Hi,

I have a 56 plate vRS TDI with 84,000 miles on the clock, its still on the first set of brake pads, and they look like they have about 9mm left, but at the last service I was told the rear brake pads will need to be replaced in about 3 months, is this normal?

Why do the rear pads wear out faster than the front?

And no I don't drive with the hand brake on!!

Andy

Edited 15 December, 200916 yr by dibbley

First of all it's spelt brake, unless you are breaking the pads. Secondly that is mega mileage for pads, be thankful!

Typo / mis-spell in title sorted.

My Passat wore the rear pads out after 20k, I put that down to the stupid electric handbrake and hill hold. My fronts went at 28k.

Are you sure your on your first set of pads after 84k? thats a long time for a set of discs never mind a set of pads!

80k+ surely not. garage might have changed them on a service maybe?

get some ferrodo front and backs. It'll make you think you have new brakes.

I highly doubt it's 84k on original brake pads.

I managed to get 32k out of mine with the car being remapped from about 5k.

I am now on 51k and on my next service next week i am having some DS2500's fitted to the front kindly provided by Dan_the_V8Man and kindly fitted for £23 by my dealer whilst the service is being done.

Mind you i am paying £650 for Service, Cambelt & Water Pump change (which is my choice at 51k) and Brake Pads fitted.

I reckon you are probably on your 3rd set of brake pads by now. If they are the originals can you let me know what make they are as i want some

Carl

Firstly, Thanks for sorting out my major spelling mistake!!!

And I have just been back through all of my service records for the car, and no the pads have not been changed, as you probably can tell from the mileage I do a lot of motorway mileage, I also ride a bike, you may well think what the hell has that got to do with it, but I have been taught to read the road and slow using engine breaking where possible, when on the motorway I don't brake just because the car in front does, I just take my foot off the pedal and let the car slow naturally, it does seem to annoy the tailgater's, but that just adds to the fun of the boring state of the roads.

I do occasionally drive it like it should be driven, but with the number of camera's out there and the fact that Derbyshire now seems to be a blanket 50MPH zone its not easy.

I suppose the dealer may have changed them and not charged me for them, its my personal car so I get to see, and pay all of the bills!

Just called the dealers and Richard (Parkside) has confirmed that I am still on the first set, is that a record?

Andy

Edited 15 December, 200916 yr by dibbley

84K is very good for front pads but certainly believable for a car that does mainly motorway miles.

Driving style is key, I'm an ex biker and also tend to use a lot of engine braking. I reckon that my Almera would have seen almost 50K out of its front pads and thats with little motorway miles, just wish front tyres would last that long!

I did get 46K and 55K out of a front set on my Superb 2.5TDI and Superb 1.9TDI respectively, both manual transmission, its just a bit annoying that the rears need replacing! But Hey Ho, its off to Parkside I go (£55.00+VAT).

Andy

they dont always list pads on the service history though

But they would be listed on the invoices, and as its on variable servicing I don't have a lot of these to trawl through.

Andy

Fair enough, just seems a huge amount of mileage for one set of pads

Edited 15 December, 200916 yr by dan_the_v8man

I got through both pads and discs in about 34k front and rear on my 2001 Passat Estate. It did have ESP?DSC etc. so maybe the rear brakes were working frequently to stabilise the vehicle. Or not. Never thought I was very hard on brakes and tried to maximise the mpg.

what make are the standard pads, does anybody know .

ive got ferodos on mine on the front i can see through the caliper, but not sure if original pads anyway they are very good, i usually fit uprated pads to my cars but i dont think this needs them.

Over 80K on one set of brakes, did it take you 60K to find them?

Respect. I reckon that must be some sort of record.

Took my discs and pads out at over 90tkm (56tmls) Front pads still had about 40% left and rear pads about 30%. Discs looked like new.

Also do a lot of long distance driving (only a bit faster so once in a while) and this means a lot of KM without having to use the brakes.

Wear on the rear is a more than on the front.

I think mainly because the rear setup is smaller AND because of a the electronics involved nowadays, brake bias is much more to the rear as it was without electronics.

The rear brakes are more used to stabilize the car than before, this causing more wear.

Always had my rear rims dirtier (brake dust) than the front.

(took my discs and pads out to change them to EBC uprated (but not grooved/drilled) discs in combination with the green stuff pads.)

My dear old lady (51 plate 4x4 and about to be changed for a petrol Scout) needed new front discs and pads in October at 105K miles. I suspect there were new front pads fitted at some earlier point. Don't remember.

What I do remember was getting very tense when,at about the 30k mile stage, she needed new pads and discs on the rear. No problem since tho'. Suspect it was either a hand brake (break?!) fault and/or the ESP/ABS getting a tad excited on the hilly bits round here.

Like previous replies I try to read the road ahead and not use brakes very often, also do mainly motorway driving .

I got 90,000 out of the fronts and a couple of thousand more from the rears.

Took my discs and pads out at over 90tkm (56tmls) Front pads still had about 40% left and rear pads about 30%. Discs looked like new.Also do a lot of long distance driving (only a bit faster so once in a while) and this means a lot of KM without having to use the brakes.Wear on the rear is a more than on the front. I think mainly because the rear setup is smaller AND because of a the electronics involved nowadays, brake bias is much more to the rear as it was without electronics.The rear brakes are more used to stabilize the car than before, this causing more wear.Always had my rear rims dirtier (brake dust) than the front.(took my discs and pads out to change them to EBC uprated (but not grooved/drilled) discs in combination with the green stuff pads.)

thats a very good point about ESP. And as you quite rightly point out, under normal driving there does seem to be more brake dust on the rear

thats a very good point about ESP. And as you quite rightly point out, under normal driving there does seem to be more brake dust on the rear

I had a Vauxhall Vectra, (rubbish I know) that had 90,000 miles on the clock when I sold it, it had never had any pads or discs. My current Octy has 52,000 miles on and the pads and discs have loads of life left. It does depend on how you drive the car, forward obsevations being important so that you don't have to brake all the time, one can anticipate and come off the throttle earlier. This helps fuel consumption as well. I regularly get upper 50's to the gallon out of my 2.0tdi and have had 68 on a run. I am retired but do like to press on occasionally!

Seasons greetings Monkster.

At the moment I have 62k out of all 4 pads on my estate. Was told the average life was 40k and can be doubled or halved depending on driving style.

Asked garage to check them at service in Sept and they were confident of at least another year out of discs and pads so looks like over 80k on mine too.

I'd suggest the ESP and brake bias is why the rears are going first.