Hey Jim!!!! Great hearing from you. Hope all is well up in the muskeg!!
Incidentally, this year, I did a piece for the Canadian version of April
auto issue about whether (and how) Canadians should come down to the
states
to take advantage of the lower new car prices and the loonies' being on
par
with the greenback. Very interesting issues, and I can see why Canadian
are
angry about some manufacturers' non-ex****t policies (though not Ford.
Perhaps you have a dealer's perspective?)
As far as the brakes, thanks for the explanation. I'm betting you're
right,
especially since I use the emergency brake so much, sometimes even when
the
truck starts to roll. So would you change the rears at this point at a
6/64ths (2 mm) over the rivet head? The rear shoes only dropped 2/64ths
over
the last two years, so if it remains the same, I'd hit 1/16th two years
from
now. But I don't want to take chances or have to keep pulling the drum out
of nervousness. Does $189 seems fair? They're figuring at least an hour's
work. ($189 is US of course, but it's so close now anyway.) And is it
right
to tell them not to turn 'em but sand them instead? Aluminum oxide or
garnet
paper medium grit?
As far as the story, I am embarrassed to say I don't think they ever used
it, and I have no idea why, since the auto editor assigned. But I was a
freelancer at the time, and now I'm on staff (though as finance, not an
auto
writer). So I'm going to push it. I also did a piece about using forums to
get computer tech advice, and that ran. So I should be able to update and
at
least blog the auto one. The more I use forums, Usenet or otherwise, the
more convinced I am that it is the BEST way to get help, pretty much no
matter what you're into. And when you get experts like you or the
Microsoft
MVPs, it makes it even better! I will let you know as soon as I can
resurrect it!
My 92 still remains near showroom. While I had my tires off, I just
Rustoleum-ed the wheels wells and leaf springs, as a do every few years.
Looks like a brand new truck under there. I so wish Ford would bring back
the manual for the Explorer. Xterra seems like the only choice these days
that is close to the Explorer though with a "manny" "Manny!" Hey I just
made
that up!! :O)
Anyway, thanks again. I'll be in touch!!!!
Anthony Giorgianni
For everyone's benefit, please post back to the group
"Jim Warman" <mechanic@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Eq4Rj.2674$XI1.1627@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Long time, no see, Anthony... How's things going?
>
> First, I'm going to suspect that it is your driving style that has the
> brakes wearing more evenly. Braking effort is *usually* about a 60/40
> split front to back... Under what would be considered "normal" driving
> style, people use the brake pedal often... Since the front brakes "come
> on" before the rears, we will experience more front pad wear than you
> might... You use your brakes only when you have to... and this may have
> you applying the brake with just enough force to keep the brake wear
> roughly even front to rear.
>
> Let's spend a minute discussing your rear brakes... In the industry,
these
> are known as a "duo-servo, self energizing drum brake"... The "front"
(or
> primary) brake shoes serve two purposes... First, they do help to slow
the
> car down, but their second purpose is to force the secondary brake shoe
in
> to the drum. We will sometimes see the primarry brake shoe made of a
> different grade of friction material. The primary brake shoe lining is
> often a different length than the secondary and can even be a different
> thickness than the secondary.
>
> One would think that the engineers would have it figured out by now, but
> the primary shoe always seems to wear much quicker than the secondary.
>
> Where we live and where we drive will have a great influence on brake
> lining life. In our area, we are entering into the first of our two
annual
> "mud bowls"... Most of our customers spend a good deal of time "off
road"
> (Alberta oil patch, remember?) and it isn't uncommon to do rear brakes
> several times before these guys are ready for fronts.... Hell, in a
rainy
> year, it isn't uncommon to do rear brakes a couple or four times in a
> year... Mud can be a techs blessing.
>
> Since you say that your brakes are more than up to the task, I can only
> suggest that you are looking for a problem where there isn't going to be
a
> problem to be found (flip over enough rocks and you're bound to find a
few
> bugs)...
>
> What ever became of that magazine article you were writing? I was
waiting
> with baited breath to see the final product....
>
> Take care...
>
>
> "Anthony Giorgianni" <pleasereply@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:4814ccde$0$11596$607ed4bc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Hello All. Sorry for the length of this.
>>
>> I'm hoping folks here might be able to come up with a theory - or
confirm
>> one of my theories - about what is happening with my 92 Explorer
brakes.
>> Keep in mind that I'm an unusual in how I use the brakes; more on that
>> later.
>>
>> ISSUE: I have about 97,000 miles and have never changed the pads. The
>> thing
>> is the rear brake shoes are wearing out FASTER than the front disc
brakes
>> pads, although both are wearing very slowly. My Ford dealer says the
>> front
>> pads should wear about about three times for every one time the rear
>> shoes
>> wear out, which I've heard elsewhere as well. He says something is
wrong/
>> The question is: Why are the rear brakes wearing first? The dealer, who
>> will
>> do my state inspection Monday 4/28/08, is hypothesizing that maybe
there
>> is
>> a problem with the brake system pro****tioning valve? (All stops, even
>> emergency ones, are secure, fast and straight!)
>>
>> This is where wear things stand:
>>
>> FRONT PADS: 11/64ths (slightly more than 5/32) Ford recommends changing
>> at
>> 1/16. One side is very slightly more worn than the other. The outer and
>> inner pads are worn about the same. They have worn very slightly since
I
>> checked at this time last year. I don't see a need to change these now.
>>
>> REAR PADS: The front shoe on both sides is worn more than the rear
shoes,
>> down to about 6/64ths to 7/64ths over the rivet head (3/32nds) in the
>> most
>> worn spots. (They were 8/64 to 9/64ths in 7/06) Ford I think recommends
>> changing at 1/16 above rivet head, though NY State requires
replacement
>> at
>> 1/32 over the rivet. I'm thinking I should change them soon just to
sure
>> I
>> don't get the rivets too close to the drum, ad it's getting close to
the
>> inspection limits. The dealer wants $189 to do both sides of the rear
>> alone.
>> I told him I want the drums sanded and not cut, per Ford's
instructions.
>> The
>> drums are in very good shape.
>>
>> MY DRIVING HABITS: I think you can tell that I am EXTREMELY light on
the
>> brakes. I coast to stop signs and red lights and stay far behind the
car
>> in
>> front so that I rarely use the brakes or only very lightly and briefly,
>> except for occasional fast braking in emergencies. I also have a manual
>> transmission, though I don't down****ft excessively. However, I DO use
the
>> parking brake a lot, often at red lights, since I don't like keeping my
>> foot
>> on the brake if I'm on even the slightest hill. (I tap the brake pedal
a
>> lot
>> of let cars behind me know I'm stopped or slowing, but not enough the
>> engage
>> the brakes)
>>
>> THEORIES ABOUT WHAT COULD BE HAPPENING:
>>
>> A) Pro****tioning valve problem as the dealer thinks? Is there one?
>> B) My light use of the brakes but frequent use of the parking brake,
>> though
>> applying at a stop, is causing the rear brakes to wear as fast as the
>> front
>> ones
>> C) I disassemble and grease the calipers with dielectric compound
>> annually .
>> I have never disassembled or greased the rear pads. I'm wondering
whether
>> they are dragging a bit. Maybe the return springs are old? The drums
come
>> off fairly easily, though it seems like the pads may be in slight
contact
>> with the drum when I remove it on both sides.
>>
>> So... has anyone seen this before, with rear brakes wearing out as fast
>> or
>> more quickly than the fronts? Any ideas what's going on? Does replacing
>> the
>> brakes make sense now, and is $189 for the rear brakes alone too high?
>> I'm
>> reluctant to use these cheap quickie places. (One Jiffy Lube manger
told
>> me
>> that he didn't even know what torquing the lug nuts even means!!!!)
Also,
>> I've never done rear brakes before, and the procedure in the manuals I
>> have
>> (Haynes and Ford shop manual) seem like it's a lot of work, especially
>> when
>> I comes to adjusting.
>>
>> Thanks for reading and for any advise or feedback.
>>
>>
>> Anthony Giorgianni
>> For everyone's benefit, please post back to the group
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
|
