Vance

At about 33,000 miles, I took my '97 A4Q in for an oil change and came out with new pads and rotors -- front and rear. The service advisor said that the pads had worn far enough to be replaced under warranty, then called back and said they were replacing the rotors, too.

If this was a service advisor letting the Audi warranty help out a customer, that's great (I was a helpful service advisor in a previous life). But I hate to think of replacing rotors every 30K -- I thought only carbon/carbon brakes wore pads and rotors at the same rate.

So, high-mileage people: how are your rotors holding up?

Bob

Rotors wear almost as fast as pads on Audis

Vance

How about the 30K? Expected?

Given the effectiveness of the brakes, I can't really bitch -- well, yes, I can. But I do remember the surprise I had trying to haul a Honda CRX down from 100 in the desert once. I'd rather buy rotors.

Bob

I do admit that 30K is rather soon but 40-50K is typical.

Wedge

It was difficult to get use to. Especially, since my previous car was a 1979 FIAT X1/9, which had great non-powered all-wheel discs with Metal Master pads.

Manny

I have a '96 A4 2.8Q with 57K miles. I still have the original pads and rotors - no problems. I trded in the '97 A4 2.8Q with 47K miles and it too had all original pads and rotors.

Kyle Bailey

Independent mechanic turned the rotors, though I'm not sure that was the right thing to do. He assured me the rotors were still thick enough to be turned, but given the size of the lip on them, I'm not sure I believe him. So far they seem to be fine - no sign of warping.

Kyle
'97 2.8

Vance

Yeah, and it was like that with the following Hondas. And that's why this Honda employee has four German cars in the drive and garage.