99 Rx300 Front Brakes

[artbuc]

According to aftermarket stock numbers, it looks like front brakes on 99 RX are the same as 99 Toyota Avalon. Any problem with getting Avalon brake pads from Toyota dealer and putting them on my RX? Toyota dealer is closer and cheaper.

Braking on my Avalon stinks so I replaced front original pads with Hawk Pro Ceramic. Braking is dramatically improved but my front wheels are black after just 1500 miles.

Since braking has always been good on my RX, thought I would stick with Toyota pads.

[lenore]

According to aftermarket stock numbers, it looks like front brakes on 99 RX are the same as 99 Toyota Avalon. Any problem with getting Avalon brake pads from Toyota dealer and putting them on my RX? Toyota dealer is closer and cheaper.

Braking on my Avalon stinks so I replaced front original pads with Hawk Pro Ceramic. Braking is dramatically improved but my front wheels are black after just 1500 miles.

Since braking has always been good on my RX, thought I would stick with Toyota pads.

←

I purchased the Akebono ceramics and they are fantastic, no dust and much better stopping. I also replaced the front discs with Brembo rotors.

[TunedRX300]

I have Akebono ProAct and Brembo rotor and great result. Read this link about Akebono, they are OEM pad makers for many automakers including Toyota. Not all ceramic pads are the same.

http://www.babcox.com/editorial/bf/bf30322.htm

www.rockauto.com listed the same Akebono part number for RX300 and Avalon. RX300's OEM front replacement pads do not have integrated wear indicator so be careful.

[mikey00]

According to aftermarket stock numbers, it looks like front brakes on 99 RX are the same as 99 Toyota Avalon. Any problem with getting Avalon brake pads from Toyota dealer and putting them on my RX? Toyota dealer is closer and cheaper.

Braking on my Avalon stinks so I replaced front original pads with Hawk Pro Ceramic. Braking is dramatically improved but my front wheels are black after just 1500 miles.

Since braking has always been good on my RX, thought I would stick with Toyota pads.

←

I stayed with the stock Lexus pads for the same reasons you listed above. You may want to check the price at irontoad.com. Being that they have Lexus part number you don't have to worry about matching them up with a Toyota number. Same price as Toyota dealer and they come right to your door in just a few days.

Don't worry about the wear indicators mentioned in the previous post. They are just small metal clips that you remove from the old pads and put on the new. Takes 2 seconds. Or order new ones with the pads.

[artbuc]

Ok, the deed is done. Got new Toyota front brake pads for my 99 RX at local Toyota dealer for $46.78. Same pads from Lexus dealer are $62. Toyota part number is 04465-33121.

Now I begin the search for Toyota part number for rear 99 RX pads.

[TunedRX300]

Ok, the deed is done. Got new Toyota front brake pads for my 99 RX at local Toyota dealer for $46.78. Same pads from Lexus dealer are $62. Toyota part number is 04465-33121.

Now I begin the search for Toyota part number for rear 99 RX pads.

←

Toyota pads are good. There is a TSB on RX OEM pads clicking and clunking when you shift from D to R. However, not all cars have this problem. See multiple discussions on this problem on RX300, RX330 and even ES

http://www.clublexus.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128059

http://www.clublexus.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154152

I hope you don't run into this problem. Like Mikey00 said, you must tell your mechanic to re-use removable wear indicators if you don't DIY. A lot people who install themselves have to go back and install them since this is not a common design. Good luck

[lenore]

Yes, by the way my clicking went away with the Akebono ceramic pads. I don't know why but it did.

[artbuc]

Ok, the deed is done. Got new Toyota front brake pads for my 99 RX at local Toyota dealer for $46.78. Same pads from Lexus dealer are $62. Toyota part number is 04465-33121.

Now I begin the search for Toyota part number for rear 99 RX pads.

←

Toyota pads are good. There is a TSB on RX OEM pads clicking and clunking when you shift from D to R. However, not all cars have this problem. See multiple discussions on this problem on RX300, RX330 and even ES

http://www.clublexus.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128059

http://www.clublexus.com/forums/showthread.php?t=154152

I hope you don't run into this problem. Like Mikey00 said, you must tell your mechanic to re-use removable wear indicators if you don't DIY. A lot people who install themselves have to go back and install them since this is not a common design. Good luck

←

I have not had the brake click when reversing direction on my RX. However, I had it big time on my 95 LS400 and 99 Avalon. I had the LS400 in the lexus shop several times and they said my brakes had a design problem and could not be fixed. I didn't believe them until I bought the Avalon and ran into the same problem.

Yes, I did reuse the indicators. Also lubed the slide pins and re-lubed the back shims.

Looks like the rear pads on the 99 RX are identical to the 99 Celica.

[TunedRX300]

Looks like the rear pads on the 99 RX are identical to the 99 Celica.

That explains why rear pads cover only 75% of the frictional surface, leaving 1/3 to 1/2 inches of rust ring. It is fine to use common part among models but Toyota must know SUV needs bigger brakes since it is heavier with higher payload limit. Rear rotor is already tiny and not vented, I am just puzzled why anyone would use the brake pad designed for a compact sedan to ghetto fit a SUV :chairshot:

[artbuc]

Looks like the rear pads on the 99 RX are identical to the 99 Celica.

That explains why rear pads cover only 75% of the frictional surface, leaving 1/3 to 1/2 inches of rust ring. It is fine to use common part among models but Toyota must know SUV needs bigger brakes since it is heavier with higher payload limit. Rear rotor is already tiny and not vented, I am just puzzled why anyone would use the brake pad designed for a compact sedan to ghetto fit a SUV :chairshot:

←

Are you saying Toyota's rear brake design is bad on the RX300? I believe this is possible because the rear pads are showing almost the same wear as the front pads. On my Avalon, the front pads were shot at 60k while the rear pads look like they can go another 50-60k. My RX front pads are shot at 60k and the rear pads look like they only have another 5-10k on them.

The front pads for the 99 Avalon and 99 RX300 appear to be identical. It doesn't make any difference whether you buy them from Toyota or Lexus. If this isn't true, I hope someone tells me.

Based on aftermarket stock numbers, it appears that the rear pads on the RX300 are identical to the rear pads on a 99 Celica. I have yet to confirm this. Is it possible that the dimensions of the pads are identical allowing aftermarket suppliers to specify the same pads for the RX and Celica, but Toyota uses one pad material for the Celica and a different pad material for the RX?

I am not interested in putting cheap parts on my vehicles. On the other hand, I am not interested in paying Lexus $15 more for the exact same pads I can buy from Toyota.

[TunedRX300]

Looks like the rear pads on the 99 RX are identical to the 99 Celica.

That explains why rear pads cover only 75% of the frictional surface, leaving 1/3 to 1/2 inches of rust ring. It is fine to use common part among models but Toyota must know SUV needs bigger brakes since it is heavier with higher payload limit. Rear rotor is already tiny and not vented, I am just puzzled why anyone would use the brake pad designed for a compact sedan to ghetto fit a SUV :chairshot:

←

Are you saying Toyota's rear brake design is bad on the RX300? I believe this is possible because the rear pads are showing almost the same wear as the front pads. On my Avalon, the front pads were shot at 60k while the rear pads look like they can go another 50-60k. My RX front pads are shot at 60k and the rear pads look like they only have another 5-10k on them.

The front pads for the 99 Avalon and 99 RX300 appear to be identical. It doesn't make any difference whether you buy them from Toyota or Lexus. If this isn't true, I hope someone tells me.

Based on aftermarket stock numbers, it appears that the rear pads on the RX300 are identical to the rear pads on a 99 Celica. I have yet to confirm this. Is it possible that the dimensions of the pads are identical allowing aftermarket suppliers to specify the same pads for the RX and Celica, but Toyota uses one pad material for the Celica and a different pad material for the RX?

I am not interested in putting cheap parts on my vehicles. On the other hand, I am not interested in paying Lexus $15 more for the exact same pads I can buy from Toyota.

IMHO RX's rear brake design is not adaquet for a heavier SUV. If you look at Porsche Cayenne, the basic model of the three have standard 330mm vented rotors, 4 piston monobloc aluminum painted calipers at the REAR.

RX300 has non-vented (RX's FRONT is 298mm, rear one is even smaller) rotors, one piston cast steel non-painted calipers both front and rear.

We can say those who drive Porsche tend to go faster, fine. At least design the brake so it at least look nice (e.g. no rust ring around the hub). Take a look at RX330's rear brake, Toyota powder-painted the non-frictional surface with heat and rust resisting paint and have a brake pad to cover most of the rotor frictional surface.

Can anyone tell me why can't Toyota have these obvious features on RX300?

Edited December 16, 2005 by TunedRX300

[mikey00]

Other than the rust ring, I thought the RX has a pretty good brake system. Good stoping power, very few complaints about warped rotors or need for rotor replacements, pads last a long time with even front to rear wear. From my own experience and posts on the RX forums most get 70k to 80K on a set of pads.

[lenore]

I agree the RX brakes have been great, lasted longer than any other car I have had, And stop very well. I had 80k on my fronts when I changed them and they still had life left. The rears did wear out first however. But 50 k not bad.

[TunedRX300]

Not to spark a debate but good rotor and pad wears are secondary features, the primary feature of the brake is stopping. As wwest posted, he could care less about brake components beat each other up, as long as it saves his life.

Some objective data

BMW X5 weights 900lbs more than RX300, yet 60-0 is 125 feet

http://motortrend.com/roadtests/suv/112_03...erd/index3.html

2000 RX300's 60-0 is 132 feet

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/...22/article.html

[mikey00]

Not to spark a debate but good rotor and pad wears are secondary features, the primary feature of the brake is stopping. As wwest posted, he could care less about brake components beat each other up, as long as it saves his life.

Some objective data

BMW X5 weights 900lbs more than RX300, yet 60-0 is 125 feet

http://motortrend.com/roadtests/suv/112_03...erd/index3.html

2000 RX300's 60-0 is 132 feet

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/...22/article.html

I agree stopping power is a primary feature, that's why I listed it as number one in my personal observation of the RX brakes and it was also listed in lenore's observations. I don't put much weight on the data you supplied above. They were 2 different groups performing the tests at 2 different times on 2 different surfaces. Just for example in 9/03 Consumer Reports tested the RX330 60-0 stopping distance at 134' and the X5 at 136'. At least this is the same testers on the same track but it's the 330 not the 300.

If you read the Edmunds report that you supplied the link to above you will see that the number is actually 134 not 132 as you stated above. It looks a little suspicious that CR and Edmunds came up with the exact number but I guess it is possible.

[TunedRX300]

Good observation on test data. Let's not trust that and go down to the physical fundamental of braking.

Stoptech has a good technical white paper on the physic of braking system

http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/The%20Ph...g%20Systems.pdf

Few highlights

from page 1

Kinetic Energy = 1/2 * mass * velocity squared

This means higher mass vehicles liks SUV need proportional larger brakes (larger rotor, multiple pistons for better clamping force) than sedans to stop at a given distance from a given speed.

from page 5 and 3

A little algebra will also yield stopping distance having inversely proportional to piston surface area and caliper force. That is why multiple brake pistons clamping on both side of rotors reduces stopping distance.

Brake rotor radius is also inversely proportional related to stopping distance. Larger brake rotor means shorter stopping distance for a given weight and speed.

It is very obvious to see RX's braking is on the small side given that Porsche's rear rotor size is 10% bigger than the front rotor size of RX300. Again, let's assume Porche Cayenne's drivers are speed demons. 2002 ES300 has two piston calipers in the front, 2002 RX300 has one piston caliper in the front. I highly doubt ES owners are more aggressive driver than RX AND ES is a much lighter car. If we believe ES's braking is adaquet, then RX's braking is not.

[mikey00]

Good observation on test data. Let's not trust that and go down to the physical fundamental of braking.

Stoptech has a good technical white paper on the physic of braking system

http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/The%20Ph...g%20Systems.pdf

Few highlights

from page 1

Kinetic Energy = 1/2 * mass * velocity squared

This means higher mass vehicles liks SUV need proportional larger brakes (larger rotor, multiple pistons for better clamping force) than sedans to stop at a given distance from a given speed.

from page 5 and 3

A little algebra will also yield stopping distance having inversely proportional to piston surface area and caliper force. That is why multiple brake pistons clamping on both side of rotors reduces stopping distance.

Brake rotor radius is also inversely proportional related to stopping distance. Larger brake rotor means shorter stopping distance for a given weight and speed.

It is very obvious to see RX's braking is on the small side given that Porsche's rear rotor size is 10% bigger than the front rotor size of RX300. Again, let's assume Porche Cayenne's drivers are speed demons. 2002 ES300 has two piston calipers in the front, 2002 RX300 has one piston caliper in the front. I highly doubt ES owners are more aggressive driver than RX AND ES is a much lighter car. If we believe ES's braking is adaquet, then RX's braking is not.

What's your point? I only said I thought the RX has good stopping power and I still do. I don't doubt that if you look long and hard enough something somewhere will stop quicker. Although the StopTech article provided no data to support this.

[TunedRX300]

Did I miss something? You dispute test data (RX300 vs X5) that I provided, so physical principles that all brakes follow, regardless of testing setup, would be objective enough to reveal that heavier SUV such as RX300 needs better brake. I showed you a lighter Lexus model that has better brakes. Now you come back and ask for data again?

It is not hard and does not take long to look. If you choose to ignore the ES example, take a look at the previous generation LS (94-00), front rotor is 315mm, 5% larger than 00 RX; LS has 4 piston per caliper, RX has 1. LS, a sedan with similar weight class as the RX, is aimed for more conservative drivers than RX's. If Toyota believe LS has adaquet braking, RX's braking system is again inadaquet.

[lenore]

Braking within 10 percent of each other is absolutely rediculous. Reaction time and road surface can more than make up that difference. I have never had the brakes fade or cause alarm on my 99 RX300. It stops very well considering the weight and size. You all have all gone off the deep end, it is not a performance car for racing, a SuV that does a good job. Enjoy your evening.

[TunedRX300]

Braking within 10 percent of each other is absolutely rediculous. Reaction time and road surface can more than make up that difference. I have never had the brakes fade or cause alarm on my 99 RX300. It stops very well considering the weight and size. You all have all gone off the deep end, it is not a performance car for racing, a SuV that does a good job. Enjoy your evening.

Front 4 piston calipers double the clamping force because it is clamping on both sides of the rotor, not to mention that is on top of larger caliper surface (2 pistons on a side vs 1) and larger rotor size. Check out LS's rear rotor, it is vented and again larger in size than RX's rear. That combination is more than 10%. That design is more than 10 years old, now newer LS430 has boosted up its brake design.

Each of its own, for me, I would like to have a little more insurance when it comes to brakes. If I travel 50mph down the street with my family on board and a druken driver just ran a red light, I am not thinking I have a sport car, a SUV, or a luxury sedan, I slam on my brake to stop so we don't get crushed. If given a choice, I would rather have engine to underperform than my brake underperform. I guess others may think they would never get into such situations then RX's brake is perfectly fine for them.

[mikey00]

Braking within 10 percent of each other is absolutely rediculous. Reaction time and road surface can more than make up that difference. I have never had the brakes fade or cause alarm on my 99 RX300. It stops very well considering the weight and size. You all have all gone off the deep end, it is not a performance car for racing, a SuV that does a good job. Enjoy your evening.

Front 4 piston calipers double the clamping force because it is clamping on both sides of the rotor, not to mention that is on top of larger caliper surface (2 pistons on a side vs 1) and larger rotor size. Check out LS's rear rotor, it is vented and again larger in size than RX's rear. That combination is more than 10%. That design is more than 10 years old, now newer LS430 has boosted up its brake design.

Each of its own, for me, I would like to have a little more insurance when it comes to brakes. If I travel 50mph down the street with my family on board and a druken driver just ran a red light, I am not thinking I have a sport car, a SUV, or a luxury sedan, I slam on my brake to stop so we don't get crushed. If given a choice, I would rather have engine to underperform than my brake underperform. I guess others may think they would never get into such situations then RX's brake is perfectly fine for them.

This discussion has really gone off the deep end. I'm outta here.

Edited December 19, 2005 by mikey00

[melhadri]

Just purchased a set of front brake pads ($45) from the Lexus Dealer. Also bought a set of front Brembo Rotors ($110) from autopartswarehouse.com. (free super fast shipping) I am ready to have these parts installed however, I think I am missing shims for my front breaks. Are the shims a vital part of braking? What are the implications for installing new Toyota breaks w/o shims? If necessary, whats the best place to buy shims? Lexus is selling the front set for ~$35. Thanks in advance.

[Grumpa72]

According to aftermarket stock numbers, it looks like front brakes on 99 RX are the same as 99 Toyota Avalon. Any problem with getting Avalon brake pads from Toyota dealer and putting them on my RX? Toyota dealer is closer and cheaper.

Braking on my Avalon stinks so I replaced front original pads with Hawk Pro Ceramic. Braking is dramatically improved but my front wheels are black after just 1500 miles.

Since braking has always been good on my RX, thought I would stick with Toyota pads.

Decent prices here but I have no knowledge about their quality on Lexus parts.

http://www.rockauto.com/

Gary

[lenore]

There may be shims on the original pads. they can be reused after cleaning them up, Some pad sets come with shims.

[TunedRX300]

Akebono pads came with stick on shims and a pack of high temperature noise dampening grease. www.rockauto.com have the best price, you can even google 5% coupon code on the internet.