Front Brakes

Post your general and technical information, questions or responses in this forum. Viewing messages is open to all with no registration or log-in required. Prior to posting a new message or a response to an existing message, registration or login is required. Please do not post FOR SALE or WANTED ads in this section!

Moderator: bfadmin

Post Reply
tanksalot
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:23 pm

Front Brakes

Post by tanksalot »

Hello!
We have a 1999 Born Free with about 106,000 miles. We've had it for 5 years, bought it with 45000 miles on it. Right now I'm having a shop put 4 Bilstein shocks on it.
It has the (to my knowledge) original brake pads, and I asked the shop to replace the front pads as a precautionary measure. (I didn't want to be in the middle of nowhere and hear grinding noises. They recommended replacing both the pads AND THE ROTORS since the rotors were "rusty". This makes no sense to me. We've almost never used the RV on salt-covered roads, and the rotors to me look fine.
We travel the West/Southwest extensively, and avoid the Northeast like the plague. In my mind it's a lot better (& cheaper) to replace pads on all 4 wheels before they start making noises. The shop's advice came in the process of them replacing the old shocks with new Bilstein shocks (which I provided). The shock replacement job is tough, and I'm only paying $225 for labor only.
Does the "new rotor" idea make sense to anyone. The brakes work fine now and don't pull or chatter. I'm thinking they underestimated labor for shock replacement.

Thanks!
Stan F.
User avatar
Roger H
Posts: 653
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 7:48 pm

Re: Front Brakes

Post by Roger H »

That's a tough one without seeing them, Stan... but if you've got 105k on the rotors, they may be getting thin. That mostly means that at some point in the not too-distant future, they'll get hot, warp, and you'll be replacing them anyway. The other issue is that if they're grooved at all, and I'd expect they would be, then your pads will quickly groove into them and then more likely need to be replaced when you replace the rotors later too.

I'd say with that kind of mileage on them, just replace them. YMMV.

Roger
'06 Born Free 32 RQ Kodiak Chassis
(Former: '01 Born Free 23 RK)
Dinghy: '16 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon with a Blue Ox Aladdin tow bar.
Traveling with Sir Winston and Lady Rae (Cavalier King Charles Spaniels)
tomzleapin
Posts: 485
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 9:15 am

Re: Front Brakes

Post by tomzleapin »

I did my front brake pads myself this summer at 90,000 miles. I always have done brakes myself for all my vehicles and living in Minnesota, rust is a huge problem. You only need to replace the rotors if the thickness is less than minimum, they are warped, or damaged (such as metal-on-metal when pad is completely worn). Rust on the brake surface will occur after sitting awhile and will wipe clean the first time you hit the brakes.

While you're at it, check your rear brakes. Last year I checked my front pads and they were okay. I assumed that the front pads would wear faster than the rear so I didn't check the rear. When I was out west I started hearing bad noises from the rear when I braked. One rotor was shot. The other side had a sliver of pad remaining so that rotor was okay. It's not a trivial task replacing a rear rotor.
Tom
2005 24' RB
Towing 2016 Mini Cooper convertible on tow dolly
New Hope, MN
Post Reply

Return to “General and Technical Information, Questions, and Responses”