Rear Brakes Wearing Faster than Fronts

[Fifty150hs]

I've searched this problem, but can't come up with this problem associated with e53 X5's. At my last brake job I did all four corners with new Powerstop carbon fiber pads and drilled and slotted rotors. Was checking wear on them yesterday and the rears are noticeably worn when compared to the fronts. The fronts have a ton of meat left on them. the rears are about half the amount of pad as the fronts. Anyone experience this situation? 2006 3.0

[andrewwynn]

I suspect it's related to the slotted rear rotors especially if that is an upgrade. The fronts are designed much bigger to take the majority of the stopping energy and I suspect by improving the rear brakes they are doing more work than they used to.

I would definitively test out the front brakes with some firm braking on wet or sand etc to make sure they are locking up before or same time as the rear. Lock the front= under steer and slight loss of control, lock the back and spin around like a top it's why tire install locations are required to put a new pair on the back axle.

Coincidentally I'm replacing my wife's rear brakes today. We drove the car for about 1500 miles past the wear indicator and there is still about 3mm on the inside pad and about 2.5 on the outside pad. I don't know what thickness the pad is when the sensor is triggered but I'm estimating the new pads are about 8mm thick. Did you measure precisely? Often things can look quite different from the perspective or possibly the backing plate or is it possible the fronts started thicker?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Blowout]

I put Brembo rotors and Hawk pads on the rear when the car was at 47k.

The front rotors were changed at 36k with OEM and they still have some life in them.

It's now at 110k and there is still some meat on front and back pads.

[Fifty150hs]

Update:

Did a tire rotation yesterday and checked my pad thicknesses. The fronts were 8mm and the rears were at 6 and 7mm. Not much difference, but looks like a big difference.

[14thbmw]

Lots of use of traction control can wear the tears faster then the fronts.

[Fifty150hs]

Originally Posted by 14thbmw

Lots of use of traction control can wear the tears faster then the fronts.

I don't drive that aggressively. At least what I consider aggressive.

[bcredliner]

Traction control pulse brakes the wheel(s) slipping. Since the X5 is all wheel drive and on some year variable I can't think of circumstances where traction control or ABS would wear the rear pads more than front.

ABS stops tires from sliding in milliseconds. Won't learn anything by slamming on the brakes as long as ABS is working properly.

I don't know if front pads on a 2006 3,0 are bigger or not. If they are wear front to back with normal driving will be close to equal.

[StephenVA]

Have access to a infrared temp reader? Drive 20 mins and read brake temps. Front hotter than rear. (GOOD) No big difference left to right/ front or rear?

Than all is OK

[Fifty150hs]

Originally Posted by bcredliner

Traction control pulse brakes the wheel(s) slipping. Since the X5 is all wheel drive and on some year variable I can't think of circumstances where traction control or ABS would wear the rear pads more than front.

ABS stops tires from sliding in milliseconds. Won't learn anything by slamming on the brakes as long as ABS is working properly.

I don't know if front pads on a 2006 3,0 are bigger or not. If they are wear front to back with normal driving will be close to equal.

Front discs are a little larger on the front so the pads probably are too.

[Fifty150hs]

Originally Posted by StephenVA

Have access to a infrared temp reader? Drive 20 mins and read brake temps. Front hotter than rear. (GOOD) No big difference left to right/ front or rear?

Than all is OK

I have one. I'll give it a try later today.