Rear brake pads and rotors junk at 25K miles.

[Calidad]

The rear pads on my 2019 XLT Max did not last 30K miles, while the fronts are at 40K and still look good based on a recent dealer oil change/inspection.
No mention from the dealer of proximity to the wetlands & ocean (approx 200 yds) as reason for dismal life of rear pads. I can't recall another vehicle that needed rear pads before the fronts. Full disclosure: I have been driving for nearly 5 decades so recollection of the service history for all prior cars may not be accurate.

Every vehicle I have owned newer than 2009 with advanced stability systems which is every vehicle made today will wear out rear pads first. The new stability systems use rear braking to address stability issues. Especially if you live in foul weather regions and drive to aggressively for conditions. Regardless of that even in dry mild climates all modern vehicles will wear rear brake pads out first again due to stability and performance factors the brake systems are used for today. And as pointed out smaller rear pads etc.

As for brake pad life there are the odd ball types most likely to post online “I did 100,000 miles on a set” who likely live in a flat earth reality vs the rest of us who don’t. Of all the vehicles I have owned all my Toyota trucks were absolutely horrible regarding brake pad life. The worst was my J80 when living on a steep hill. 8000 miles a set was pretty typical. Several friends and family had similar mileage life on their j80’s. My Subaru which towed trailers a bunch 65,000 miles every time for 200,000 miles. Non towing subaru same use 85,000-90,000 every time.

My Sequoia which replaced the Subaru 30,000 miles.

The Expedition so far has been the superior truck regarding pad life.

Each driver and each use case is very different for anyone comparing with others. The only way you can effectively compare vehicles is with the same driver under similar usage.

I know people who can literally destroy brakes on any vehicle after driving it for a month, add a heavier larger vehicle and they can destroy the brakes even faster. The Expedition 100% is a big vehicle and driven poorly easily can burn thru brakes quickly.

 

[SyndicateZ]

Every vehicle I have owned newer than 2009 with advanced stability systems which is every vehicle made today will wear out rear pads first. The new stability systems use rear braking to address stability issues. Especially if you live in foul weather regions and drive to aggressively for conditions. Regardless of that even in dry mild climates all modern vehicles will wear rear brake pads out first again due to stability and performance factors the brake systems are used for today. And as pointed out smaller rear pads etc.

As for brake pad life there are the odd ball types most likely to post online “I did 100,000 miles on a set” who likely live in a flat earth reality vs the rest of us who don’t. Of all the vehicles I have owned all my Toyota trucks were absolutely horrible regarding brake pad life. The worst was my J80 when living on a steep hill. 8000 miles a set was pretty typical. Several friends and family had similar mileage life on their j80’s. My Subaru which towed trailers a bunch 65,000 miles every time for 200,000 miles. Non towing subaru same use 85,000-90,000 every time.

My Sequoia which replaced the Subaru 30,000 miles.

The Expedition so far has been the superior truck regarding pad life.

Each driver and each use case is very different for anyone comparing with others. The only way you can effectively compare vehicles is with the same driver under similar usage.

I know people who can literally destroy brakes on any vehicle after driving it for a month, add a heavier larger vehicle and they can destroy the brakes even faster. The Expedition 100% is a big vehicle and driven poorly easily can burn thru brakes quickly.

Im going to have to disable the stability/traction control so that I can save rear pad life then

 

[Calidad]

Im going to have to disable the stability/traction control so that I can save rear pad life then

Not possible without killing major systems. Especially in high cg vehicles. The core stability systems in modern cars are tied to drive modes, throttle nanny, abs, likely some code tied to roll over , air bag and seat belt tensioners.

Go buy a pre 2009 vehicle if cheap brake pads wearing out in less than 50,000 miles bothers you. Only vehicles I’ve ever had that didn’t need rear pads first were manual transmission cars built before 2005

 

[SyndicateZ]

Not possible without killing major systems. Especially in high cg vehicles. The core stability systems in modern cars are tied to drive modes, throttle nanny, abs, likely some code tied to roll over , air bag and seat belt tensioners.

Go buy a pre 2009 vehicle if cheap brake pads wearing out in less than 50,000 miles bothers you. Only vehicles I’ve ever had that didn’t need rear pads first were manual transmission cars built before 2005

I was being sarcastic. I dont have any issue with the rears going first. I actually had my brakes done this past summer (all corners) with new pads n rotors and the rear actually had more life than fronts

 

[Fastcar]

I just went back through some old paperwork and found the same issue on a 2014 KR that I owned. Same issue. Gotta be the salt air getting the rotors and taking out the pads. So every 20K r&r the rear pads I guess. Either that or move inland.