Hi everyone,

 

when I had a service some time ago, the service man told me that the brake pads are worn 80% and asked me whether I want to replace them (and I said yes).

The mileage of the car (7 seater, diesel) was 50k miles. I know that the distance after which you have to replace the pads can vary and depends on the driving style but is the 50k miles reasonable distance when it could happen ?

 

Thanks

 

Mine has done under 20k and at the last service (December) they said the rear pads were 80% worn. Strangely the front pads were only 20% worn.

I will check once the weather improves...

'Upselling'   the person on the Service Desk is a receptionist and knows nothing about cars and the tech inspected the car and the Service Manager wants work.

 

What a shame they can not be trusted to be honest.

 

The Service man does not know 80% worn from 20%  worn, it is what they say even if they are 90% worn.  They do not know the measurement for new and 100%.

 

Surprised that the discs are not needing replaced before the pads, but maybe your discs do not rust badly.

 

50,000 miles is amazing for some drivers, and just about normal for others. 

I agree, 80% can even mean unworn, my pal had changed his brake pads the night before a main dealer service (to keep up the warranty), you can guess the rest.

 

The manager even foolishly said "ah but how many miles have you done since changing them?" to which the response was 2 miles, the 2 miles I walked home after dropping the car off to you!

2 hours ago, Nimby said:

Mine has done under 20k and at the last service (December) they said the rear pads were 80% worn. Strangely the front pads were only 20% worn.

I will check once the weather improves...

 

Adaptive cruise control is using lots of rear pads, pretty common case.

I don't have ACC, and probably wouldn't use it if I did.

1 hour ago, linni said:

 

Adaptive cruise control is using lots of rear pads, pretty common case.

Exactly why? The system is called "cruise control", not "automatic hand braking".

1 minute ago, Paws4Thot said:

Exactly why? The system is called "cruise control", not "automatic hand braking".

 

So when cruising who the hell need brakes?

I guess it uses rear breakes rather than front ones to adjust the speed.

26 minutes ago, Paws4Thot said:

Exactly why? The system is called "cruise control", not "automatic hand braking".

ACC actively brakes to maintain both speed and distance to the car travelling in front.

 

It does seem to use the rear brakes more than the front to do this.

 

Our Superb mk3 on 56,000 miles, mainly motorway, rear brake pads are 60% worn but front pads only 10% worn

Don't know whether it is true on Skodas, but new rear brake pads are frequently much thinner than fronts, so may appear to be 50% worn when brand new.

1 hour ago, Routemaster1461 said:

Don't know whether it is true on Skodas, but new rear brake pads are frequently much thinner than fronts, so may appear to be 50% worn when brand new.

Front 20mm new, Rear 15mm new

11 hours ago, Nimby said:

Mine has done under 20k and at the last service (December) they said the rear pads were 80% worn. Strangely the front pads were only 20% worn.

I will check once the weather improves...

Mine has done 24k miles and the front pads were nearly down to the metal, the discs were pretty worn too. Did both last week, checked the rear pads too just for piece of mind and they had about 3mm left so did them as well, rear discs were fine. Car stops a lot better now. 

Ask for pad thickness measurements, not a percentage.  If they can't tell you then probably haven't measured them so is up selling waffle.

 

I once had a garage (Seat ex Audi in Twickenham) pull the 80% worn stunt on me, did nothing, following year a different garage said just over half worn.  
So either they lied, or pads somehow grew back over following year.

 

But mileage is poor indicator of brake use, if live in very hilly area or with lots of traffic lights going to use brakes lot more than someone cruising many miles at constant speed on good road.

 

 

I had my car in for MOT and service yesterday, different manufacturer, main agent. Having done 53,000 miles the fronts were c40% worn,discs lipped, rears 30% discs lipped and scorn (sic), and it looks like the state of the discs will untimately decide when replacement is necessary Lipping is almost inevitable as the pads will rarely reach right to the edge of the disc, and there may be a similar ridge at the inner edge as well. I'm lucky that I live in a fairly rural area with good fast A roads that require little heavy brake use and I do little mileage in town and city.

It amazes me that people swallow and repeat as fact anything that is stated to them by a main dealer service receptionist or printed on the job sheet especially any measurements of brake pad thickness which wont have been made and are simply a keypress for a standard upselling phrase.

 

Would you allow them to invest your retuirement fund or savings?

 

5 hours ago, SurreyJohn said:

Ask for pad thickness measurements, not a percentage.  If they can't tell you then probably haven't measured them so is up selling waffle.

 

Of course they will be able to tell you whatever phrase comes into their head, saying "I don't know" is not in their vocabulary, being able to BS in an instant is a required skill.

 

Of course having no idea of what the original thickness is or maybe even what a break pad looks like, not being able to convert a percentage of a dimension to a resultant dimension the results of the question will likely be very amusing so well worth asking!

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

It amazes me that people swallow and repeat as fact anything that is stated to them by a main dealer service receptionist or printed on the job sheet especially any measurements of brake pad thickness which wont have been made and are simply a keypress for a standard upselling phrase.

 

My question to you and the other garage naysayers is if we've not to trust the garage, who do we trust?

 

 

4 minutes ago, kodiaqsportline said:

 

My question to you and the other garage naysayers is if we've not to trust the garage, who do we trust?

 

 

Someone who does not have a track record for misrepresenting the facts; I have seen "80% remaining" turn into "80% worn" between the mechanic's job sheet and the job invoice.

6 hours ago, kodiaqsportline said:

My question to you and the other garage naysayers is if we've not to trust the garage, who do we trust?

 

Yourself and your judgement whether it be of mechanical things or human behaviour, in both cases skills well worth developing, maintaining and honing.

I was about to start a long journey (almost 1k miles one way - they didn't know it) and was a bit worried once they told me that.

 

Can I measure the size of the brake pads by myself ? If so how do I do that ?

Are you talking about the front or back brakes?

 

The front pads have a built in wear indicator so a warning light will come on when the pad wear limit is reached. Note the wear indicator is only on one side inner pad, so doesn't guarantee the other pads aren't worn more

 

The rear pads need to be measured by hand. You can often see the outer pads through the alloy spokes and estimate the thickness. Make sure you are looking at the friction part of the pad and not the metal backing plate. You may need to move the wheel round until you get a clear view of the caliper and pad.

 

To do it properly needs a micrometer or other measuring tool. You won't be able to see or measure the inner pad without removing the wheel. Often the inner pad will have different wear to the outside, sometimes a lot different.

 

The minimum pad thickness to pass an MOT is 2mm iirc, but I would always replace them once they get down to 4 or 5 mm

 

Iirc new pads are 20mm thick for front pads and 15mm for rear pads.

 

Although you are doing 1000 miles, I assume that this will involve long periods of motorway driving where brakes are not used that much.

 

If, as I suspect, you don't really know how to do it, pop down to local trusted independent and ask them to take a look for a second opinion.

Edited 18 February, 20242 yr by xman

Spend a fiver and shame the garage. These are a piece of cake to use. Look for brake pad measuring tool.

 

@xman

yes, they are front brakes.

 

@inspectorman

thanks ! I was thinking of any way how to measure it by myself.

I just need to find a video as I didn't even know that I can measure it by myself

 

8 hours ago, New11 said:

@xman

yes, they are front brakes.

 

@inspectorman

thanks ! I was thinking of any way how to measure it by myself.

I just need to find a video as I didn't even know that I can measure it by myself

 

 

Just take a look. I'm sure you can tell 3mm from 10mm. It does not requires a micrometer to assess pads.

 

I'm not criticising you.  I'm suggesting it's really easy to be on a level with your local garage chimp in when it comes to decision making.

Does anybody know what is the original size ? And does the size differ between front and rear brakes ?

On 16/02/2024 at 07:41, SurreyJohn said:

Ask for pad thickness measurements, not a percentage.  If they can't tell you then probably haven't measured them so is up selling waffle.

 

I once had a garage (Seat ex Audi in Twickenham) pull the 80% worn stunt on me, did nothing, following year a different garage said just over half worn.  
So either they lied, or pads somehow grew back over following year.

 

But mileage is poor indicator of brake use, if live in very hilly area or with lots of traffic lights going to use brakes lot more than someone cruising many miles at constant speed on good road.

 

 

 

In my experience it's standard practice for dealers to claim 80% worn when the pads are 20% used, i.e. you are down to "only" 80% left, act now!  It could be argued in court that what they're saying is technically correct (whilst being obviously completely misleading).  Just IMHO.