I have an R50 with 60,000 miles on the original brake pads. The inside rear pads are about gone but the fronts still are 5-6mm thick. Is it normal for the rear pads to wear faster than the front? This has never happened on any other car I've owned.

 

On my R53 the rears wore out first.

 

Either you folks are driving with the handbrake on or perhaps dragging/out of adjustment or there is something wrong with the brake bias/proportioning. Fronts should always take more wear than the rears.

 

I agree that the fronts should wear out before the rears but I know that on my 2003 MCS that the rears wore out first and there was nothing wrong with the rear brakes. I have seen many posts where people have had the rears wear out before the fronts.

I suspect there are a few reasons for this:
- Softer pad material in the rear
- Much smaller pad surface area for the rear pads
- Thinner pad material on the rear
- Rear pads/rotors get very hot under hard use
- Rear caliper pistons tend to stick a little causing a little drag on the rotor

 

Our 2006 S with 23k has already gone thru a set of rear pads and the front were at 75% when I did the rears.

 

I did notice that the front OEM pads are made by Jurid and the rear OEMs by Ferodo so maybe the pad material is a key difference in wear.