Notices
Stock JK Tech Bulletin board forum regarding issues with OE (original equipment) components of the Jeep JK Wrangler (Rubicon, Sahara, Unlimited and X) such as factory suspension parts, engine, transmission, body parts, interior fixtures and the on-board computer.

Brake dust question

Thread Tools
 
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 12:24 PM
  #1  
Krumby's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
From: Wellington Florida
Default Brake dust question

Ok jeepers answer me this. If the rear brakes wear out faster than the fronts why are my front rims dirtier than the rears????
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 12:37 PM
  #2  
JKUon37s's Avatar
JK Newbie
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
From: Tulsa, Ok
Default

I don't think I've ever seen or heard of worn out rear brakes before the fronts. A majority of your stopping force comes from the front, therefore you eat through more pad subsequently causing more brake dust. Have you owned the Jeep since new? Maybe the last owner changed the fronts and not the rears and that is why you are thinking it is opposite.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 12:49 PM
  #3  
Jiblet's Avatar
JK Junkie
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,191
Likes: 6
From: Boston, MA
Default

Originally Posted by JKUon37s
I don't think I've ever seen or heard of worn out rear brakes before the fronts. A majority of your stopping force comes from the front, therefore you eat through more pad subsequently causing more brake dust. Have you owned the Jeep since new? Maybe the last owner changed the fronts and not the rears and that is why you are thinking it is opposite.
JKs are definitely biased to rear braking.
It surprises a lot of folks at first but no news there. It seems rear pads are wearing out 2:1 over the fronts.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 12:51 PM
  #4  
Twinkydog's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
From: Oak Ridge, NC
Default

Originally Posted by JKUon37s
I don't think I've ever seen or heard of worn out rear brakes before the fronts. A majority of your stopping force comes from the front, therefore you eat through more pad subsequently causing more brake dust. Have you owned the Jeep since new? Maybe the last owner changed the fronts and not the rears and that is why you are thinking it is opposite.
Been around the JK long? It's known for eating the rear pads way before the fronts. My rear pads were gone at 30k and the fronts still looked new. OP, I have no idea other than airflow at the rear may cause the dust to be evacuated better.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 12:52 PM
  #5  
Mello03's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
From: Greensboro, NC
Default

I know up that a lot of vehicles today are biased more toward the rear than ever before. Maybe because the surface area of the pad itself is the answer? I mean look at the size of the pad material vs the rear. Even though the rear pads may wear out more quickly, there is more material/surface area on the rotors in front, therefore more dust. That's my theory?
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 12:52 PM
  #6  
Jiblet's Avatar
JK Junkie
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,191
Likes: 6
From: Boston, MA
Default

Originally Posted by Krumby
Ok jeepers answer me this. If the rear brakes wear out faster than the fronts why are my front rims dirtier than the rears????
mebbe cuz you don't rotate often enough.


Just kidding. Can't say I've noticed a difference on mine.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 12:55 PM
  #7  
Sahara Lee's Avatar
JK Freak
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
From: Lakeland, Florida
Default

Twinkydog may be on to something. The front and rear brakes are made differently. The front disk is just a disk. The rear brakes use a combination of disk and drum. The drum is inside the disk and only used for emergency/park brake.
Reply

Trending Topics

Old Jan 5, 2014 | 01:58 PM
  #8  
JKUon37s's Avatar
JK Newbie
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
From: Tulsa, Ok
Default

Nope, this is my first JK (lots of Jeeps though) and I've only put 4k miles on it. I've always done my own brakes (and most of my friends) and I've always done the fronts first. Thanks for the heads up on the JK. Seems against principal that the JK would be rear biased in the brake department, but what do I know.
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 02:04 PM
  #9  
Billbikes's Avatar
JK Freak
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 826
Likes: 0
From: Sanatoga, Pa
Default

Maybe it has to do with the smaller pads, or pad material that they wear faster. ?????
Reply
Old Jan 5, 2014 | 02:07 PM
  #10  
ronjenx's Avatar
JK Jedi Master
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 12,907
Likes: 185
From: Maine
Default

Originally Posted by JKUon37s
Nope, this is my first JK (lots of Jeeps though) and I've only put 4k miles on it. I've always done my own brakes (and most of my friends) and I've always done the fronts first. Thanks for the heads up on the JK. Seems against principal that the JK would be rear biased in the brake department, but what do I know.
It has to do with the more sophisticated ABS today's vehicles have. It allows normal braking to be biased to the rear for more stability.
Earlier systems could not do that without risk of locking up the rear brakes.
Harder braking is still the job of the bigger front brakes.
My '01 VW Golf wears out the rear pads faster than the fronts, too.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:47 AM.