Initial response discouraging...
 

I'm still awaiting a response to my email from EBC USA. I chose to use email so I could attach the photos which you've seen. Picture's worth a thousand words, and all...

I did speak with the EBC/brake pad customer service specialist at the outfit where I purchased the pads. Unfortunately, they're telling me that "EBC doesn't offer a pad for the E53 X5 4.8is." He further stated that the pads for the 4.6is are different from the 4.8is. That was news to me.

If that's the case, then there's the "rub." Different pad backers for the 4.6 and 4.8. I own a 4.8, and I bought pads for a 4.6. "Sorry, we can't help you."

However, BMW part numbers are the SAME for both models, as shown on the online ETK. Please note item No. 11 on each diagram and table:

http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts...75&hg=34&fg=05

http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts...75&hg=34&fg=05

I can't resolve the conflict between what the vendor is saying and what my parts counter man is telling me. So..... I'll wait futher to hear from EBC directly on their perspective.

Will update then.

While this is nowhere near conclusive, I did have my stock E39 M5 front calipers sitting in the garage, so I decided to have a look.

On those calipers, the contact face is solid for the top 2/3 of the pad.

If the M5 pads had extraneous castings in the same locations as the D920 X5 pads, it would cause misalignment against the rotor face.

Given that I've already done twice as many brake jobs this month as planned, I'll wait until the Axxis pads arrive before I get an up-close look at the X5 4.8is caliper, sans pads. (At which time I will have performed THREE brake pad replacements at each corner...)

Incidentally, not only is the BMW part number the same for 4.6 and 4.8 front pads (34 11 6 761 282), but also for the calipers themselves! For both the 4.6 and 4.8, the left and right calipers are BMW p/n's 34 11 6 757 053 and '054, respectively. As a result, I ain't buying the vendor's response.

Porterfield Pads are the same number for the 4.6is and the 4.8is (fronts)

I understand EBC have replaced your pads?

So what is your connection to EBC, LVR? :confused: :)

I only ask because you knew this before I did....

Long story short: I just spoke with the US Auto manager for EBC, and he's shipping out new sets F&R. He suggested I try their SUV/Truck application for higher heat and lower dust properties, so I'm going to give them a try.

Full story: I did receive an email (finally!) from the Automotive Manager at EBC Brakes USA last week. In it, he said:
"Looking at the pictures, it is very likley that there was an assembly error at the factory.I have forwarded your information to our main offices in England and they are looking into this and will be back with you shortly."

After not hearing anything for seven more days, I fired off another email to this fellow yesterday. Nothing back. Your post this morning (US-time) prompted me to call the outfit where I'd purchased the pads to ask again for a Return Authorization.

Got the same line from them about me ordering the wrong part (I entered '04 4.6 into their website, as there's no listing for the 4.8...), but after I explained the common BMW part numbers and the email from EBC USA, he agreed to call the guy and get back to me.

He calls me back and gives me the contact info for the Auto Manager at EBC USA and asks me to call him directly. I call and he explains that the inside backer plate was assembled to the outside pad. Offers to replace my full set. I take him up on it.

So, after a protracted effort at getting a solution, I finally have one. I had been seeking a full refund for my purchase, but I'm willing to give them a second chance. Not too crazy about the two additional 4-wheel brake jobs that were required (remove & replace with originals, and now remove originals and replace with EBC replacements), but it allows me another opportunity to become one with my machine.

Had the Axxis Deluxe Plus parts been available now for the D920 pad shape, I would have insisted on the full refund. I don't like the idea of 'assembly errors,' but I hate the dust from the factory pads even more!

I do wonder how many other folks experienced the same assembly error.

-Dave

Just want to clarify, LVR. At no point in this entire thread did I ever talk or write about lawsuits or compensation. Or was this just a broad generalization about the US? All I wanted was a refund, and in the end I'm settling for a new set of pads.

FWIW, the apologies from EBC were not profuse. In fact, there was no apology--merely a "we'll take care of you" in reference to the replacement pads.

And you know what? That's all I needed.

no connection. I simply drew EBC's (UK) attention to the thread via an email of my own asking them to investigate it on your behalf as it appeared EBC USA has a care factor of NIL. This is what the forum is for.

They immediately replied to me that it had been incorrectly packed and should have been detected when opened as they were wrongly packed parts.

How you would know they were wrong is beyond me and I was not going to post their (biased) reply without giving you the chance to speaK FIRST. Had I done so you would probably have accused me of defending them and by extension condemning your installation again.

In relation to your question above.... chill out.

In relation to my comments about lawsuits, it was a generic spray aginst those who quickly start talking compensation etc without getting the whole story. You don't have to look far in this forum to see that sort of attitude.

And look, they can say you should have followed the instructions, but unless you were experienced and compared them with the originals how are you supposed to know? End of story.

Well thanks for acting on behalf of a fellow boardmember, LVR. I do appreciate it, as the response on my end was quite disappointing. Interesting that EBC UK would respond immediately to your email (by blaming the customer, it seems) and yet they never replied to me directly, or bothered posting to this thread after they read it. Hmmmm.....

I did know they were involved, as one of my emails from EBC USA--while it had edited out the previous correspondence--did include an electronic signature at the bottom from European Friction Industries Ltd out of Bristol, UK.

So you were not going to post their biased reply, but you will include it by implication?

If you recall, I described my level of experience at the outset. I believe my error was less a function of experience and more one of carelessness, but I must admit that after this experience, I will inspect MUCH more closely next time! ;)

I'm posting EBC's included instructions, as nowhere do they say to: "inspect these parts against their factory counterparts to ensure that we have not sent you the wrong part or incomplete assemblies in place of finished components." There's nothing about pre-installation inspection, actually.

In fact I did compare the parts, comparing pad shape to pad shape and backer shape to backer shape. I noticed, for example, that the EBC rears are chamfered at the leading and trailing edges (like the fronts), whereas the factory rears are not.

I admitted when I opened this thread that I missed the outer castings on what EBC sent as outboard pads. I even suggested as a lesson learned for others to "carefully inspect aftermarket pads prior to installation for ANY differences with factory equipment..."

And while I'm in mea culpa mode, I'll gladly admit that my initial description of a design defect was incorrect. This was a manufacturing defect (or more broadly, a product defect, if you prefer). EBC USA called it an assembly error.

It was NOT merely a packing error, which would imply that I received a finished part intended for another application. What I received was an incomplete assembly intended for the 4.6/4.8 application. That's pretty poor QC, and entitles me to "slag the brand for all they're worth," but I won't.

I'm glad you saw the error of your ways and deleted your original reply stating "Obviously the middle option was right because the packaging was wrong....."

If you do a search on EBC's online catalogs, you will find only ONE application with the FMSI D920 pad shape: the X5 4.6. If you use their internal product number of DP31472C, once again, only one application: the 4.6 (although the 2005 International catalog shows that part number applies to both the 4.6 and 4.8).

What appears to have happened, is that EBC shipped the incomplete assembly for the inboard pad, also marked DP31473C, (with the four castings, but without attaching the spring clips that align the pad with the pistons) instead of the actual outboard pad that has only two castings.

If you look at the actual inboard pad (with clips), you will see how the inner castings are hammered down to attach the two central spring clips. Those appear as small cube-shaped castings on the incomplete assemblies that were sent to me as outboard pads. What is clear is that customers should never receive EBC pad backers with those cube-shaped castings in tact; rather, the spring clips should appear installed on around them and they be used as inboard pads only.

Since such manufacturing processes operate on a continuous or at least large batch process, I'd be willing to bet that I am not, nor will not be, the only person to experience this product problem with Redstuff for the 4.6/4.8.

My only desire here was to make others aware of what to look for. Which is yet another good function of this forum.

Cheers!

You really have a chip on your shoulder don't you?

Here is their email. Look at the dates sent and replied.

You said yourself you hadn't compared them.... and if you read the whole sentence I also stated in your defence that you weren't to know.....is that biased? I don't think so...

For someone who has analysed and photographed so many pads, you sure have missed the point. It was two mistakes. One of theirs and one of yours. Big deal.

Actually no. If you read the email from EBC they say they are 4 inner pads (ie incorrect type), which refers to the middle option. Again, I chose not to post this as you would get all hurt and twisted again as what EBC USA and EBC UK were saying to both of us was different.

Were I to have posted this we then get into ANOTHER petty point.

I will finish this by saying I emailed EBC UK as (by your own admission) you were getting nowhere with EBC USA. I did this as a forum member trying to help out someone who could be perhaps a little less thin skinned.

I have no interest in EBC other than seeing forum members find a solution for their 4.8's.