Sign in to follow this  
Ramboy

Warped Discs

Recommended Posts

Just taken my 08 plate SR180 in for a service and mentioned a slight brake judder for then tocheck out. Dealer has stated that I tequire new discs and have quoted £283.00 for two front discs and new pads.

Somewhat disapointed that a car 26 months old requires new discs and theyhave refused replacements under warranty.

Anyone else had this problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just taken my 08 plate SR180 in for a service and mentioned a slight brake judder for then tocheck out. Dealer has stated that I tequire new discs and have quoted £283.00 for two front discs and new pads.

Somewhat disapointed that a car 26 months old requires new discs and theyhave refused replacements under warranty.

Anyone else had this problem

Hi Ramboy,

While I was searching the forums for another brake related question I had, I came across this thread which sounds similar to your situation:

http://www.toyotaownersclub.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=111077&st=0&p=1007199&hl=brake%20discs&fromsearch=1entry1007199

Not sure it's a great deal of help.. seems like many dealers will try and argue it's wear and not a warranty issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toyota's policy is quite clear I'm afraid.........It IS wear and tear, sorry

Kingo :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely reject that statement Mr Kingo.

If you measure the discs and pads you will find that they are well within the wear limits. The difference here is that the owner isn't complaining that the parts are worn, he is claiming that the steering wobbles when braking. It is a safety related issue and this owner is entitled under the terms of the warranty to free parts and labour. I have debated this in several cases and found that my opinion on this is correct. It is the dealer that has missed the point. If the parts are worn the owner is liable. In this case the safety related fault needs to be rectified under warranty. If the owner loses control of the car and has an accident, see who the law thinks is liable.

Ramboy

If you need guidance on this let me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree Anchorman.

There's a helluva lot of difference between fair wear and tear and not fit for purpose.

In my experiemce it's down to poor design and rubbbish materials.

It seems that many modern discs just ain't up to the job.

I own a 1994 car that is still running on it's original discs with 75,000 miles on the clock. Yes it is low mileage for its year but combined with age it's obvious to a blind man on a galloping horse discs ain't what they used to be.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst recognising ancs's expertise on this I must beg to agree.

Its not wear and tear but pad material transferring onto the disc thru poor design/poor material. Perhaps the caliper is sticking and has caused this? No matter what, a car this old should be checked thoroughly by the dealer and the cause eliminated.... under warranty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it might just be a co-incidence (and I don't believe in many of those), but I have a feeling that compared to my previous vehicle and the present one, Mr T has changed the pad material. (That's based on looking at the pad and the brake dust that gets thrown off onto the wheels.)

Now, perhaps it is just an alternative component source fitted to this vehicle compared to the previous one. Maybe! :g:, but I'm highly suspicious that there is/was a widespread depositing problem there and that Mr T. knows about it.

I'm sure that Mr T doesn't roll over and just accept the "oh it's fair wear and tear" explanation from his component suppliers, so why should Mr T's customers?

Is Mr T feeding the dealers the wrong information or are the dealers not listening properly to what he is saying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely reject that statement Mr Kingo.

My original post was short, maybe I should explain further

Toyota revised their policy on brake wear/judder/corrosion in Nov 2009, leaving the dealer network with specific guidlines to work to. My use of the term "wear and tear" may have been flippant, but what I should have said in reply to Ramboy was that in the specific circumstances he gave, brake judder at 26 months, means that Toyota would not replace the brake discs under warranty, as they fall outside their guidlines for replacement. Now anybody can make of that what they will, I don't personally agree with it, but if the dealer was to replace the discs in those specific circumstances, then they would not be paid for the parts or labour and would have to stand the cost themselves

There is a whole lot of criteria to work to, and brake disc cracking for instance would be covered for the full 3 year 60K, but for judder, if the disc is below min thickness you can replace the disc up to 18 months or 20K whichever is the sooner, for discs above min thickness, you can skim, also up to 18 months or 20K whichever is the sooner. Discs that fall outside this period/mileage/policy are not claimable and the customer has to pay for replacement.

The term wear and tear is never mentioned, so maybe it was the wrong phrase to use, but the result is the same. Not covered by warranty

I hope the above makes things a bit clearer

Kingo :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

getting the discs skimmed maybe a good alternative Ramboy. The minimum thickness is generally stamped/cast on the inside of the discs bell so fairly easily checked. Its normal for many dealers to advise new discs rather than skimming as they skim yer pocket instead - especially in these economic times.

How many discs does it take to keep Kingo in pies every year? :lol: :lol: :lol: Answers on a worn disc....

(I guess he's off pies following the fitness regime!)

Just a thought - you should ask for yer discs back as metal scrap is worth about £160+ a ton with cast approaching £200.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many discs does it take to keep Kingo in pies every year?

(I guess he's off pies following the fitness regime!)

Pies? :eek: Pies?? Moi???

My flabber has never been so gasted :lol:

Kingo :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just taken my 08 plate SR180 in for a service and mentioned a slight brake judder for then tocheck out. Dealer has stated that I tequire new discs and have quoted £283.00 for two front discs and new pads.

Somewhat disapointed that a car 26 months old requires new discs and theyhave refused replacements under warranty.

Anyone else had this problem

Hi Ramboy,

So what reason does the dealer give for disc replacement?

Are they:

i) cracked - if so parts failure and should be covered under warranty without question

ii) below minimum thickness [25mm I believe for front discs and 1mm for front pads] - if so fair wear and tear

iii) actually warped - if so, have they tested for 'run out' with a dial gauge and can they give you any figures? This is also fair wear and tear as warping can be caused by a variety of reasons.

iv) coated with resin from the pads causing a vibration due to the uneven surface - if so, pads 'not fit for purpose' as pads SHOULD NOT deposit material onto the disc as they are supposed to have enough friction material and be of a suitable temperature resistance not to do so. This is what I see on my front discs. I believe the front and rear pad materials to be different - Anchorman or Kingo will doubtless confirm or not.

v)corroded - usually caused through lack of use or faulty calipers but fair wear and tear.

If you can prove iv), than as Anchorman says, you have a case to dig in and seek recompense.

I have found that if there is a build up of deposit on the front discs of my RAV, then as suggested by Anchorman, I make sure I do some controlled but fairly heavy braking from speed or with load and the discs come up clean.

I have to say that I have never experienced this problem with any previous car I have owned. Did have the opposite issue with a BMW Touring when Asbestos was first banned - pad material so aggressive they ate discs at an alarming rate :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes its all down to "What is the actual fault" If the run-out is measured and the disc is warped then it wont be covered under warranty, we dont of course have the info to hand but warped discs are not covered at this age/mileage

Davrav, that was still happening on certain models until very recently, the pad would grind the disc away in a very short period of time

Kingo :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you have been holding the brakes on in traffic which heats them too much on the pad-to-disc surface contact area so they warp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:thumbsup:KPH - It is possible but not in this case. This is a common problem.

I have noproblem with brake wear nor corrosion - it would be unfair to expect TGB to pick up the tab for either. However, brake judder is the result of abnormal wear and I'm pleased to see that my previous rants on this subject have stuck and the correct term of depositing is being used :thumbsup:

Thanks for the better explanation Kingo but it seems that the term judder has been slotted between the two acceptable and none claimable forms of brake issue. My problem with that policy (if it has been clearly identified by TGB) is that as far as warranty goes a test of fairness and reasonableness should be applied. In the case of pads and discs, there are specifications for wear limits and the parts never get anywhere near those limits let alone the European standard for vehicle manufacturers of a ratio of two sets of pads to one set of discs. If a ratio of one to one were achievable that might be a compromise but when the owner has to foot the bill for part worn discs and pads due to a fault and not wear is an error on Toyota's part and one that needs addressing. It is niether fair or reasonable.

I say to owners again - if this is the case you must dig in and if I can help I will. PM me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I thought I'd mention it seeing as no one had in this topic thus far.

Sorry that you have had such troubles though, it is a bit silly that they are not made of substantial enough material. It happens all too often with Toyota parts these days....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I thought I'd mention it seeing as no one had in this topic thus far.

Sorry that you have had such troubles though, it is a bit silly that they are not made of substantial enough material. It happens all too often with Toyota parts these days....

Plain old cast iron no matter if its fitted to a RAV or top of the range Merc (unless somebody foolishly opts for carbon fibre).

There is very little can be done about fair wear and tear and in most cases about corrosion. In the latter, it can be reduced by getting the right amount of abrasive in the pad which effectively scours the disc. In the case of the early RAVs they not only didn't scour but they transfer residue from the pad to the disc (called depositing) and that is the start of the problem. Because of the uneven distribution of the resinous deposits, the disc wears unevenly.

I can see a lot of engineering going on in your signature - is that up and running these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this