Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unless the rotors are either replaced or resurfaced it's a cheap brake job.
Wiggle all you want but cheap is will always be cheap.
Can't you get it through your head that "cheap" does not automatically equate to being "improper"? Why is that hard to grasp?
Replacing parts at the drop of a hat seems to be your only possible resolve... Are you too a Zone 10 First Admiral ASE Master Field Operations Engineering Technician (Z.1.0.F.A.A.S.E.M.F. for short) ???
Can't you get it through your head that "cheap" does not automatically equate to being "improper"? Why is that hard to grasp? Cheap is not doing the right thing. Improper means to do the wrong thing by design.
Replacing parts at the drop of a hat seems to be your only possible resolve... Yes, when it's not your property you replace with new or proper rebuilds Deleted personal insult.
Never ever let anyone put just brake pads on and NOT either resurface the rotors or install new rotors!! Never ever!!!!!
The pad dust from braking will burn into the surface of the rotor to form a glaze that makes the pad/rotor a matched set. Leaving the glaze on with new pads is like braking on ice!!! No kidding!!!
Wrong...
you do not necessarily have to have the rotors turned if they are in good shape.
There are lots of reasons why a shop will recommend resurfacing:
a. the rotors really need resurfacing
b. customers expect it and therefore they 'recommend it' to meet customer demand
c. the shop wants to be absolutely certain of a smooth rotor surface
d. the shop is unethical and wants to perform an unnecessary 'service' to make more money
...the only way to know for sure is to look at the rotor surface yourself and do an on the spot inspection.
Be aware that several automobile manufacturers have stated on the record that they don't recommend resurfacing unless there is clear evidence that it is necessary:
[SIZE=2]RESURFACE THE ROTORS EVERY TIME OR AS NEEDED? Should rotors be turned every time the pads are replaced? Many shops resurface rotors every time the pads are replaced whether they really need it or not. Why? Because they want to avoid comebacks. Besides, many customers might think they are not getting their money's worth if the rotors are not resurfaced as part of a brake job.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]General [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]Motors[/color][/color] has a different opinion. In technical bulletin #00-05-22-002 to its dealers, GM says, "Brake rotors should only be turned when one of the following rotor surface conditions exist: severe scoring with depth in excess of 1.5 mm or 0.060 inch, pulsation from excessive lateral runout of more than .080 mm or .003 inch, thickness variation in excess of 0.025 mm or 0.001 inch, or excessive corrosion on rotor braking surfaces."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]GM also says "Rotors are not to be resurfaced in an attempt to correct the following conditions: noise/squeal, cosmetic corrosion, routine pad replacement or discoloration/hard spots."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]In other words, GM frowns on rotor resurfacing during what it calls "normal" pad replacement. But is any brake job ever normal? Every job is different and every rotor needs to be carefully inspected and evaluated to determine its condition when brake work is done.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]GM says resurfacing rotors unnecessarily shortens rotor life. They also say resurfacing is "ineffective at correcting brake squeal and/or premature lining wear and should not be used to address these conditions, unless specifically directed to do so in a service bulletin." Yet, how many service bulletins have we seen over the years from GM and other auto makers who say the fix for a particular brake squeal condition on a certain make or model is to replace the pads and resurface the rotors? It can be rather confusing.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]FORD NOTES[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] Ford says it has no official policy on resurfacing rotors. As long as no shake, vibration or brake pedal judder is present and the rotors are not badly grooved or rusted, there should be no need to resurface them. Ford says it hasn't seen any problems caused by film transfer from the friction material.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] If rotors do need to be resurfaced, they encourage their dealers to use an on-car lathe rather than a bench lathe to minimize runout.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] One item that seems to cause some confusion when it comes to resurfacing Ford rotors is Ford's use of a single "machine to" spec on their rotors. GM and Chrysler include both a "machine to" thickness and a discard thickness on their rotors.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] The "machine to" spec on a Ford rotor is the minimum thickness to which the rotor can be turned and safely returned to service. The number includes enough margin of safety so that the rotor should last as long as the pads. Once the rotor is worn below the "machine to" thickness, it should not be resurfaced any more or returned to service when the pads are replaced. It must be replaced.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] The problem is Ford does not put a "discard" thickness on their rotors so technicians sometimes think the "machine to" thickness is the discard thickness and replace the rotors unnecessarily.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] Ford says the main issue with rotor thickness is not rotor warping, mechanical failure or heat management, but the physical operation of the brakes. The rotor must be thick enough to prevent the caliper pistons from popping out if the rotor and/or pads are worn. The "machine to" spec they use allows for this and leaves enough thickness to assure safe operation of the brakes.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] When resurfacing a rotor, the minimum recommended depth of cut .002 in. The maximum is .008 in. If you take too deep a cut, it will leave a rough surface finish above 100 microns that may cause problems.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] As for rotor runout, sensitivity depends on the vehicle application. On Ford 4x4 trucks, the limit is .001 in of runout. Another is 1989-'97 Thunderbird (front and rear). [/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] If rotor runout is excessive, it will lead to uneven wear that causes the thickness of the rotor to vary. This, in turn, will cause a vibration or pedal shudder when braking. Problems such as rust between the rotor and hub, hub runout and uneven torquing of the lug nuts can all cause runout that leads to uneven wear and pedal vibration. Always clean the hub/rotor interface when servicing the rotors, and apply a thin coating of antiseize to the mating surface to inhibit corrosion.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2] Ford says aluminum [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]alloy [COLOR=blue ! important]wheels[/color][/color][/color] are much stiffer than [COLOR=blue ! important][COLOR=blue ! important]steel [COLOR=blue ! important]wheels[/color][/color][/color], and are much more likely to cause a rotor runout problem if the lug nuts are not tightened evenly.[/SIZE]
There are lots of reasons why a shop will recommend resurfacing:
a. the rotors really need resurfacing
b. customers expect it and therefore they 'recommend it' to meet customer demand
c. the shop wants to be absolutely certain of a smooth rotor surface
d. the shop is unethical and wants to perform an unnecessary 'service' to make more money
...the only way to know for sure is to look at the rotor surface yourself and do an on the spot inspection.
How does a motorist do that? There's more to it than just looking at the rotor surface. Thickness has to be measured with a mic and runout measured with a dial indicator.
Not cutting or replacing the rotors may be ok for the do it yourselfer working on his own car but for a shop to stand behind it's brake work, it just doesn't make sense to not do it right the first time. Not to mention the liability.
A good quality brake pad and hardware along with proper machining of the rotors if possible and all the necessary cleaning and lubing will ensure a problem free repair.
I understand what the manufacturers are recommending but it doesn't always work that way in real life. Noise can be corrected by machining.
Hard spots cannot be machined out, only made worse.
.020 to .025 is needed for the rotor to last as long as the new pads.
Bottom line is rotors do not last as long as they used to. About 10 years ago it started getting hard to find a good high quality rotor. Wagner was the best but now they're being made overseas and the quality has gone to hell. Buying rotors from all the discounters is a crapshoot.
Bottom line is rotors do not last as long as they used to. About 10 years ago it started getting hard to find a good high quality rotor. Wagner was the best but now they're being made overseas and the quality has gone to hell. Buying rotors from all the discounters is a crapshoot.
Yep, this is a true story! I had a brake job done only to have both rotors warp within 2,000 miles. BOTH ROTORS WERE MADE IN CHINA bought from NAPA.
I had the brake job re-done using rotors made in Mexico with no further problems so far.
You mean you don't do all your own mechanical work?
No, not anymore. You see, my legs wore out so I'm doing good to walk anymore even with knee replacements.
I used to do it all myself until about 2003 when my legs just gave out. I directed and trained more mechanics than I can remember for the engine/heavy equipment manufacture I retired from so I know good quality work when I see it. I also know shoddy work when I see that too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
