I was replacing my brake pads w/ something a little more aggressive due to poor stopping distance. And I discovered that my rears were 90% gone and the rotors were slightly grooved, but the fronts were only 50% gone and the rotors were perfectly smooth.

It was my understanding that the fronts should be more worn, not the rear.

I have 35's w/ a 3in lift and only 39k mi.

Is this normal?

 

Funny you brought this up. Just had the dealer do my oil change and 23 pt check up. And my front pads were 90%, while my rear pads were 60%. So, at least mine is consistent with yours. I've got a 2007 with 21,000 miles on it so far, so I haven't had to change the pads yet.

 

Rears wear faster on jk's.

 

my esp has been disabled from day one and my rears wore out long ago and I am still running my original fronts.. I am at 40,000 KMS

 

Mine were replaced at about 16k. I bought the Jeep used from a dealer Ive purchased from before. Apparently that is the only "service"(other than an oil change) that it needed when they took it in on trade.

Not to derail you're thread but I am curious... What type of pads are you installing that are more aggressive?

 

Yep, Im at 37,000 I have about 90 percent of my fronts and about 20 percent of my backs. I think this is done to keep the vehicle stable, especially on turns.

 

Just stop riding your brakes like a grandma and you wouldnt have this problems, nah Im just messing with ya the rears do wear faster

 

Im running Autozone's gold series. They're 1/2 the price of the really expensive one in the magazines, plus they come w/ a lifetime warranty so I can afford yo replace.them every 2yrs.

I actually got the wheels to lock up for a sec before the ABS kicked in. This was the 1st time I've ever been able to do this.

 

At Teraflex Plus in Salt lake City right now having 538's done and found rear down to nothing and fronts at 60%, got just over 40k out of them on a 4 door. Whoda thunk?

 

Just had my rear pads and rotors replaced. Fronts consist of very little wear.