Should I replace my rusty rotors?

[Susan]

I'm going to get new front and back pads and one of the places I got an estimate for said my back rotors were a little rusty and "probably should be replaced". My mechanic friend told me don't bother, that's ok. So whose's right? Got an estimate from my dealer for my pads which included 4 hours of labor - I know nothing about cars, but that sounds excessive to me! This other garage only said 2 hrs.

 

[Brain]

Rust is worn off when you apply the brake...but the presence makes me think that the brake in question is not applying, possibly a stuck piston in the caliper. It won't do any damage, but in the snow/ice, I'd rather have all four wheels applying braking force to the wheels (better control). 4 hours for 4 wheels is excessive, especially since they are disk brakes all around. Now - if someone were to do it at home with a regular floor jack instead of a lift and hand tools instead of pneumatic (air) tools, I would think 3-3.5 hours would be right. Pads are cheap, rotors are not. Was it the stealership that said to replace the rotor???

 

[Susan]

Stealership! That's 4 sure! No, replacement of rotors came from this highly recommended place. They quoted me $65-$70 for the pads and $75 for 2 "cheaper metal" rotors, whatever that means. Rotors can come in different strength metals? Anyway, the dealer was cheaper on parts but sure made up for it in time! Maybe if I stood there and watched they move quicker.

 

[Mbrooks420]

I replaced my rear pads and rotors last weekend. The rotors were 20 a piece(the cheap chinese ones) and the pads were $30(wearever gold) Took about 3 hours for just the rears. The parking brake shoes in the rear take some extra time over front rotors. I also had to free up the e brake.

 

[Susan]

Where do you guys find stuff so cheap? I called Lappen's and the cheapest pads they had for my car were $54. So, I don't need new rotors, could be another problem, but the rear brakes could take a little longer? Does anyone know a trustworthy mechanic in the Boston area? Maybe I should post the question seperately.

 

[Brain]

http://www.partsamerica.com/PartDet...WEA&MfrPartNumber=MKD667&PartType=220&PTSet=A
That's Checker/Advanced Auto/Schucks/Kragen's website...east to do a parts cost comparison there. Others are NAPAonline.com and Autozone.com
$18.28 for lifetime replacement (for a pair if I'm not mistaken).

You can get different grades of steel - different alloys - the highest priced ones (racing) are cryogenically treated (frozen down to -310F or lower), while the cheapest are recycled metal mixes....

Yes, rears to take longer than fronts because of the emergency/parking brake. Braking uses up front pads more than rears, because that's where the weight is transferred when you are braking, so although it might be an initial mix of like 60% to the front and 40% to the rear, the front brake pads will wear about twice as fast as the rears....and in your case, if the back disks have rust on them, they will last forever.

 

[Brain]

Cheaper rotors also tend to be thinner (less metal = less $, especially with the price of steel these days), so they don't have as much mass to sink the heat created by braking, hence they tend to warp faster and easier.

 

[Susan]

So the consensus is no new rotors, but check out why they may have rust. Thanks!

 

[Mbrooks420]

My rear rotors were very rust. Anywhere the pads didn't touch you could push over a 1/4 into them. They passed inspection, but the mechanic said they were pretty beat, and if it were his car he'd change them.