Charger Forums banner

101 - 120 of 166 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
840 Posts
It's also unexplained after multiple attempts to seek confirmation. Brakes are also a safety system of the car.

Absolutely proper to file a report with NHTSA. Both reports are viewable on the NHTSA web site so let's see if the change is legit or an error.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Not really proper as the new design isn't failing. They stop, evidently as well as the previous ones, the only thing getting hurt is your wallet at replacement time. Having to replace rotors and pads instead of just pads has to hurt that.

NHTSA is not, and should not be concerned with injuries to your wallet. It IS a valuable resource for true safety issues.

This pad debacle is not one of them and to me it's a waste of their time and effort that could be better served finding real safety issues.



Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
What proof do you have that this is just a part/design change? If it is then fine but at least provide me an explanation when I question it. I have not seen anything that would indicate a part/design change. I went to Brembo’s website and they do not even list the rear pads. I can only find drawing for the front 6 piston pads. If you have something I would love to see it.

If you think a manufacturer like Brembo is not capable of making a mistake like this I can tell you from personal experience that they f*** things up all the time. It would not surprise me at all if this was a manufacturing defect from Brembo that FCA was not even aware of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,073 Posts
It's not a safety issue. There was clearly some reason behind doing this. It's not like half of the brake pad fell off, they were clearly intentionally machined down. If they would have shrank the rotors down to match nobody would even have noticed.

All filing a complaint with the nhtsa is doing is wasting taxpayer's dollars because someone doesn't like an answer they got from Chrysler and feel entitled to getting something for free.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,122 Posts
It's not a safety issue. There was clearly some reason behind doing this. It's not like half of the brake pad fell off, they were clearly intentionally machined down. If they would have shrank the rotors down to match nobody would even have noticed.

All filing a complaint with the nhtsa is doing is wasting taxpayer's dollars because someone doesn't like an answer they got from Chrysler and feel entitled to getting something for free.
I agree and disagree with you.

Do I think it's a safety concern? No.

However, I do think people paying for these cars deserve to know why their rear brake pad is sweeping only 75% of the rotor. That's not supposed to be like that. I said it before, but I have NEVER in my life seen a pad only sweep a portion of the rotor.

It would annoy the heck out of me if I bought a new car and saw that. Who has ever seen a shaved down brake pad?

Now, here's where I'm probably different. I don't have time for another headache in my life. I'd just buy a new set of rear pads and rotors off of Rock Auto for $120 total and put them on and call it a day.

The little guy (us the consumer) is fighting a giant in trying to prove what we know, in that this is probably a mistake by either Brembo or Dodge. Unless there is a safety issue, they're unfortunately unlikely to do anything.

I'd think a little pressure on the dealer where you just bought a $40k car would be more beneficial. It's not hurting them much to toss on a set of rear pads and rotors to keep a customer happy. Yeah, easier said than done, but would think a result would happen here quicker than trying to fight corporate level battles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,073 Posts
Oh I agree that Chrysler/Brembo should give an explanation for why they made the change, but complaining to the NHTSA is not the solution. If you're gonna complain to some government entity the BBB or department of consumer affairs would probably more appropriate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
840 Posts
A couple guys filed with NHTSA already. Maybe you can file a complaint with the the BBB or consumer affairs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Again I ask how do you know it’s not safety critical? How do you know it’s just a shaved down pad? Where are you getting these facts? I’m not trying to be a jerk but seriously asking how you can be so sure. I for one am not and am genuinely concerned that I may be driving a car that could potentially be a disaster waiting to happen. So yes I filed a claim just to be safe. If it turns out to be ok fine no harm no foul. Hopefully someone else will benefit from what we are doing and not have to worry if something is wrong with their new car because we got the answers for them here and now. If there is a real problem then we will have identified it before something bad happens to get FCA to do something about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
2019 scatpack, had the same 75% pad. After reading this, I ordered the PowerStop Z26 pads and changed mine out. I had 5000mi on the original pads and had a small ridge on the rotor. After the PowerStop break-in process, you couldn’t even tell the ridge was there. $61 on Amazon, a few extra minutes during a needed tire rotation and now I’m good to go. I’ll pay $61 any day to not have to deal with a dealership. And I get the added bonus of no brake dust!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,073 Posts
Again I ask how do you know it’s not safety critical? How do you know it’s just a shaved down pad? Where are you getting these facts? I’m not trying to be a jerk but seriously asking how you can be so sure. I for one am not and am genuinely concerned that I may be driving a car that could potentially be a disaster waiting to happen. So yes I filed a claim just to be safe. If it turns out to be ok fine no harm no foul. Hopefully someone else will benefit from what we are doing and not have to worry if something is wrong with their new car because we got the answers for them here and now. If there is a real problem then we will have identified it before something bad happens to get FCA to do something about it.
Use some common sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,122 Posts
Again I ask how do you know it’s not safety critical? How do you know it’s just a shaved down pad? Where are you getting these facts? I’m not trying to be a jerk but seriously asking how you can be so sure. I for one am not and am genuinely concerned that I may be driving a car that could potentially be a disaster waiting to happen. So yes I filed a claim just to be safe. If it turns out to be ok fine no harm no foul. Hopefully someone else will benefit from what we are doing and not have to worry if something is wrong with their new car because we got the answers for them here and now. If there is a real problem then we will have identified it before something bad happens to get FCA to do something about it.

I have to agree with the poster above. Use common sense here.

I believe Wisconsin Bob posted a picture of the shaved down pad. There is the proof of a shaved down pad.

Second, if your brakes weren't working properly, you'd know. It's a smaller pad on the same sized rotor. Not much to debate there. I'd be interested to see if the stopping distance is increased due to a smaller pad, wouldn't be surprised at all that in heavy duty braking you may see minimal increase. However, you're stopping distance is still shorter than an R/T with the standard brakes.

I feel your pain, and have nothing against what your doing. It's understandable. If you're that concerned for your safety, but a set of Raybestos rotors, they look identical, on Rock Auto, I believe they're 30 bucks for the pair, and the Raybestos pads are 25. You can get Power Stop Rotors for 130, and pads for 50. So you can spend 55 dollars for parts and then maybe another 100 if you have a shop do the install to solve your problem while you're waiting to hear back on you're report.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
854 Posts
For what it's worth here are my findings on mine, it was built April 11, 2018, and it's a Daytona 392 with the Dynamics Package, and I'm the original owner.

I changed out my pads at around 7,700 miles to PowerStop Z26 all the way around because I couldn't stand the brake dust anymore. I have had full contact all the way to the outer edge of the rotor the entire time of its life so far. I also noticed there wasn't any difference between the brake pad designs of the Powerstop's and the original Brembo's when I swapped them.

The pad number is the same as what Wisconsin Bob posted which is BRM003 FG.

Here are some shots of the original rear pads:


Sent from my SM-N976V using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I have considered just ordering a set of pads. My car only has 1400 miles on it and would probably be totally fine at this point.
The reality is I shouldn’t have to. After all I just dropped 40k on the car it should come to me free of defects. I shouldent have to argue with someone to get it that way.

Let me lay out some facts for you. I am a quality engineer and my bread and butter is axel modules. Manufacturing defects of calipers, brake pads, and rotors are near and dear to my heart.
So when you say use common sense realize that I have. My life experience my “common sense” is afforded the knowledge of how things work on a manufacturing and supplier level. When it comes to this specific situation my common senses tells me that there is a very strong possibility that we have a manufacturing defect present on our cars.

There are 3 ways this gets to our cars.
One a design change. You are assuming with no facts that this is the case here. Could this be the case sure but considering the change is for a car popular among enthusiasts and it produces an apparent visual defect; It is unlikely that the change would get approval. If it did get approval there would likely be a communication down to the service level to prevent the kind of backlash we are seeing here. Not all design changes get communicated down but my experience says something like this probably would. Additionally, from a cost prospective it just doesn’t make sense to keep the larger rotor if a smaller pad was satisfactory. The same applies to the caliper. OEMs are big on cost down design changes and this one just doesn't smell right.

Two a deviation. This occurs when a supplier makes a minor mistake and produces a known quantity of sub standard parts. OEMs will typically work with suppliers to prevent down time if they are unable to meet their delivery requirements without approval of the deviation. Again this is totally in the realm of possibility. It is of course subject to the same approvals as a design change and would likely not be approved. Someone like me would have to agree to it along with several other departments. I can tell you I would never accept this type of deviation from a supplier unless there was no other way forward and I had pressure from the board to do it. Again in this case there would likely have been some kind of communication down to the service level.

Three a manufacturing defect. Like I said in a previous post Brembo has made it’s fair share of mistakes. Most of which go undisclosed to end users and never make it onto a vehicle. Someone like me stops that from happening most of the time. They source a lot of their pads from other manufacturers and missing a uniform defect is easy for an assembler to do. When calipers are shipped to OEMs or other module assemblers the process of installing the caliper over the rotor is typically blind. So again it is easy for the assembler to miss a defect like this especially since most plants don’t verify the quality of incoming parts. Their supplier has a QC department dedicated to preventing defects and if something did come up they could just charge back the costs in post. A defect like this could be noticed during vehicle road tests. Unless someone cued the road tester to specifically evaluate the visual appearance of the rotor it’s well within the realm of possibility for it to be over looked since everything seems to function as normal. The same supplier is sending these pads out to parts stores so it stands to reason that the same defect would start to show up in replacement parts.

I hope this is just a bad decision made by FCA engineers. Unfortunately my gut says otherwise.

Your assertion that you can simply use “common sense“ with no knowledge base or subject matter expertise is both arrogant and dangerous. I pity anyone who blindly follows your line of reasoning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,073 Posts
Again, use some common sense. Anyone with a cerebral capacity greater than that of a pinecone can see that for some reason or another, those pads were intentionally milled down. The pad did not just fall apart like that, and it isn't a safety issue.

And if you want to go about complaining about assumptions, you're assuming it's a defect. There's still a very good chance that Chrysler determined there was a reason to change the pad, but apparently if anyone's opinion differs from yours it has no basis.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,122 Posts
Lol, you put some thought into that, but I think you're going to stress yourself out. You have 1,400 miles on your car. Buy a new set of aftermarket pads, put them on with the stock rotors, and call it a day. You'll spend $50 bucks and have some piece of mind that at least you're brakes are functioning properly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Obviously you didn’t read my whole post. I literally listed the 3 possibilities for how this could happen. I even expressed that any one of them is totally possible. And stated that I would prefer that this was just a bad decision by FCA. I am open to your opinion in fact I hope you are right. I won’t be happy if It is an intended change but I’ll live.

The problem is we don’t know which one of those possibilities is the cause of this situation. That is the question I want to get answered. If you are fine with it how it is great don’t sweat it. I still want to know and so do a lot of other people here. On top of that if it is a defect I want to make sure FCA pays to fix it.

I never said or implied that I thought the pad fell apart. It’s either a design change or an approved(deviation)/unapproved manufacturing defect. Which means a machine or fixture failed resulting in a uniform defect. i.e. the shortened pad

Asserting it’s normal with out any real facts about the situation is what I don’t agree with and why I asked where you were getting your information from. if you had real solid facts from FCA to back up your claim I’d be happy to accept your explanation.

You are wholly right about one thing. I am assuming this is a defect but that comes from my line of work. In the automotive industry you are guilty until proven innocent. There is no exception to this rule. Most of my day is spent proving that suspected defects are normal or not my plants fault.

Now let’s stop bickering and get back to the point of this thread. I apologize to anyone who has had to read through these posts.
291873
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Lol, you put some thought into that, but I think you're going to stress yourself out. You have 1,400 miles on your car. Buy a new set of aftermarket pads, put them on with the stock rotors, and call it a day. You'll spend $50 bucks and have some piece of mind that at least you're brakes are functioning properly.
I’m not really stressed just interested and vested in getting an answer. If I don’t get a reasonable answer soon I’ll probaby just go the aftermarket route for piece of mind. I prefer not to spend any money and just live with it if FCA can give credible information for why it’s an intended changed. Or have FCA pay to fix it if it is a true defect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
For what it's worth here are my findings on mine, it was built April 11, 2018, and it's a Daytona 392 with the Dynamics Package, and I'm the original owner.

I changed out my pads at around 7,700 miles to PowerStop Z26 all the way around because I couldn't stand the brake dust anymore. I have had full contact all the way to the outer edge of the rotor the entire time of its life so far. I also noticed there wasn't any difference between the brake pad designs of the Powerstop's and the original Brembo's when I swapped them.

The pad number is the same as what Wisconsin Bob posted which is BRM003 FG.

Here are some shots of the original rear pads:


Sent from my SM-N976V using Tapatalk
The BRM003 FG is just a friction material code and not the part number. Some one else posted the Mopar part numbers but I could not find any official part drawings.
Is there anything else written/stamped on the pad under the metal shield?
Thanks for your help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Here's a picture of my pad number; BRM0003 FG. The Mopar number is 68144223AB; and the Brembo pad number is at the dealer is FF 003, FF 004. View attachment 291784
Finally got around to looking up the part drawing from Brembo and they don’t show that missing part of the pad in the drawing. Also the compatibility is only shown for chargers up to 2010 so maybe it’s different now but I doubt it.
291876

291877

291878
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,073 Posts
This isn't the first time they've used seemingly undersized pads for the calipers and rotors on these cars. The rear pads on the cop brakes are in a very similar situation, they are about 1/4-1/3" shorter than the backing plate of the pad and of the rotor. There's probably a reason for them doing this, probably for front to rear balance. Milling the pads down was probably the cheapest way to achieve this.

Aside from that I can think of several reasons why they'd leave the rotor bigger. The most obvious is they've already got tooling and parts on the shelf for those rotors. Since the calipers are still able to accept the larger pad (probably the same caliper for cost/tooling reasons) the rotor needs to be large enough to accommodate that, otherwise you'd have the pad riding over the top of the rotor. Aside from coefficient of friction and clamping force, the next most important part of a braking system is probably thermal mass. A larger rotor will have more and will be less prone to fading.

By the way, you're not the only one here who sits in an office with a piece of paper on the wall that says "engineer" all day.
 
101 - 120 of 166 Posts
Top