2008 IS350 Front Brake Rotor and Pad Replacement
05-18-11, 02:33 PM
#1
Driver School Candidate
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: AB
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 IS350 Front Brake Rotor and Pad Replacement
I just got back my 2008 IS350 from servicing today and they informed me that my front brake pads and rotors needed to be replaced. To quote them, it says:
"Front brake pads at 3mm - will not last till the next service. Will require front rotors and pads $750."
I was a bit shocked as this car only has 44,000 km on it and I'm a very easy going driver.
My question is, is this normal? It seems very early to need to replace the rotors. I asked about resurfacing and all the service manager said was, if it could have been resurfaced they would have suggested that.
I'm not sure if the price is normal, it seems high to me. Would you suggest going somewhere other than the dealer for this? Are there better aftermarket options I should consider? I'm not a performance driver, so I'm not looking for sporty parts, but I've heard of pads with less dust?
I'm not a handy person, so I have no faith in replacing these myself. Should I just suck it up and let them do it?
Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks!
Kaz
"Front brake pads at 3mm - will not last till the next service. Will require front rotors and pads $750."
I was a bit shocked as this car only has 44,000 km on it and I'm a very easy going driver.
My question is, is this normal? It seems very early to need to replace the rotors. I asked about resurfacing and all the service manager said was, if it could have been resurfaced they would have suggested that.
I'm not sure if the price is normal, it seems high to me. Would you suggest going somewhere other than the dealer for this? Are there better aftermarket options I should consider? I'm not a performance driver, so I'm not looking for sporty parts, but I've heard of pads with less dust?
I'm not a handy person, so I have no faith in replacing these myself. Should I just suck it up and let them do it?
Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks!
Kaz
Last edited by Kazabet; 05-18-11 at 08:20 PM.
05-18-11, 03:18 PM
#2
44,000 mi or km is VERY early to have to replace the rotors. The pads might need to be changed soon and most brake shops only charge $100 or so per axel for pads.
If you are not confident you can change them yourself, then take it to a local mechanic or brake shop and get an estimate.
I priced out pads and rotors at AutoZone and the parts would only be $120 - $170 (fronts only) depending on the pads you get. Remeber though that this would be a less quality option than the Dealers lexus parts.
If you are not confident you can change them yourself, then take it to a local mechanic or brake shop and get an estimate.
I priced out pads and rotors at AutoZone and the parts would only be $120 - $170 (fronts only) depending on the pads you get. Remeber though that this would be a less quality option than the Dealers lexus parts.
05-18-11, 06:29 PM
#3
I just purchased front rotors for $171 shipped to my door. Red stuff pads are about $80. These are OEM equivalent parts. Local mechanic will charge less than $100 for labor. That's savings of about $500 if you go that route assuming that quote was for the front brakes.
05-19-11, 05:41 AM
#4
Ask him why the rotors have to be replaced.
I bet he can't give you a good reason other than they recommend doing both at the same time (because it makes them a ton of profit, but he'll leave that part out).
Unless the rotors are under spec (they won't be at your mileage) or they have a very deep groove in them (and you'd want him to show/prove that), there's no reason to change the rotors when you replace the pads.
Resurfacing does nothing for you but waste useful rotor metal, assuming everything was properly done in the first place and the brakes have been bedded/used properly.
I bet he can't give you a good reason other than they recommend doing both at the same time (because it makes them a ton of profit, but he'll leave that part out).
Unless the rotors are under spec (they won't be at your mileage) or they have a very deep groove in them (and you'd want him to show/prove that), there's no reason to change the rotors when you replace the pads.
Resurfacing does nothing for you but waste useful rotor metal, assuming everything was properly done in the first place and the brakes have been bedded/used properly.
10-24-11, 12:15 PM
#5
Pole Position
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ask him why the rotors have to be replaced.
I bet he can't give you a good reason other than they recommend doing both at the same time (because it makes them a ton of profit, but he'll leave that part out).
Unless the rotors are under spec (they won't be at your mileage) or they have a very deep groove in them (and you'd want him to show/prove that), there's no reason to change the rotors when you replace the pads.
Resurfacing does nothing for you but waste useful rotor metal, assuming everything was properly done in the first place and the brakes have been bedded/used properly.
I bet he can't give you a good reason other than they recommend doing both at the same time (because it makes them a ton of profit, but he'll leave that part out).
Unless the rotors are under spec (they won't be at your mileage) or they have a very deep groove in them (and you'd want him to show/prove that), there's no reason to change the rotors when you replace the pads.
Resurfacing does nothing for you but waste useful rotor metal, assuming everything was properly done in the first place and the brakes have been bedded/used properly.
10-24-11, 12:24 PM
#6
I just called a mechanic and he informed me that the front brakes, if the pads need to be changed, SHOULD get a new rotor as well. He said that when they service front brake pads on an ISx50, they replace the rotors as well, having it resurfaced makes the front really thin. Replacing the pads only will have the pad worn down quicker because of the uneven surface. Right, Wrong?
If the rotors are in good shape and you're replacing with the same type of pad, just replace the pad, bed properly, and you're good to go.
10-24-11, 12:38 PM
#7
Pole Position
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming you're replacing with the same type of pads, and there's otherwise nothing "wrong" with the rotor (ie really deep grooving or significant uneven pad transfer) then he's wrong (or just trying to sell you rotors).
If the rotors are in good shape and you're replacing with the same type of pad, just replace the pad, bed properly, and you're good to go.
If the rotors are in good shape and you're replacing with the same type of pad, just replace the pad, bed properly, and you're good to go.
Any recommendations on shops that will do a great job for a good price in So Cal. (Los Angeles Area).
Trending Topics
10-26-11, 01:21 AM
#9
Driver School Candidate
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: ca
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ask him why the rotors have to be replaced.
I bet he can't give you a good reason other than they recommend doing both at the same time (because it makes them a ton of profit, but he'll leave that part out).
Unless the rotors are under spec (they won't be at your mileage) or they have a very deep groove in them (and you'd want him to show/prove that), there's no reason to change the rotors when you replace the pads.
Resurfacing does nothing for you but waste useful rotor metal, assuming everything was properly done in the first place and the brakes have been bedded/used properly.
I bet he can't give you a good reason other than they recommend doing both at the same time (because it makes them a ton of profit, but he'll leave that part out).
Unless the rotors are under spec (they won't be at your mileage) or they have a very deep groove in them (and you'd want him to show/prove that), there's no reason to change the rotors when you replace the pads.
Resurfacing does nothing for you but waste useful rotor metal, assuming everything was properly done in the first place and the brakes have been bedded/used properly.
10-26-11, 06:17 AM
#10
There's no reason, whatsoever, to resurface rotors just because you're replacing pads.
Resurfacing just wastes good rotor metal for no benefit.
Even GM started telling their dealers years ago to stop doing this as routine...for example:
http://www.procutusa.com/supplier_gm.aspx
Originally Posted by GM
Rotor refacing during normal pad replacement is not necessary.
Rotor refacing for cosmetic corrosion is unnecessary. Clean up of braking surfaces can be accomplished by 10-15 moderate stops from 62-75 km/h (35-40 mph) with cooling time between stops.
Rotor service is ineffective in correcting brake squeal and/or premature lining wear out and should not be used to address these conditions
Rotor refacing for cosmetic corrosion is unnecessary. Clean up of braking surfaces can be accomplished by 10-15 moderate stops from 62-75 km/h (35-40 mph) with cooling time between stops.
Rotor service is ineffective in correcting brake squeal and/or premature lining wear out and should not be used to address these conditions
Originally Posted by GM
Brake rotors should only be turned when one of the following rotor surface conditions exist:
1. Severe scoring - depth in excess of 1.5 mm (0.060 in).
2. Pulsation concerns from:
* Lateral runout in excess of 0.080mm (0.003 in).
* Thickness variation in excess of 0.025 mm (0.001 in).
* Excessive corrosion on rotor braking surfaces.
1. Severe scoring - depth in excess of 1.5 mm (0.060 in).
2. Pulsation concerns from:
* Lateral runout in excess of 0.080mm (0.003 in).
* Thickness variation in excess of 0.025 mm (0.001 in).
* Excessive corrosion on rotor braking surfaces.
No, they aren't. Rotors don't warp normally. That's yet another myth. See here:
http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/wp...rakedisk.shtml
Originally Posted by Caroll Smith, a guy who knew a bit about brakes
With one qualifier, presuming that the hub and wheel flange are flat and in good condition and that the wheel bolts or hat mounting hardware is in good condition, installed correctly and tightened uniformly and in the correct order to the recommended torque specification, in more than 40 years of professional racing, including the Shelby/Ford GT 40s – one of the most intense brake development program in history - I have never seen a warped brake disc.
And we might as well dispel the third common myth with brakes... despite what the guy trying to sell you the uberkool drilled rotors is telling you, in street use "upgrading" your rotors or pads (and drilled ain't an upgrade anyway) will not stop your car any shorter than the stock brakes will....the brakes don't stop the car, the tires do. If you want to stop shorter you'll need better tires, not better brakes.
10-26-11, 06:02 PM
#11
Driver School Candidate
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: ca
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, you don't.
There's no reason, whatsoever, to resurface rotors just because you're replacing pads.
Resurfacing just wastes good rotor metal for no benefit.
Even GM started telling their dealers years ago to stop doing this as routine...for example:
http://www.procutusa.com/supplier_gm.aspx
It describes the very few circumstances under which you should ever resurface a rotor-
Anybody wanting to resurface your rotors for other reasons is just trying to get money out of you.
No, they aren't. Rotors don't warp normally. That's yet another myth. See here:
http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/wp...rakedisk.shtml
He then goes on to explain what is really happening to cause the issue most ignorant shops blame on "warped rotors".... and why it happens, what to do about it, and how to avoid it
And we might as well dispel the third common myth with brakes... despite what the guy trying to sell you the uberkool drilled rotors is telling you, in street use "upgrading" your rotors or pads (and drilled ain't an upgrade anyway) will not stop your car any shorter than the stock brakes will....the brakes don't stop the car, the tires do. If you want to stop shorter you'll need better tires, not better brakes.
There's no reason, whatsoever, to resurface rotors just because you're replacing pads.
Resurfacing just wastes good rotor metal for no benefit.
Even GM started telling their dealers years ago to stop doing this as routine...for example:
http://www.procutusa.com/supplier_gm.aspx
It describes the very few circumstances under which you should ever resurface a rotor-
Anybody wanting to resurface your rotors for other reasons is just trying to get money out of you.
No, they aren't. Rotors don't warp normally. That's yet another myth. See here:
http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/wp...rakedisk.shtml
He then goes on to explain what is really happening to cause the issue most ignorant shops blame on "warped rotors".... and why it happens, what to do about it, and how to avoid it
And we might as well dispel the third common myth with brakes... despite what the guy trying to sell you the uberkool drilled rotors is telling you, in street use "upgrading" your rotors or pads (and drilled ain't an upgrade anyway) will not stop your car any shorter than the stock brakes will....the brakes don't stop the car, the tires do. If you want to stop shorter you'll need better tires, not better brakes.
Your the first person i have ever heard say " that to stop shorter u should get better tires not brake pads"...you are some what wrong about your statement,whats the point of track pads or a bbk???
From my understandings people usualy upgrade to different tires for grip not stopping power.
10-26-11, 07:07 PM
#12
I guess you've never spoken to anyone who knows how brakes work before then.
No, I'm really, really not.
For a street car?
Absolutely no point at all other than looks.
For a car driven on a track there's a lot of useful benefits to a BBK.... Reasons for the track include: Adjusting the "feel" to your liking and several aspects of thermal control, which mean nothing in street use but mean quite a bit when you'll be repeatedly braking from 100+ mph back to back to back without letting the brakes cool off... but none of them is being able to stop shorter than the stock brakes could the first time
No, they upgrade for both (or at least that's the result, even if they're not aware of it) The tires are what stops the car after all, not the brakes.
I'll save you some time and post some sources for you, since this ain't my first rodeo on this topic.
First, read this article. It's by a world reknowned brake engineer. He has designed braking systems for Ford, Bosch, Saturn, Stoptech, and others. He has taught classes to the ASE on brakes. He has literally written books on braking systems. He'll tell you upgrading brakes won't stop the car any shorter. Even better, he'll explain each part of the brake system, what it does, and why it does not stop you shorter.
http://www.scirocco.org/faq/brakes/p...n/pfpage1.html
Here's a sample
Originally Posted by James Walker Jr
Ths part might surprise some and offend others, but it is a big misconception that changing brake pad material will magically decrease your stopping distances. In fact, you may have even seen published "data" which attempts to correlate stopping distance to friction coefficient. Although it may appear that there is a relationship between the two, there really isn't, and here's why.
Originally Posted by Brembos FAQ on brakes
"At the speeds that stopping distance is generally measured from (60 to 70mph), the test is primarily testing the tire's grip on the pavement. As delivered from the manufacturer, nearly all vehicles are able to engage the ABS or lock the wheels at these speeds. Therefore, an increase in braking power will do nothing to stop the vehicle in a shorter distance."
Originally Posted by Stoptech on brake upgrades
"The brakes don't stop the vehicle - the tires do. The brakes slow the rotation of the wheels and tires. This means that braking distance measured on a single stop from a highway legal speed or higher is almost totally dependent upon the stopping ability of the tires in use"
Originally Posted by The National Law Enforcement Testing Center on why they don't test normal stopping distance on brake pads when they test brake pads
"When braking to a targeted deceleration rate, where the speed of the vehicle at brake application is the same, the stopping distance should also theoretically be the same, making any measurement of stopping distances irrelevant"
Originally Posted by Car and Driver
Another key factor is a short stopping distance—the length of road needed to slow down the car... But every car has brakes strong enough for the anti-lock system to hold its tires on the verge of lockup for at least one stop
Originally Posted by The Actual Formula for Braking Distance
d = V2/(2g(f + G))
Where:
d = Braking Distance (ft)
g = Acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft/sec2)
G = Roadway grade as a percentage; for 2% use 0.02
V = Initial vehicle speed (ft/sec)
f = Coefficient of friction between the tires and the roadway
Where:
d = Braking Distance (ft)
g = Acceleration due to gravity (32.2 ft/sec2)
G = Roadway grade as a percentage; for 2% use 0.02
V = Initial vehicle speed (ft/sec)
f = Coefficient of friction between the tires and the roadway
It asks about the coefficient of friction between the tire and the road.
As long as your pads can lock the wheels (or engage ABS for cars with ABS), which even the stock brakes can do, then "better" brakes won't reduce stopping distance at all. They can't in fact.
Because the brakes don't stop the car, the tires do.
Last edited by Kurtz; 10-26-11 at 07:21 PM.
