Hi,
I have a rim that has a 5 bolt universal ( 5x100 and 5x114.3 ). I was just wondering if these would fit a Oldsmobile Alero, which bolt pattern is 5x115?
Thanks,
Ron
no they are not the same.
5x114.3mm (5x4.5") will not fit properly on a 5x115 bolt pattern. it is .7 mm short on each side and will not bolt up safely.
1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...
But will it still fit, I mean bolt on?
i thought i was pretty clear...
Quote:
will not bolt up safely.
obviously i didnt give you the answer you wanted to hear, but thats the right answer.
1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...
LOL this thread sucks.
use your head 115 is NOT the same as 114.3
and whitegoose is right, if you look at weels there is a angle cast into the wheel around the lug nut holes, its to center the wheel and it gives it more contact area to keep it tight and spread out the load on the lugs. Get wheels that are the size your car takes, do it right or leave it alone.
this was learned in kindergarden. the square peg fits in the square hole and the round peg fits in the round hole. 114.3 does not equal 115
whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:no they are not the same.
5x114.3mm (5x4.5") will not fit properly on a 5x115 bolt pattern. it is .7 mm short on each side and will not bolt up safely.
Lol, your math is a little off, they are .35 mm short on each side.
I'm going to go against the JBO grain on this one, they will work fine. The manufacturing tolerences casting those would allow more than that insignificant difference anyway.
Besides, there are thousands of cars on the road running what you are looking for, and with hub-centric rings, the lugs shoudn't matter if they are a little out of whack, as long as they are all evenly out of whack.
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
no there is a reason they require what they do. rims dont give a general range saying well 5z100-5x114.3 should fit ok.
our cars are 5x100 for a reason. just like every car has its spec for a reason.
OHV notec wrote:whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:no they are not the same.
5x114.3mm (5x4.5") will not fit properly on a 5x115 bolt pattern. it is .7 mm short on each side and will not bolt up safely.
Lol, your math is a little off, they are .35 mm short on each side.
I'm going to go against the JBO grain on this one, they will work fine. The manufacturing tolerences casting those would allow more than that insignificant difference anyway.
Besides, there are thousands of cars on the road running what you are looking for, and with hub-centric rings, the lugs shoudn't matter if they are a little out of whack, as long as they are all evenly out of whack.
115-114.3+0.7
not .35.
This is officially the funniest thread ive read today..
Ron, if you want to run r ims, that arent the right specs for our cars, be my guest.. Just do me one favour, and make sure you are not near any one else, in case @!#$ hits the fan.
Fallout 57 wrote:OHV notec wrote:whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:no they are not the same.
5x114.3mm (5x4.5") will not fit properly on a 5x115 bolt pattern. it is .7 mm short on each side and will not bolt up safely.
Lol, your math is a little off, they are .35 mm short on each side.
I'm going to go against the JBO grain on this one, they will work fine. The manufacturing tolerences casting those would allow more than that insignificant difference anyway.
Besides, there are thousands of cars on the road running what you are looking for, and with hub-centric rings, the lugs shoudn't matter if they are a little out of whack, as long as they are all evenly out of whack.
115-114.3+0.7
not .35.
This is officially the funniest thread ive read today..
Ron, if you want to run r ims, that arent the right specs for our cars, be my guest.. Just do me one favour, and make sure you are not near any one else, in case @!#$ hits the fan.
actually, you're both right. you're talking about the same thing, just different terms. from bolt hole to bolt hole there is a difference of 0.7mm (diameter). from the center to each hole is 0.35mm (radius).
and no, they will not fit.
Fallout 57 wrote:OHV notec wrote:whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:no they are not the same.
5x114.3mm (5x4.5") will not fit properly on a 5x115 bolt pattern. it is .7 mm short on each side and will not bolt up safely.
Lol, your math is a little off, they are .35 mm short on each side.
I'm going to go against the JBO grain on this one, they will work fine. The manufacturing tolerences casting those would allow more than that insignificant difference anyway.
Besides, there are thousands of cars on the road running what you are looking for, and with hub-centric rings, the lugs shoudn't matter if they are a little out of whack, as long as they are all evenly out of whack.
115-114.3+0.7
not .35.
This is officially the funniest thread ive read today..
Ron, if you want to run r ims, that arent the right specs for our cars, be my guest.. Just do me one favour, and make sure you are not near any one else, in case @!#$ hits the fan.
I've bolded, italicized, and underlined the part which screams 0.35, as in EACH hole will be 0.35mm from where it would be with the other pattern.
Also, as I've already stated, there are thousands of cars on the road running 114.3 rims on a "115" hub. But hey, if you guys honestly think a casting can consistently be within 0.014", congratulations on your optimistic nature.
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
ive tried fitting 114.3 mm rims on a 115 bolt pattern. i didnt say it cant fit, i said it cant be done safely. you can damage the studs as it puts added stress on them, or puts added stress on the material of the rim around the bolt hole (or both).
when you draw the nuts onto the studs, the convexed part at the bottom of the stud will try to fit into bolt hole. as it fits into the bolt hole, the stud can be bent to allow it to draw in fully. this can put added stress on the studs and can actually cause studs to break or weaken. also, it can stress the material around the bolt hole of the rim or cause damage to the material around the bolt hole of the rim (which would suck if they are aftermarket rims).
regardless if you want to think of it as .35mm from the radius or .7 mm in a straight line, its the same thing. i may not have worded it clearly enough, but i think we both know we are talking about the same thing.
for what rims cost these days, just get yourself the proper bolt pattern.
1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...
Many, if not most wheel shops will sell them to you saying they fit. I would not use 114.3 on 115 pattern, but many do with no apparent issue.
As far as I know, the holes are not generally cast in but drilled to a good degree of accuracy.
I believe they are referring to the WHEELS being cast.
Anyway - Ummmm....... 0.35mm which is like 1/3 of a mm is enough to "NOT BE SAFE"? The reason I ask is you guys are arguing the point of the stress on lugs and studs etc. Just one thing. Not everyone has the SAME EXACT lugs, regardless if they were made to be the same, they are mass produced and they will have MINOR, VERY MINOR differenences. Same goes with wheels and wheel makers.
I called Motegi today ( the rims I have ), and told them my story.
They confirmed to me that they WILL fit, and not to have any worries.
Ron
I always wondered the same thing. I have a cutlus myself with the 5x115 but never tried it. ive seen a malibu riding around town with Cobra wheels. There bolt pattern is 5x114.3 as well. I work for goodyear, and as long as the wheel sits tight on the hub, and it does not make the wheel sit kind of offset, then i think it should be fine. Dont hold me to it though.
Ok, I'm going to go ahead and admit to using a 5x114.3 wheel on a 5x115 pattern.
My current setup is custom brakes in the front and rear, with 5x115 in the front and 5x100 in the rear. I MUST be able to use a spare tire, and well, I have yet to find a spare tire with these dual patterns (I HAVE found a dual one though, but didn't fit), AND be able to fit it in the stock tire well, AND fit over my monstrous brakes. Nothing will fit the front brakes and fit in the tire well (cadillac 16" 5x115 spare is HUGE), but I did find a chrysler spare that fit in my trunk and barely over my brakes, and was 5x100. So, if I ever get a flat tire in the front, I must be able to swap a rear to the front, and use the spare on the back (5x100). Also, spares are supposed to go on the back in a fwd vehicle anyway. So my 8 or so restrictions all work out
Now, I've only seen ONE wheel manufacturer that sells dual pattern 5x100/115 wheels. Most sell 100/114.3. I need a dual pattern, AND I was looking for something that looked VERY similar to the stock Z24 00-02 wheels (ftw). I finally found one with the dual pattern.
When using a hub ring, you can get pretty damn close to centering the wheel on the hub. I put in all new lugs and studs all the way around. When tightening my 114.3 fronts on a 115 pattern, when getting to the last turn or so you can definitely feel slight resistance. This resistance is very small when using a normal tire iron, but you can definitely tell a difference between that and doing the back wheels. That said, 1/3 of a mm is VERY small, but you can still feel the difference. On the wheels, you can also tell where the paint on the cone has started to wear out and scar due to the increased friction in that area. Major problems? None really, I do have a slight vibration between 65-75 mph, but seeing as
NOTHING in my suspension was originally on or
made for this car, I cannot attribute the wheels to being the problem. I understand that there is extra stress on the bolts, but seeing as these bolts are originally very high grade bolts and made to be VERY tough, I doubt I will incur any problems.
Using a hub ring is ABSOLUTELY necessary, as without it, the wheel would slightly move upon tightening the first nut, and then completely throw everything off. I've been using this setup 8 months now, and it's still kickin. In the end, if you have a car that is 5x115, i DEFINITELY recommend you use 5x115 wheels. The ONLY exception is if the 5x114.3 wheels you want are the ones you've wanted for the past 10 years and will die without them, or if you have extreme circumstances where the wheels are the most minor of your problems.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sold my beloved J in April 2010 -
Okjust to chime in here using a little math. Would it actually be .35 to EACH lug because there are 5? I mean none of the lugs will form a straight line. It could be true with 4 lugs or 6 but what about 5? Not sure how they are measured. Good luck with the wheels though.
Sigh here's for the noobs who don't know how to do simple math, OR are talking about a subject that they don't know about (i.e., how patterns are measured to BEGIN WITH).
When you say 5x100, that means there are 5 bolts equally spaced around a 100 mm diameter (edge to edge) circle. The 100 mm is NOT a radial (center to edge) measurement and it is NOT a cartesian (x,y) measurement.
When measuring how "far off" your lugs are, regardless if its 5 bolts of 24 bolts, there is NO point in measuring ANYTHING between stud and stud. The ONLY difference that you measure is between the CENTER OF THE CIRCLE AND THE STUD. This is noted in the gray arrows on the diagram. This extra distance is how far "off" your bolt will be.
So yes, your bolt is "off" in comparison from the original by
0.35 mm.
"Funny thread" indeed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sold my beloved J in April 2010 -
Quiklilcav wrote:D.S.S. Cavalier wrote:Okjust to chime in here using a little math. Would it actually be .35 to EACH lug because there are 5? I mean none of the lugs will form a straight line. It could be true with 4 lugs or 6 but what about 5? Not sure how they are measured. Good luck with the wheels though.
Yes, each lug would be .35mm off, because that is measured from the center of the hub bore.
The wheel bolt pattern is the diameter of the circle they are on, not a distance between lugs themselves. So the .7mm difference in diameter=.35 difference in radius.
For more reading pleasure, enjoy this: http://library.thinkquest.org/20991/home.html
The bottom line is there will be a shearing force on the lugs. It's been used a lot, so has been proven to withstand a lot of that stress, but you chose if you want to take the risk or not. The force is definitely there.
Actually, if you run the numbers, the shearing stress is minimal compared to the tensile stress from bending (especially if you factor in the threads as stress concentrators). When using Von Mises stress as a determining factor, the bending is a much larger contributor.
Bottom line is that people have been doing this for years without problems.
fortune cookie say: better a delay than a disaster
Or..how to make a short story long....
As my wife just bought a new Suzuki SX4, I was in the process of preparing for new snow tires. I have always used separate wheels for that purpose and the specs for the sx4 was 6in wide, 5 x 114.3mm (4.5in) bolt pattern, deep offset. I happened to have exactly the right fit, 4 Dodge Intrepid/Caravan wheels (recently acquired from discarded son’s car) equipped with partly used winter tires. But I also had 4 empty wheels for my ’93 Pontiac TranSport that had been provided by the GM dealer at the time I bought the TS in ‘93. The claimed specs on the internet for these GM wheels is 5 x 115mm bolt pattern. I wondered if GM used rounded up specs ...is 115 a short label for actual 4.5in (114.3)...as the difference would merely be 0.7mm diameter, so 0.35mm radius...that is 0.014in or 1/70 in..... But if the fit is same, it was easier to intall new tires for the SX4 on the empty wheels ...and eventually keep the Intrepid wheel/tire set for the TS . I searched various forums on the matter and the opinions varied from “b....it ..they are the same” to “no no...using the wrong one will make the first nut pull the wheel 0.35mm off center thus causing tire unbalance...etc....specially if they are not hub centric”...which is the case.
In doubt, I did have the tires taken off the Chrysler 114.3 rims and install the new tires on them. Then, I went in the process of installing the used tires on my empty TS rims.....and I happened to pay attention to a label on the inside of the rim normally hidden by the tire....and to my stupefaction... .I read what I had not noticed in 18 years : it read CHRYSLER......!
Now do not tell me that in 1993, Chrysler, that had been using 4.5in (114.3) bolt circle for decades...would have had different 115mm rims, used on none if its cars, that GM would use for its cars....or that I had been unknowingly using “wrong” 114.3 rims for years on my alleged “115” mm TS..without ever noticing any off center or unbalance.
Now....tell me...has someone actually measured ...if possible..this alleged 0.7mm diameter difference between 114.3 and 115mm bolt circles? Why would GM switch to 4.514 in. bolt circle instead of standard 4.500 used all over the industry? In the past, GM used 4 5/8 or 4.625in , that would be 117.5mm..but why bother to go to 115 in lieu of 114.3?
OK..what is your opinion? Was my effort to go blindly by the specs the necessary thing of was I fooled uselessly by a hoax ?
... who cares. This thread is from 2008, too.
5x114.3 and 5x115 are
FINE to interchange. It's not a big deal.
2001 Olds Alero (LD9)
650 whp / 543 ft-lb
@turboalero
I care!. What I described happened in 2011 and is still a case for several. I saw no reason to start a new thread, but I can. . I can opt out of this forum too.
Tons of people use 114.3 for a 115mm application.
My 20's are 5x100 and 5x114.3 - Let my buddy borrow them for a car show on his Grand Am which is 5x115mm. Bolted right up. No stress, no tight fit, nothing. Pretty sure all wheel unless made for a specific application will allow a minor amount of play. The actual lug nuts center the wheel on the hub.
Anyway, carry on.
