if they were replaced, you've got something wrong with your rotors. I'd say that either the work or the pads were defective if they only lasted 7 months.
BTW, I've got over 90k on my pads and they're all over 50% still. Not to mention that I've got the original tires too. :) On 9/28/06, Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So.. is it common to replace rear brake pads at 7 months (12,000) miles? > > 2003 Tahoe. > > I got 54,000 miles off the original brakes, and both front and back were > replaced in Feb 2006. Now, after getting a tire rotation this week, they > tell me the rear brake pads have about 5% remaining. > > Sounds like to me they were never replaced to begin with... > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:216328 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
