Brake Disc Pads problems of the 2006 Ford Five Hundred

The contact owns a 2006 Ford Five Hundred. The contact stated that while driving approximately 50 mph and having to brake abruptly, there was a hesitation in braking response. The vehicle was taken to the dealer for diagnosis where they advised him that they were unable to diagnose the failure. The vehicle was repaired and three sets of rear brake pads were installed on the vehicle. In addition, the low beam headlights started to dim. The contact inspected the vehicle himself and noticed that the pig tail socket had shortened. The pig tail socket was replaced. The failure mileage was unknown. The current mileage was approximately 125,000. The VIN was unavailable.

The contact owns a 2006 Ford Five Hundred. The contact was driving in reverse at an unknown speed. As the contact applied the brakes, the vehicle would not respond and crashed. A police report was filed but no injuries were reported. The failure was not diagnosed. Approximately four months later while driving at an unknown speed, the contact applied the brakes and experienced an increase in stopping distance. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where the contact was told that the rear brake pads would need to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired. The failure mileage was 14,000 and the current mileage was 16,000. The VIN was unavailable. Updated 05/24/lj.

I own a 2006 Ford Five Hundred which I purchased used with approx. 12000 miles. Prior to the purchase Ford recalled it and put new brake pads and rotors on the rear. It now has 29000 miles on it and the rear pads are worn out and Ford says the rotors need replacing. The brakes drag in the rear. Ford says they are not responsible. I have researched on line and found a large number of complaints identical to mine. This is a manufacturer design problem and a safety hazard since there are reports of the brakes wearing completely into the rotor and locking causing accidents. The owner has no clue since they wear out so fast. Ford should be held accountable for their design flaw before there are deaths caused by this flaw.

2006 Ford Five Hundred, car has 40,000 miles and I have replaced the rear brake pads twice so far, also the rotors have been turned and in need of being changed as of right now. Many other people are having the same problems with this vehicle.

The contact owns a 2006 Ford Five Hundred. While driving between 10-15 mph, the vehicle would make a scraping sound. The vehicle was taken in for routine service and rear brake failure was discovered. The pads and rotors had to be replaced. TSB number 10021463 (service brakes, hydraulic) was referenced. The contact was informed that his vehicle was out of warranty. The failure mileage was 40,000. Updated 12-15-08 updated 12/17/08.

I took my Ford 500 in for the rear brake recall,they replaced the pads ,but the rotors were within limits,so they turned them down. Now when it comes time for normal brake replacement,I will probably have to replace the rotors on my own. In other words, Ford only gave me a set of pads,which sure is a cheap way out.

The new car rear brakes have excessive wear on the rotors and when wet the brake pads expand causing the car to jerk excessively when brakes are applied. This condition is extremely excessive at very very slow speeds. When pulling out of a parking spot hours after a rain the excessive brakes can even cause neck pain. My concern is that even though I know Ford will replace these brake pads as promised: I am very concerned that the rotors that have very excessive wear will be tuned and not replaced. It appears to the naked eye that a quarter of an inch has been worn off of the rotors, and the car only has 12500 miles on it. Ford is aware of the brake problem, but is waiting for the excessive wear to replace the pads. What should I do?.

This is in regard to a 2006 Ford Five Hundred with rear brake grinding. I received a notice ( 07n10)from Ford motor company July 2007 . It stated that my vehicle may have had direct exposure to moisture for an extended period that may have caused the brake pads to swell and create a slight drag condition. Low levels of brake drag could lead to premature brake pad wear. At 36,000 miles the rear brakes began to grind . The rear brake pads and rotors were replaced at no charge . When I brought the auto to the dealer for repairs the service manager told me the front and rear brakes needed to be replaced because it was an all wheel drive vehicle. When the appointment was made to have the repairs completed at the dealer I was insured all the parts were available. To my surprise the dealer did not have all the needed parts to make the repairs. Fortunately another dealer in the area had the needed parts. The dealer furnished a loaner car for 5 days . When I picked up the car only the rear brakes were replaced. If the cause of the failure is in fact "moisture" then why wouldn't all the pads need to be replaced?.

The contact owns a 2006 Ford Five Hundred. The contact heard a grinding noise coming from the rear of the vehicle when he shifted into reverse. The rear brakes would also continuously grind. The dealer stated that the rear brakes and rotors caused the failure. As of October 24, 2007, the dealer had not repaired the vehicle updated 11/14/07.

Had to replace rear left and right brake disc pad and rotors @ 37,249 miles. . Received 12/27/07 64200. Updated 12/12/07.

In June 2007, my wife took our 2006 Ford Five Hundred (sel) to the local dealer for an oil change. She was informed at the time that she needed to have the rear brake pads replaced. The car had only 26,800 miles on it. I was in disbelief and told her not to allow the work. I took the car to an auto service center that I trusted the next day. Sure enough, the pads needed to be replaced. I had them do the work. I then complained to the local dealer that this wear rate was unacceptable and cars normally go significantly longer before needing rear pad replacement. I received a letter from them stating that the "brake wear on your vehicle is considered to be within normal parameters" . I knew this was not true. In July, I received a letter from Ford motor CO. Stating that they were extending the warranty on the rear pads to 36,000. I received a refund from the dealer. Just recently at 68,584 miles, we had to have the pads replaced once again. I don't think this is acceptable wear for these pads. It cost us $227. 01 to have them replaced. My wife uses this car for business, so it looks like we'll need to plan on replacing these pads every year. Interestingly, the front pads have not worn out yet. The second problem we have had is with the tie rod end links which needed to be replaced at 53,671 miles. I have never had to perform this replacement on any other vehicle I've owned, many have gone well over 100,000 miles. I believe there is a design problem with the car in this respect.

Rear brakes went out at 23,000 miles. Needed new rotors and pads. Ford makes disposable rotors, in that they can't be turned or resurfaced. They are throw away rotors, and I had to buy all new ones at $100 a piece. Why did rear go out before front? why does Ford make disposable parts? don't know, but it is a shame and a rip off.

Rear brake pads and rotors too small and wear out before 10,000 miles. At 3,000 miles I informed the dealer that rear wheels were collecting large amounts of brake dust. Service advisor found no problems with brakes at that time. Ten months later, I was informed by service advisor that the rear brake rotors and pads were designed too small and the pads and rotors were wearing out prematurely. Service advisor said they they were replacing rear pads and rotors on numerous Ford Five Hundreds prior to 10,000 miles. Service advisor said that Ford would pay the cost if vehicle was less than 12 months old.

: the contact stated the brake rotors and pads wore out quickly. The contact expressed there was too much brake dust in the rear brakes. The service dealer did not find any problem.

The contact owns a 2006 Ford Five Hundred. According to the dealer, the brake pads rub the rotors and heat the pads and rotors during stopping. The contact noticed the failure while driving 30 mph. The vehicle was taken to the dealer once and they acknowledged the failure and extended the warranty. The current mileage was 5,800 and failure mileage was 1.

: the contact stated the rear brake pads were disintegrating; this was noticed while washing the vehicle. The dealership and manufacturer determined it was a cosmetic problem. The dealership suggested the contact purchase a plastic shield to keep the dust off of the brake pads. The contact cleaned the dust off of the brake pads and stated it takes 20 minutes on each side. Updated 3/3/2006 - the consumer believes that the brakes may not be releasing all the way.