Is it normal for the rear brakes to wear out faster than front brakes?

[tengiday]

Hello,
I just took my car to 5K-mile service and was told that my front brake has about 70-80% left, while my rear brake has about 50% left. I would like to know whether this wear is normal. I used to think that FWD cars often have front brake wear out faster, but it seems like my rear one is wearing out faster.

PS: My car is at about 45,400 miles, and I often drive alone (not take anyone else).

[Dave's]

I believe the typical ratio is something like 70% front and 30% rear brakes, so no, I don't think the rear brakes should show that kind of wear. Not to say they haven't recently redesigned the pads so they wear out more evenly but if so I'm not aware of it. But I'm not a brake specialist either.

[JohnGD]

Just about all cars today, or maybe all cars, have electronic brake force distribution. The ABS system helps to apply more braking to the rear wheels initially so you get the most out of all brakes. On these systems the rears wear out more or less about the same time as the fronts.

[min2patl]

Actually i believe it is.... my old camry had organic pads in the rear which wear down faster than the front. However i could be wrong if they changed it

[tengiday]

It's a bit strange to me because I used to think the front brakes play major role in braking, resulting faster wearing down. With this opposite trend, I think I may need a new rear brake set at about 60k mile, while the front brake may hold up to 100k mile. :-( It's usual for an OEM brake set, isn't it?

[JohnGD]

The front pads are larger than rears. So that helps even out the difference in braking force. I was expecting a difference of 3-5K miles in between, not 40K miles. Maybe they did use a cheap pad in the rear, you never know how far these cost cuttings have gone.

[Vlad1024]

In all cars the brakes are heavily front biased. When you brake weight is transfered to the front wheels so they "grab" better. Also, the car would oversteer ALOT if brakes were rear biased. My rear brakes lasted twice as long as the front ones. The only thing that would cause the rears to wear would be different pads or something is sticking.

[kenny1773]

2 camrys now and multiple brake pad changes, mine have ALWAYS worn out the rears first, by a long shot.

[molson.david]

on my cars front to rear break pads wear ratio is at least 2:1.
never seen rear pads need to be replaced sooner than 60-70K.
front (even ceramic) last no more than 35-40K.
my brother's GS and sister's IS -same story.
front pads always wearing far before rear.
they bought 1year old IS with 10K on it-pretty sure pads were original. close to 35K front pads were replaced. rear got at least 50% of live left.

[SilverBullet]

Can't remember if I've replaced them on my car, but when I brought it in for the 60k service back in April, they said the rear ones were "overtightened" and were wearing faster than the front and they loosened them and that's where I am at now . It still brakes fine, so I'm not too worried. I always thought that the front wore faster with a FWD car but I guess I'm wrong lol.

[aznlunatic206]

I'm not sure if this applies to the gen 6's also, but in my 2011 se i have brake assist and while braking from 40mph to 0, I've notice at a certain point my rear brakes kicks in and slows down the car down to a certain speed and then lets go and the front brakes does the rest of the work. I can definitely feel the rear brakes kick in as the car does not dip forward and my foot is fairly light on the brakes. Could this be the cause of the rear pads wearing out quicker? I can almost imagine that the rear pads are thinner than the fronts and with brake assists makes them wear out even faster.

[Donald E. George]

Line pressure to the rear brake calipers is reduced by the proportioning valve to prevent the rear wheels from locking up due to the front weight bias. At full emergency stop, the line pressure to the real brakes is probably about 50% of front caliper pressure. I drive my vehicles about 65000 miles before trading and never have to replace the pads.

[BLG]

My 2003 Solara has 78,000 miles on the front pads and they're still good, but the rear pads were replaced with Wagner ThermoQuiet at 60,000 miles, and at the last tire rotation I was told they need replacing again after just 18,000 miles! Too bad the brake shop doesn't have a limited lifetime warranty to coincide with the brake pad warranty.
I wonder if it's a Solara problem, brake pad problem, or if I'm supposed to brake "hard" to put more pressure on the front pads.

[hardtopte72]

From what I can remember Gen 6 Camrys all wear the rear brakes disproportionately faster than the fronts. Some avalons are also known to do this also.

And remember while there may be generalizations in the industry cars are still individual. My Corolla has over 100K on the original front brakes. I will probably make it to 120K while a car like a tC will be lucky to 60k. From what I see on New Toyotas they are almost not wearing brakes out. My Camry has 83K and has 80% left up front. Maybe it is because the bulk is highway but brake designs are significantly changed from the old days.

[tengiday]

Alright, if this is a normal case, I don't have to worry about this. I always had my dealers check my brakes evey time I went for car service, and they didn't seem to find any problem. Even though I drive fast, I use my brakes very lightly; probably that's why the brake force is on the rear more.