rotors : min thickness vs discard thickness

[mikeinaustin]

Originally Posted By: TFB1
Originally Posted By: mikeinaustin
and that is my point, it seems to me that this failure point number must be published somewhere. i thought it was called the discard value, but am not sure anymore.


Minimum and discard are one in same(well discard is .001" less in thickness than minimum)... As far as failure point depending on load, towing, etc it could vary on same vehicle... Mostly it's a safe point the rotor can still dissipate heat, and not a strength issue...


yes well in my particular case the stamped minimum is 22.4 and bmw measures the rotor at 21.5, so i am 0.9 mm below the minimum.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: mikeinaustin
If your rotors are basically already at the min.new, then how far below before they will fail safety inspection and/or become unsafe for use? I have heard that it is 0.8 below stamped #.
0.8 is 20mm which the thickness of my rotors when new. Did you mean 0.08 or are you talking about mm versus inches?

 

[Leo99]

Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: spk2000
Their refusing to pay in hopes you will pick up the tab.

If there are under a maintenance contract and don't do it then they are taking on liability if you get into an accident and you could sue them. Might make them aware of this liability.


Exactly, I would ask them to put into writing that they are not going to a replace a safety related components that are worn beyond specifications under their maintenance plan.
That, of course, means YOU acknowledge you are continuing to drive a car with unsafe brakes because of a "contract dispute". You can't have it both ways.


You are not a very logical or critical thinker. The dealership are the experts on the car and they blessed it. If something happens they will be very sueable.

The users knowledge of the issue does not release the dealer from liability.



Where did you go to law school?

BMW didn't bless anything. They didn't say the rotor was safe to drive on. They said they wouldn't pay for replacing it.

 

[javacontour]

But are they saying replacement isn't needed, or that it needs replacement and BMW will not pay?

Seems either way, BMW is in some sort of peril. If they said they would pay for maintenance, and won't pay for the rotors, are they not fulfilling the terms of the agreement?

If they are saying the rotors do not need replacement and it's safe to drive, is there some risk for BMW should that not be true?

Perhaps the agreement doesn't cover rotors. I.E. if you need rotors, you, not BMW must pay. I don't know.

That seems to be the only safe "out" for BMW. Any other scenario seems to put them in some legal peril.

 

[KrisZ]

So much drama over nothing. Just drive with the parking brake partially engaged few times and the pads will very quickly achieve the minimum thickness.

 

[philipp10]

Find another BMW dealer, send your wife and have her tell them the brakes feel funny. Bet they write her up for new rotors and refuse to do any work unless the rotors are replaced, due to safety. Take that paperwork back to the original BMW dealer.

 

[philipp10]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
I'm shocked and surprised that the makers of the "Ultimate Driving Machine" would be so heartless. After all, they ARE a charity, right? BTW what's this doing in an oil forum?


ah the section heading is ATF, Diff, Trans, BRAKES.....