Seems that Chrysler and Dodge changed the bolt pattern (in 2005?) from 4.5" (114.3 mm) to 115 mm. The center hole size didn't seem to change (still 71 mm which is what imperial?). Seems like a small change - I wonder why they did it. Are rims interchangeable between the two?
Wheel bolt pattern (115 mm vs 114.3 mm)
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
They used the new 5x115mm bolt pattern on the LX cars compared to the outgoing LH cars 5x114.3mm. The minivans continued with the 5x114mm pattern until they were restyled an went to 5x127mm.
There are other problems. RWD Mopars used the 5x114.3mm with a low offset wheel. minivans and LH cars used 5x114.3mm with high offset wheel. The LX cars used 5x115mm on a medium offset wheel.
Some people interchange them (mainly people putting larger wheels on old RWD Mopars). The bolt circle difference is about 0.027" (1/10th of 1/4 inch) difference. I wouldn't do it, but some people do.
Joined
·
1,509 Posts
I have NEVER seen proof that this is two different bolt patterns.
There are literally millions of vehicles on the road with "114.3" listed bolt patterns on "115" wheels and vice-versa. The difference is simply rounding. In Metric, 5x115 is easier to write than 5x114.3. Both are technically 5x4.5" bolt patterns. Just like 5x127 is 5x5". Literature changed at the time 5x5 was changed to 5x127 will also refer to 5x4.5 as 5x115.
LX wheels will fit an LH, and a Jeep XJ too. And a Mustang, and an Explorer, and tons of other vehicles. You need to worry about the offsets, primarily for steering geometries more than anything (pushing the wheels away from the vehicle changes the Ackerman geometry).
There are literally millions of vehicles on the road with "114.3" listed bolt patterns on "115" wheels and vice-versa. The difference is simply rounding. In Metric, 5x115 is easier to write than 5x114.3. Both are technically 5x4.5" bolt patterns. Just like 5x127 is 5x5". Literature changed at the time 5x5 was changed to 5x127 will also refer to 5x4.5 as 5x115.
LX wheels will fit an LH, and a Jeep XJ too. And a Mustang, and an Explorer, and tons of other vehicles. You need to worry about the offsets, primarily for steering geometries more than anything (pushing the wheels away from the vehicle changes the Ackerman geometry).
Joined
·
933 Posts
Anyone who's ever tried lining up the offset hole on an A727 or A904 can appreciate an RCH of difference in measurements.
To be sure, the Mopar rims are not the "same". There are a couple of TSB's floating around out there regarding transient vibration from improper mounting, sizes, etc ad nauseum.
To me, the higher the performance of the vehicle, the more it would seem proper to pay close attention to what you're doing.
Below is a link showing all of the various bolt patterns and hub registers, which does show the slight differences. The 2011+ LD/LA Chrysler hub is a full mm larger than the typical Ford hub size. In the overall scheme of things, especially considering wear, that may seem like a rounding error at best. But with vehicles capable of 140+ mph - even with a beat-up old police model,for example - it's not something to mess around with. Using a foreign size may work, to a certain degree, because of those tolerances. But what happens to those tolerances over time, especially with the additional wear induced by vibration? You will very likely experience excess wheel bearing wear, rotor run-out, reduced caliper clamping force, and bizarre steering behavior.
It's your vehicle, of course, so you do as you wish. Just make sure you have plenty of liability insurance.
Bolt-Pattern-and-Hub-Centric-Guide.pdf (uswheeladapters.com)
To be sure, the Mopar rims are not the "same". There are a couple of TSB's floating around out there regarding transient vibration from improper mounting, sizes, etc ad nauseum.
To me, the higher the performance of the vehicle, the more it would seem proper to pay close attention to what you're doing.
Below is a link showing all of the various bolt patterns and hub registers, which does show the slight differences. The 2011+ LD/LA Chrysler hub is a full mm larger than the typical Ford hub size. In the overall scheme of things, especially considering wear, that may seem like a rounding error at best. But with vehicles capable of 140+ mph - even with a beat-up old police model,for example - it's not something to mess around with. Using a foreign size may work, to a certain degree, because of those tolerances. But what happens to those tolerances over time, especially with the additional wear induced by vibration? You will very likely experience excess wheel bearing wear, rotor run-out, reduced caliper clamping force, and bizarre steering behavior.
It's your vehicle, of course, so you do as you wish. Just make sure you have plenty of liability insurance.
Bolt-Pattern-and-Hub-Centric-Guide.pdf (uswheeladapters.com)
Joined
·
1,509 Posts
Hub spacers or re-centering rings may be needed, and I would never advise fitting a wheel that's a hub-centric fit to a hub that's different. Example, an LH wheel will fit on a JS but be too large for its hub, while a JS wheel will not fit an LH due to the hub on the wheel for the JS being too small. That's minor, however, and I know of plenty of people who use LX wheels on LH vehicles in high-stress applications without issues, as well as someone who has LX Charger wheels on his Mustang GT.
Joined
·
933 Posts
I will borrow a word from a Mopar Action article where Rick Ehrenberg (SAE) gives us his thoughts of hub pilot rings: "Cheesy".
Rule #1 - Use the right part for the job. Enough said.
There is a definite difference between 114.3 and 115 - its not just rounding. 1 inch is exactly 25.4 mm - so 4.5 inch is exactly 114.3 mm.
They are very close though yes. I did discover this when I was replacing rear axle bearings on my '74 Cuda - 4.5 inch or 114.3 mm bolt pattern. I was looking for something to press against on the wheel end of the axle - so I thought - try these used rotors from the back of my 2010 Charger - 115 mm bolt pattern. Worked great for pressing the bearings on - then I thought are they really the same (before I checked the specs)? But when you put the rotor on the hub and look closely you can see there is a slight difference. I would not interchange wheels - the acorn nuts would not seat properly IMO.
I did use Ford rims on our '92 GC and same ones on my '95 Intrepid - 4.5" is 4.5" after all - the offset was not quite right but it worked and did not rub.
They are very close though yes. I did discover this when I was replacing rear axle bearings on my '74 Cuda - 4.5 inch or 114.3 mm bolt pattern. I was looking for something to press against on the wheel end of the axle - so I thought - try these used rotors from the back of my 2010 Charger - 115 mm bolt pattern. Worked great for pressing the bearings on - then I thought are they really the same (before I checked the specs)? But when you put the rotor on the hub and look closely you can see there is a slight difference. I would not interchange wheels - the acorn nuts would not seat properly IMO.
I did use Ford rims on our '92 GC and same ones on my '95 Intrepid - 4.5" is 4.5" after all - the offset was not quite right but it worked and did not rub.
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Join the discussion
