worn brake rotors at 33000km?

[jtk1531]

i have a 2012 gtr1400.
at 33,000KM, the left front brake rotor is at it's wear limit (4.429mm), right front rotor is still above limit but pretty close to the service limit (4.5+mm)
third set of brake pads as well, i've only used kawasaki brake pads (part no: 43082-0122) for replacement.
anyone else experienced such a quick wear rate? apart from the wear rate, there wasn't any problem at all.

any suggestion for brake rotors that lasts longer than OEM?

[gPink]

How many miles is 33,000KM?

[mike]

20,505.25 miles

[Scaffolder]

I would fight for warranty coverage Like I did.
I just had my new 2011's. Started to feel warped at about 1200 miles. Dealer confirmed at about 2800 miles. Work done at 5400 miles. Feels great now. Hopefully for a very long time.
My 2010 had rotors under warranty at 38,000 miles. With a fight.
My old 2008 had rotors done at 15,000 miles.

[jtk1531]

getting new rotors under warranty is very unlikely over here. standard answer would be "wear and tear item".
just wondering if anyone else on this site is experiencing such wear rates. never had any warp issues with the current kawasaki rotors.

did a bit more research and there were comments on other forums/sites that the new brake pads might wear down the rotors very quickly. so i'm not sure if it's a rotor problem, or brake pad problem, or bike weight problem, or just my riding style/environment.
i've checked for brake dragging every few months since i bought the bike. there was very minimal dragging. i do ride in the rain quite often, and dirt used to get trapped in the brakes on rainy days. slow speed braking produces sounds like there's some small stones trapped between the disc and the pads.

anyone switched to EBC or Galfer or any other non-OEM brands? how are those rotors wearing down as compared to OEM?

[Son of Pappy]

EBCs all the way.  My stockers went 40,000 miles.

[stevewfl]

My stockers went 76,000 miles but paper thin at 3.8 - 3.9mm

I replaced front and back with EBCs

[lather]

I am still running the oems at 102,000 miles and I am 2/3s through my fourth set of pads. My rotors are just under the service limit, my brakes are working fine.  Your 33,000 km is obviously drastically lower than my results but the fact that you have gone through 3 sets of pads tells me you are braking MUCH harder than I do. My last two sets of pads are EBC HH and they are lasting about 10,000 miles longer than the 08 OEM pads (not the new ones) and it seems the rotors are wearing less slowly but that is not documented.

[B.D.F.]

Unless you are faced with something like a safety inspection where they actually measure the rotors, I would not be overly concerned with that kind of rotor thinning. It is normal.

There is also an error in the manual regarding rotor thickness, or at least there was in the '08 manual. The acceptable wear range of the rotors was specified such that the original stock rotor size was in the middle of the wear range. Put another way, the bike was made brand new with 1/2 worn out rotors. I am not sure what the error really is but it may be that there is more wear range in the rotors than the manual specified.

Motorcycle rotors usually fail due to severe grooving, glazing or warping regardless of thickness at the time of failure rather than just because they are <slightly> too thin according to the spec.'s.

As rotors are really such simple devices made of soft steel it is unlikely any other brand or type of rotor available is going to last much longer than stock.

Brian

i have a 2012 gtr1400.
at 33,000KM, the left front brake rotor is at it's wear limit (4.429mm), right front rotor is still above limit but pretty close to the service limit (4.5+mm)
third set of brake pads as well, i've only used kawasaki brake pads (part no: 43082-0122) for replacement.
anyone else experienced such a quick wear rate? apart from the wear rate, there wasn't any problem at all.

any suggestion for brake rotors that lasts longer than OEM?

[jtk1531]

thanks for all the replies...

There is also an error in the manual regarding rotor thickness, or at least there was in the '08 manual. The acceptable wear range of the rotors was specified such that the original stock rotor size was in the middle of the wear range. Put another way, the bike was made brand new with 1/2 worn out rotors. I am not sure what the error really is but it may be that there is more wear range in the rotors than the manual specified.

i have the 2012 version manual (third edition), this is what i found in the brakes section:
brake discs, front,
- standard thickness: 4.8 - 5.2mm (0.19 - 0.20in)
- service limit: 4.5mm (0.18in)

[lather]

thanks for all the replies...

i have the 2012 version manual (third edition), this is what i found in the brakes section:
brake discs, front,
- standard thickness: 4.8 - 5.2mm (0.19 - 0.20in)
- service limit: 4.5mm (0.18in)

That is the same as what is in the 08 manual.  The way I have been reading that is that "Standard" means manufacturing tolerance range for new rotors. I don't know whether to think it's a manual  error (which would just be one more of many) or the result of a dubious manufacturing process/lack of precision to cut costs. And maybe the reason for the many rotor failures.

[B.D.F.]

Yep, I just looked and my manual has it just as yours: they are giving the manufacturing tolerance as a greater amount than the nominal wear allowed. So if rotors really do range from 5.2 to 4.8 mm, then they have used up more rotor 'tolerance' than what is available to the end user. The tolerance spec'd is 0.4 mm but from the low limit of new (4.8 mm) to the wear limit (4.5 mm) is only 0.3 mm. This is, in my opinion at least, an error.

The rear rotor spec's are worse and clearly an error: the rotor tolerance new is 5.3 to 6.7 mm. Now I have to believe that 6.7 is a mistake and they meant 5.7 mm. But even if it is a mistake, the wear limit is specified at 5.5 mm which is LARGER then the lower limit of what Kawasaki will supply on a new vehicle. Put another way, one- half of all the rear rotors Kawasaki supplied were below the wear limit when new. Clearly at least one, and I believe actually at least two errors.

Brian

The rear rotor

thanks for all the replies...

i have the 2012 version manual (third edition), this is what i found in the brakes section:
brake discs, front,
- standard thickness: 4.8 - 5.2mm (0.19 - 0.20in)
- service limit: 4.5mm (0.18in)

[lather]

An error without a doubt but a publishing error or an engineering error? Maybe poor communication between design team and manufacturing team.

FWIW, I looked at the same spec for my KLX250S:
Standard 3.35 -3.65 mm (0.132 -0.144 in.)
Service Limit: 2.8 mm (0.11 in.)

Why would a bike that will only go 80 mph and weighs less than 400lbs have closer brake manufacturing tolerance (.3 mm vs .4 mm) than a 700 lbs bike that goes 160?

[B.D.F.]

Well, for better or worse the real world is not as slick as we would like to think. The guy or girl 'in charge' of the rotor specs. just pulled them from a book somewhere, or got the data from the rotor mfg. (Nissin) who was probably also an engineer with 4 whole months of worldly experience under his / her belt. We would like to believe that the folks who work at Kawasaki (or anyplace that produces a product we have) are all well experienced designers who really know what they are doing. In reality, the person who spec'd those rotors may have about a month out of a university and could not spell rotors without a cheat- sheet. So who made the mistake is actually the second question: the first being were the rotors even designed properly (my guess is no based on the number of warped rotors and the two changes Kawi has made to try to fix them).

Sort of like 'What do you call the guy who graduated last from medical school? Doctor.'

<sideways grin>

Brian

An error without a doubt but a publishing error or an engineering error? Maybe poor communication between design team and manufacturing team.

FWIW, I looked at the same spec for my KLX250S:
Standard 3.35 -3.65 mm (0.132 -0.144 in.)
Service Limit: 2.8 mm (0.11 in.)

Why would a bike that will only go 80 mph and weighs less than 400lbs have closer brake manufacturing tolerance (.3 mm vs .4 mm) than a 700 lbs bike that goes 160?

[VirginiaJim]

Nissan made those rotors?    and double  .

[B.D.F.]

No, typo on my part. Brake mfg. is Nissin, not Nissan the auto manufacturer.

Brian

Nissan made those rotors?    and double  .

[VirginiaJim]

 

[maxtog]

Nissan made those rotors?    and double  .

"Nissin"

And Nissan is not ""

[VirginiaJim]

From my experience on both of my daughters POS, they are.