So, I'm not complaining or anything, just curious...

I'm coming up on the 65,000 mile mark, and I'm still on my orignal brake pads with no end in sight (just had them checked, still plenty left)...

Oh, and I pretty much drive it like I stole it. Everyday.

Is this normal? anyone else still on their original pads after so long?

Dinnyin

 

Brake pad wear is more dependent on how often you use them when they are hot than any other factor.

Take it to the track and go from 130>70, 100>50, 70>40, 110>60, and 100>50 all in 100 seconds -- and then do it again and again every 100 seconds. Your stock brake bads would be gone in 50 miles, not 50,000. (Those are approximately accurate speeds and times in the various braking zones for me on my local track.)

But on the street they last for years. The brakes cool down between applications.

I go through a set of track pads in about 600-1000 track miles. I have a single set of street pads that has lasted with very little wear for a couple of years now (approx 20K miles or so). Same car, same driver....

 

I just traded my 98 Integra Type R in on my 04 S2000 and my Type R had 65,000 mostly hard driven miles on it with original pads/rotors. That car had the most amazing brakes of any car I've ever driven, even other Type R's.

 

My pads made it to 75k miles, and I changed them only because I upgraded to slotted rotors and decided to give them new pads at the same time. There was still plenty of meat left to go.

I have not tracked the car, but run the canyons and mountain roads plenty.................and I engine break all the time, so that helps extend pad life as well.

-Hockey

 

Um, "no". Not remotely the same.
IIRC, pads are a bit cheaper than engines....

 

Thanks mike, but did I say canyons/mountains were the same as track? Um no.

I have been engine breaking for 20 years (in various types of cars) and NEVER had an issue with tranny or motors. As a matter of fact, my OEM pads went til 75k+ AND my OEM clutch made it til 85k miles!!! I've heard that drivel about "pads are cheaper" for years now, and know the proof is in the pudding.

......but thanks for sharing.

 

True, you didn't.

 

Not another......."pads are cheaper than engines/tranny thread"....

I've engine braked 4 different cars and NEVER had to replace the engine/tranny cause of it.

So once again... while your changing your brake pads, I'll as I'm driving by on my 1st set of stockers...

 

When I first got my S2K, I ran it late at night/early morning on isolated back country roads. Within 5k miles, my front pads went from 10mm to 5 mm. Being that they should be replaced at around 3mm, I used up .71% of my front pad lining.

I think the rears come with about 9mm of pad lining. The rears, at 4mm, were slightly more worn than the fronts.




I firmly believe that using the compression is very hard on the clutch. The brake pedal is there for a reason. The brake pedal will stop a car much more efficient than engine compression anyday.

How much would it be to replace a clutch on this car? I can change the brake pads on this car in a few minutes for a few dollars compared to what clutch, or worse yet, an engine would cost.

 

Maybe, but Mike Garrison would have already passed you about a million times