Jump to content

Brake Sensor Noise with Plenty of Life Left on Pads

BlancoSilverado
 Share

Recommended Posts

BlancoSilverado Enthusiast

BlancoSilverado

Posted
Posted

I was on a long trip a few weeks ago and noticed that my front left brakes started squeaking all the time (on or off the brake). With 99k miles on it i assumed that its probably due for new pads and rotors.

Pulled the pads and noticed plenty of life left on the pads prior to the squealers. The sensor is only on the front left of my truck and the sensor is the one that is rubbing on the rotor. I ended up pulling the sensor out and zip-tie it out of the way, drove it around and verified that the senor was the issue for the noise. Does any one know how i can put the sensor back and not have it make noise? 

IMG_1813.jpg

Mario C Enthusiast

Mario C

Posted
Posted

So last year had a notice on my dash that I needed to replace rear  pads. They were at 42 %. Now my front pads are at 35 % and no notice on my dash. But it’s squells but not all the time. I am assuming I need pads. Going to unhook the sensor and see. 

BlancoSilverado Enthusiast

BlancoSilverado

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 minutes ago, Mario C said:

So last year had a notice on my dash that I needed to replace rear  pads. They were at 42 %. Now my front pads are at 35 % and no notice on my dash. But it’s squells but not all the time. I am assuming I need pads. Going to unhook the sensor and see. 

Don't unhook the sensor, you will get a error on the dash and your max MPH will be 62mph(ask me how i know). Its not a CEL but a different one that you need a good scan tool to clear after you re-hook the sensor back in.

BlancoSilverado Enthusiast

BlancoSilverado

Posted
  • Author
Posted
23 minutes ago, Mario C said:

So what did you do. Just zip tied it. 

So far yes, its annoying hearing it squeak all the time with that much pad left. If i was low on life, i would order the pads/rotor.

 

On here looking to see if anyone has a known fix for this issue or if i am 1 out of a million having this squeaking issue.

  • 5 months later...
johnnyquick Enthusiast

johnnyquick

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 4/15/2025 at 2:34 PM, BlancoSilverado said:

Don't unhook the sensor, you will get a error on the dash and your max MPH will be 62mph(ask me how i know). Its not a CEL but a different one that you need a good scan tool to clear after you re-hook the sensor back in.

Mine never threw a code, it just does not register brake pad life for the fronts, been cut for 40000 plus miles because of a jackass at Les Schwab, and I never got around to it until next week, lol 63000 miles and now looks like I need pads.

2020 1500 RST 4wd with 6.2 and 10 speed no speed limiting either for me, but again mine is cut off.

Edited by johnnyquick
more info
typhoon186 Enthusiast

typhoon186

Posted
Posted

Turns out mine was not the brakes.  It was an idler pulley down low on the passenger side.   

replaced pulley and belt under warranty and its all good

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,770
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Paul8556
    Newest Member
    Paul8556
    Joined

  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 596 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      I hope to high heaven this is wrong. My Chevy farm trucks frame is lasting way longer than a newer Nissan Titan XD I got for a steal, and it only pulls trailers. A decade younger and it's frame is already way rustier than the waxed Chevy I drive across longs and ditches. Also, hasn't Ford been having tones of troubles with rusted frames? 
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      Batteries don’t always show signs of a few years ago my vehicle started fine in the morning and took me to work. After work the battery was completely dead and I needed a jump. No, I didn’t leave anything on and the battery was only a couple months old. It was replaced under warranty. 
    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • NDKoze
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By NDKoze · Posted

      If his battery was that bad I would think it would have been showing signs before this that were ignored. Stinks that it happened the way it did in rush hour traffic, but this seems like a pretty fringe scenario. I don't mind it that bad and never turn it off. The only slight annoyance for me is the slight delay between brake to gas, but I have gotten used to it and figure if it can save a little gas why not.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a good correction. I think “severity” was probably the wrong word for what I meant. What I really mean is closer to event priority, relevance, and actionability — not “this code is severe” or “replace this part.” I agree that a truck can have a lot of trivial or historical communication codes, and if the product starts pushing alerts for every stored or low-value event, people will ignore it very quickly. So the alert logic would need to be filtered. For example, I would not want a random old communication code to generate a push notification by itself. A useful alert would probably need to be based on things like: - new vs historical - active vs stored - repeated vs one-time - duration of the event - whether it happened near the driver-marked symptom - whether it happened together with voltage drop, reset, bus-off, misfire, oil-pressure change, etc. - whether the same pattern repeats under similar conditions So instead of saying “severity,” maybe the product should organize events by affected system and priority. For example: Misfire event: Show misfire counts / roughness first, then fuel trims, RPM/load, DFM/AFM state if available, coolant/oil temp, voltage, and related DTCs. Oil-pressure event: Show oil pressure first, but only in context — RPM, load, oil temperature, coolant temperature, DFM/AFM state if available, voltage, and baseline comparison. Communication event: Show which module/network/message dropped, whether voltage dropped, whether the recorder reset, whether it was active or historical, and whether it repeated. Voltage/reset event: Show battery voltage, crank/wake/sleep state, module reset, communication dropouts, and what came back online first. That also solves the display-order problem you mentioned. The main report should not always show the same fixed list first. It should show the system that appears abnormal first, and then the supporting values for that system. I also agree that the truck already has an oil pressure gauge and MIL. The point would not be to duplicate those. The value would be in showing what else was happening before and after the warning or symptom. For example, if the MIL comes on for a misfire, the truck already told the driver there is a problem. The useful part would be: - which cylinder or bank looked abnormal first - whether it happened after an AFM/DFM transition - whether fuel trims were already moving - whether oil pressure or voltage changed at the same time - whether the same pattern happened previously without a MIL On the OBD port point, I think you may be right for a consumer-facing version. OBD is much easier for the average owner: - easier install - easier removal - inside the cabin - easier phone connection - easier data download - easier to include a pass-through port for another scanner OBD is also the right place for DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration information, Mode 6, and normal scan-tool parameters. The reason I was looking at ECM-side recording is that some events may be gone by the time someone plugs in a scanner, and some powertrain-side network evidence may not be available the same way through the DLC. But I agree that if an OBD-based version can capture enough useful evidence for most owners, that is probably the cleaner consumer product. Maybe the split is: - OBD/DLC version for most consumers - ECM-side version only if it proves it adds evidence that the OBD version cannot get - shop/pro version if deeper powertrain-side event evidence is actually useful So I would not want to force the inline approach if the OBD workflow solves most of the real-world problem. Your last point is probably the key product requirement: the report should be specific to the system showing the abnormality. Not “here are 50 parameters.” More like: “Misfire-related event detected. Here are the misfire/fuel/DFM/context values.” or “Oil-pressure-related event detected. Here is oil pressure compared with RPM/load/temp/baseline.” or “Communication event detected. Here is what dropped, when, and whether voltage/reset happened first.” That is a much better way to think about the report.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...