33k on odo and dealer says I need new rear pads/rotors

[Buzzman12]

Actually they re-surface the rotors. I didn't mean to imply that the rotors were bad, it's just that they redo the rotors with the pad replacement. They do that with all brake jobs regardless.

Can't really agree with you on that nowadays.
Rotors are cheap, and built to the lowest standard necessary. Most rotors today do not have enough thickness to them to allow for a resurfacing.
In the "old" days, rotors were thicker and more robust, and could be turned at least once.
With the current crop of rotors, I wouldn't do it. Just replace them.

 

[dunhillmc]

It’s not “if” or “but”, but it’s the fact. Rear disk brake calipers with EPB are having flaws and Mazda had to revise the calipers after 2016/9/7. See the TSB for details.

And I simply don’t believe needing new rear pads and rotors at 33K miles cab be considered as normal rear brake wear on CX-5 unless the driver uses the brakes so often. Then he / she would need front brakes very soon too.

nope, for a while now most SUVs have a rear bias to their brakes to keep them from nose-diving. there are lots of posts here from members commenting that the rear pads need replacing before the front

 

[yrwei52]

Can't really agree with you on that nowadays.
Rotors are cheap, and built to the lowest standard necessary. Most rotors today do not have enough thickness to them to allow for a resurfacing.
In the "old" days, rotors were thicker and more robust, and could be turned at least once.
With the current crop of rotors, I wouldn't do it. Just replace them.

I’d say OP’s dealer is quite honest and did the resurface job instead of unnecessary replacement on rear rotors for his pad replacement. Based on observation of my 2016 CX-5 with 43K miles, the rear rotors should be able to resurface at least 2 times and they’d still within the minimum thickness spec, 8.0 mm / 0.31”. I’m the believer that you don’t waste any parts and material if they’re still useable within specs. If OP’s dealer would replace the rear rotors instead, he’d have to pay additional $200 for 2 new OEM rear rotors (K011-26-251C MSRP $99.95 each). The dealer have the resurfacing machine readily available at the shop, and OP doesn’t have to pay $200 extra, resurfacing the rotors which are still within specs is the best for both sides.

In fact, all commercial brake shops as far as I know still resurface the rotors for any brake pad replacement as long as the rotors are within specs.

 

[yrwei52]

nope, for a while now most SUVs have a rear bias to their brakes to keep them from nose-diving. there are lots of posts here from members commenting that the rear pads need replacing before the front

You missed my point. I didn’t say rear disk pads shouldn’t be worn out earlier than the front on CX-5. My point was if OP’s rear disk pads wore down to 3 mm and needed replacement (actually 2 mm is the minimum thickness on rear pads) at 33K miles, that means he uses the brakes heavily and more often than the most, his front pads should also be due very soon. Instead, his front pads still have 6 mm out of 8 ~ 12 mm thickness from new. To me, rear pads on OP’s 2016 CX-5 wore out too soon, much sooner than the front. This indicates there’re most likely issues in rear brakes. And the TSB says the problematic rear disk calipers manufactured before 2016/9/7 would cause EPB dragging, which also means premature wear-out on rear pads.

We’ve seen many reports here having EPB dragging, or worse, locking up the rear brakes on the highway on 2016 / 2016.5 CX-5, why wouldn’t you want to replace the important brake parts which have known issues as soon as you can? I would, and I did.

 

[Buzzman12]

I’d say OP’s dealer is quite honest and did the resurface job instead of unnecessary replacement on rear rotors for his pad replacement. Based on observation of my 2016 CX-5 with 43K miles, the rear rotors should be able to resurface at least 2 times and they’d still within the minimum thickness spec, 8.0 mm / 0.31”. I’m the believer that you don’t waste any parts and material if they’re still useable within specs. If OP’s dealer would replace the rear rotors instead, he’d have to pay additional $200 for 2 new OEM rear rotors (K011-26-251C MSRP $99.95 each). The dealer have the resurfacing machine readily available at the shop, and OP doesn’t have to pay $200 extra, resurfacing the rotors which are still within specs is the best for both sides.

In fact, all commercial brake shops as far as I know still resurface the rotors for any brake pad replacement as long as the rotors are within specs.

If they can resurface them and still maintain minimum requirements, then OK.
I'm personally not keen on having thinner rotors and possibly risking premature warpage. That's just me.

I also found it interesting that on my 6 I have early rust on my rear rotors (I've ragged on about this before...lol), with only 15,000 miles currently on my car.
Neither dealer I went to for advice and help even bothered to offer a resurfacing option.
Both dealers wanted to replace the pads and rotors.....at my expense of course. Mazda Canada also said tough nuts to my request for warranty compensation.
A third dealer said just to keep driving it, as there is plenty of pad left.
Despite the rust, they still work OK. That's what I'm doing now. Drive it til there's a problem.
When the time comes, I'll just replace the parts.

 

[ceric]

On my last full-circle checkup, the mechanic put down "6mm" for my front pads (both), then someone (maybe himself) crossed it out and put down "3mm".... I tend to disbelieve it.

I went to an indie shop I know for years. He said, "at least 6mm"....
Don't trust the dealers unconditionally.
They want to lighten your wallet. Get a 2nd opinion.

 

[2001birdowner]

My 19 grt with 22k failed inspection last week because of the rear brakes.

Inspection in my state requires there to be less than 1/2” of rust on the braking surface. I had exactly 1/2” on the inside facing edge closets to the hub where the pad makes contact.

I declined their $500 quote and replaced them myself for under $100.

I was surprised to see the inside pads were relatively low. It’s all about where you live and how you drive. With my past 3 mazdas I bought new, I never got more than 30k out of a set of pads and rotors. The brine they put down in New England is brutal.

 

[erhayes]

I sold my 2014 touring CX5 at 76,000 with original pads all around. Drive like a pussy cat could mean you drag your brakes or is there another driver that uses the vehicle??