I have read here a lot of times it is better to replace brake rotors because the cost of turning a set of rotors is not much less than the cost of a new set of rotors. Not many places will turn rotors nowadays and even so a turned rotor can be problematic and won't last as long as a new one. I did all new rotors, calipers and pads on my front brakes back in January.
I am wondering, does the same thing apply to the rear brake drums? Are they any better when turned, and are they more able to be turned because they do less of a percentage of the work to brake and stop the vehicle? Is a turned drum liable to have problems sooner than a new replacement drum? Or is it better to just replace the drums, for the same reasons it makes more sense to replace disc brake rotors?
I am planning on doing the rear brake shoes on my truck this Saturday. If they are still thick enough to turn, I can get the drums turned at 2 different garages near my house but I will just buy new drums if that is the better way to do it. I have not had it apart yet to measure the thickness of the drums yet.
If I can have the drums turned, I can do the whole job for about $60.00, including new shoes, new hardware and resurfacing the drums. Add another $100.00 if I need new drums. I have a 2001 Dodge Dakota with 135,000 miles on it and it still has the original brake shoes and drums on the rear. I haven't had it apart to check recently it but I figure it's about time. The last time I checked the rear brakes about 2 months ago, they had not much friction material left, and the leading shoes were not down to the rivets yet but still fairly thin. The parking brake is not holding the truck firmly any more. I can adjust it but I think it needs new rear brakes regardless.
Thanks for any help here.
I am wondering, does the same thing apply to the rear brake drums? Are they any better when turned, and are they more able to be turned because they do less of a percentage of the work to brake and stop the vehicle? Is a turned drum liable to have problems sooner than a new replacement drum? Or is it better to just replace the drums, for the same reasons it makes more sense to replace disc brake rotors?
I am planning on doing the rear brake shoes on my truck this Saturday. If they are still thick enough to turn, I can get the drums turned at 2 different garages near my house but I will just buy new drums if that is the better way to do it. I have not had it apart yet to measure the thickness of the drums yet.
If I can have the drums turned, I can do the whole job for about $60.00, including new shoes, new hardware and resurfacing the drums. Add another $100.00 if I need new drums. I have a 2001 Dodge Dakota with 135,000 miles on it and it still has the original brake shoes and drums on the rear. I haven't had it apart to check recently it but I figure it's about time. The last time I checked the rear brakes about 2 months ago, they had not much friction material left, and the leading shoes were not down to the rivets yet but still fairly thin. The parking brake is not holding the truck firmly any more. I can adjust it but I think it needs new rear brakes regardless.
Thanks for any help here.