1

My 2010 Honda Accord has ~170k mi, a lot of hwy miles, so minimal brake use! The original rotors AND front brake pads (seriously!) are still on and the rear brake pads that were replaced at only ~32k mi (so current rear pads now have ~138k! Don't get me started there, HONDA!).

All pads are ready to be replaced obviously (though they just passed VA inspection again!). Should I go ahead and replace the rotors as well at this point, 170k miles, but also my "first" (front) pad replacement? My front right brake/wheel squeals LOUDLY in reverse, like metal on metal! Suggestions?

Improve this question

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
2

New brake pads should always be installed on smooth rotors. That includes either new rotors or having the old ones resurfaced. The rotors need measured. If there is enough meat on them to resurface, then do it. If they are too thin then get new ones.

Improve this answer
1

I had 237,000 miles on my 2001 Accord and never had to replace the rotors. Just before I traded my car in for a 2014 Accord, my mechanic (not Honda) said I still had one more brake job left in the rotors. (When I was taking my car into the dealer, they were saying I needed brakes about every 30,000 miles; this on a car that was driven 90% on the freeway. After the last time, I took the car into another mechanic. He said I still had 80% left on the pads that Honda said were desperately in need of replacement.)

Improve this answer
0

If i was you, i would replace the rotors when you replace the pads. It is better if you replace everything knowing that the car has 170k on it. I bet the rotors are not in the best shape with the weather either. I dont know your location, but if you live in a place where they put salt on the roads during the winter, then things will be rusted, so it would be better to replace the rotors when replacing the brake pads.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .