landmannnn Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I don't get it either........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MudAllOverIt Posted November 12, 2008 Share Posted November 12, 2008 I don't get it either........... As I understand it the theory appears to be that road spray from the opposite tyre gets the inboard face of the disc mucky which wears the pad on that side quicker than the one on the outside. I've been running with the N/S shield in place and the O/S shield missing (torn off when of-roading) for about three years and I've noticed no appreciable difference in pad wear (high road mileage and high off road mileage). Cheers, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimAttrill Posted November 13, 2008 Share Posted November 13, 2008 If I may speak for Steve aka Boggy, he reckons that if you do a big mileage on wet dirt roads the rear pads will wear out quickly if you do not have the shields. 5 000 kms I think he said, Discos being worse than Defenders. I do a lot of kms on dirt roads, about 20 kms a day to work and back, and removed the shields years ago as they cracked and rattled. But most of the time the roads here are dry. I have about 120 000 kms on my last set of pads and they are not even half worn at the front, about half at the back. I don't drive in traffic much and don't like using the brakes overmuch, as you can tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.