[tdauria]

Just wondering what experiences people have had with brake longevity... my last car had a standard transmission and I got 65K out of the front brakes... never did change the back ones.

My gut feeling is that I'll be lucky to get 20k on my 2001 ES... it really likes to roll..

Does anyone notice that the stopping distance on these cars is too long? Again I am coming from a more sporty car (Ford Probe GT) so maybe it's just me... but usually when you trade in an old car everything on your new car seems better... which is the case here except for the brakes.. they don't seem very good at all.

Tom

 

[blkbute]

I feel that the brakes on this car suck ass. they should have made bigger brakes mabe to handle the load, because Ive already had to replace the pads twice and the rotors once.

 

[IntrepidXJ]

MAybe it's the way you drive

LOL

 

[bboucher]

not sure if the R/T brakes fit under the 16" rims, but if they do you can upgrade to better brakes. The R/T stops pretty good, I think Car and Driver was pretty impressed with it's stopping ability.

 

[Warlord187]

I have about 24,500 miles on my car and I'm still on the original brake pads. Also, for the past year, 95% of my driving has been in stop-n-go city traffic.

 

[McDaddy]

I just swapped pads on my '99, 65K and they still had about 40% left. The way you drive definitely affects the lifespan of your vehicle.

 

[MacGyver467]

Mine lasted for 55K.

I'm burning through my current set, though. I blame the dealers; they don't know how to install brakes correctly.

 

[blkbute]

Originally posted by Intrepid99:
MAybe it's the way you drive

LOL

yeah, thats probably the reason for the brakes and tires on my ride.

 

[moparman]

Driving style does make a difference.

Our 93 Eagle Vision has over 60k on the current pads and still stop well. For me, I stopped using the dealers years ago for brake work. I've had an exceptional mechanic for over 20 years now and his brake jobs ALWAYS last 2 to 3 times longer than the dealer work. We use better stuff than the factory does (pads, etc.) - My 95 'Trep had almost 50k when I traded it on a 98 and never had the pads changed (rotors turned, though). The 98 only had 27k when I traded it on the 2001 R/T. The R/T has some serious brakes - beats the ES by 30-40 feet 60-0.

And if you use the autostick you can get even more stopping power.

 

[btc909]

Oh the auto stick helps BIG TIME but only drop it into second unless you REALLY have to. It's not healthy for the tranny. Plus not stoping in a nice straight line makes a big difference as well. Living in Cali your forced to learn the tricks.

 

[DMAG]

Just had my fronts changed on Friday. 43K miles. Didn't need the pads too bad...but the rotors were really warped. They were cuttable, so I just went ahead and had new pads put on since it was all apart. The old ones still had about another 10K left on them though.

 

[blkbute]

I always use autostick to downshift to stop, its like all I ever use. Works really great. I also love when the engine revs up real high gearing down, especialy in the 5,000 range.

[ October 14, 2001: Message edited by: blkbute ]

 

[01Intrepid]

LOL, the Brakes will out last your Car if you don't use them......

[ October 17, 2001: Message edited by: 01Intrepid ]

 

[tdauria]

Dan Heraud from carpoint lists
Braking
SE 60-0 157'
ES 60-0 164'
RT 60-0 160'

I don't see any major difference for the RT... 160 feet still stinks.

When I first got this car there were a couple of whoah's as I came close to rear ending the car in front of me... brakes on this car are very very very bad!!!! I think it's unsafe and wish I had not purchased the vehicle... guess I'll keep it for a few then unload it.

 

[00ChryslerIntrepid]

Tom, the Intrepid is a big and heavy car. Don't expect it to stop as quickly as smaller and lighter cars. If you've had to slam on the brakes to avoid rear-ending someone that's your own fault for being inattentive.

If you really want to compare brakes, compare the braking performance of the Intrepid to the braking performance of other cars in it's size and weight class. If, after that, you find the Intrepid's braking sub-par, then I'll believe you, but don't base your judgement of the brakes on the experiences you described.

 

[00ChryslerIntrepid]

And, FYI, I think the braking performance of the Intrepid is good. I have had no problem stopping effectively, even with the car full of people.

Original brakes with 29,500 miles on it.

Driving style has everything to do with it.

 

[Warlord187]

If you didn't like the brakes, wouldn't you have discovered that while test driving her?

I haven't had any problems with the brakes, and I'm driving in city traffic 90% of the time.

Hope I just didn't jinx myself there.

 

[tdauria]

Just an example the Chevrolet Monte Carlo has two versions ... one stops 60-0 in 139' and the other in 129'... the Intrepid ranges 157'-164'... the Chevy is a big car too. If you check out carpoint you'll see that the Intrepid has braking distances that comparable to the Chevy Tahoe (161 and 164). Do you think the Intrepid is as heavy as a Chevy Tahoe... nope it's not weight it's bad design.

Anyway I'll just be careful... Thanks for the info

 

[00ChryslerIntrepid]

Perhaps the brakes on the Intrepid are not as good as those of the Monte Carlo. I wouldn't necessarily call it a bad design, just an area that could use some improvement. Bad design would be the headlight mouting apparatus on the first generation Intrepids. Bad design (from a subjective aesthetic perspective) would be the styling on the new Monte Carlo. Bad design is not braking distance...it's just an area that could use improvement.

Is it something that is really that big of a deal? Absolutely not. If you're a careful and attentive driver, braking is not a problem, no matter what make/model of automobile you're in.

I certainly wouldn't get rid of your car as soon as you can based just on braking distance. If you develop problems with the car that do not seem to be related to regular maintenance, then I would consider it.

What do you love about your Intrepid? Anything? Don't ignore all the good things that you like about the car...another thing to consider before you trade it in.

[ October 21, 2001: Message edited by: 00ChryslerIntrepid ]

 

[Warlord187]

It could be bad design. Maybe the 'Trep should have been designed with bigger rotors and/or bigger calipers and/or bigger pads, etc. It could also be a matter of inferior OE brake friction material. Personally, I haven't had a problem with braking.

I'm not trying to advertise here, but I work for Bendix brakes. As I mentioned on the 2002 police package post, we do make a brake pad for the police cruisers that use a more agressive friction material, as well as a stronger plate and a stronger friction attachment type. These brakes should reduce braking distances, but may wear down the rotors quicker.

We also make a friction material for the Brazil market (mainly) that is so agressive that you literally can stop on a dime. But, every time you replace the pads, you must replace the rotors. I'm not sure if this material is used for the Intrepid application.

I can get numbers, if so desired.