Alfa Romeo Forums banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Wheel Studs and Studettes

I have 2 each 95 LS. On car 1, I have borbet Type C, (I think), definitely alloy, with the following embossed into the wheel

7J x 15 H2
KBA 42383
C70535

On car 2, I have borbet type A, chrome plated steel as near as I can tell, with the following embossing

A70525/1
KBA 41732
LK (embossed) with a stamped "981"
ET (embossed)with a stamped "25"

Who can help me decipher this? They are both 5x98 , no problem mounting.

I have a few questions

what size tire is supposed to go on these (obviously 15" but profile/width?)
What size spacer is supposed to be used? I am using the standard Alfa spacer (about .125" thick) -- is this correct?
What length bolt is supposed to be used ? The Type C's have to have a shorter bolt (they bottom out).

Sorry for all the questions -- I am trying to figure out what to do here as I need tires; have been using 195/65's OEM type but on the wheels they look a bit odd -- the outside edge of the tire seems to be nearly on the same plane as the outside rim edge -- just seems weird to me

I need more smarts on this ! Thanks !
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,074 Posts
The Borbets (type E) I have on my 94 do have the offset, ET 35 mm, shown on the inside of the wheel, on a spoke. This in addition to the bolt spacing, ie, 98 mm. I would imagine that the offset of the wheels should be shown on yours as well, as I spect this is standard practice, at least within the brand.

So, for car number one, they are 7 inch wide as shown by the code 7Jx15. You can measure this as between the insides of the bead flanges. You could measure the flange separation width of the wheel of car two to find what that width is compared to car one.

If both are 7Jx15, with 35 offset, you could run better looking 205/60-15 or 215/55-15 with no trouble, with the speedo error negligible. However, the wheels for car 2 indicates that the offset (ET) is 25 mm. Jason might have a good idea on that.

I have a feeling the offset for the wheels on car 1 are 35 mm perhaps shown as the code 70535, but that's a guess on my part. Once again you could measure wheel one compared to the offset of wheel two, since you know that one as 25 mm. I think that would be the easiest if you can't find out anything else, there is enough cross info.

As for bolt length, I suggest contacting the SerpentAutoSport site: http://www.serpentautosport.com/ for more information. He is knowledgeable on different wheels, bolts, spacers, etc for Alfas.

Possibly, someone else will have more detailed info based on web searches I haven't done.

BTW, funny but neither of my 164s have any spacers, came that way. Haven't thought about whether or not they should have them. All the wheels have 35 mm offset, and all seems well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,358 Posts
ET stands for offset (in German) so one set of wheels is 25 mm offset which is a bit small. I do not have the correct offset number for a 7 inch wide rim. Somewhere on those alloy rims will be an ET number, often inside the rim somewhere. The ET number can be embossed or engraved in a different place from the size information.

Incorrect offset can cause clearance issues on any car but on fwd it can also adversely affect torque steer. On any car offset affects handling and steering as well as tire wear and bearing loads. It is best to stick close to factory recommended offsets but as wheel width goes up from factory maximum it is tricky to calculate acceptable offset for steering and handling effects. For example, on the similar SAAB 9000 offset for a 6 inch wheel is 33 mm (ET 33) and when you go up to a 6.5 inch wheel ET27 is used, this tells me that SAAB wants that inside edge of the tire in the same place regardless of wheel rim width as one half of the additional rim width is deducted from the ET (1/2 inch is 13 mm and half of that is 6.5 mm, 33 minus 6 is 27). Offset is the distance in mm that the hub face is offset from the vertical centerline of the wheel, positive ET is offset and negative is inset. Confusingly, both numbers are referred to as offset as it is obvious which way the ET number is intended to be measured just by looking at the inside of the rim, and to confuse things further an offset on the hub face results in a wheel that is inset relative to the fender lip, and vice versa for negative offset of which "deep dish" wheels are an exaggerated example.

The early 164 used a 6.5 inch wide rim perfect for the 195 section tire. Going up to 7 inches will cause the 195 tire to look a bit stretched. The fitment is within acceptable range though.

A very useful web site is:

Car Bibles : The Wheel and Tyre Bible Page 1 of 4

Note the tiny links at the bottom of each page which get you to the full four pages of the site. Not much info is missing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
Wheel Studs and Studettes

I have 2 each 95 LS. On car 1, I have borbet Type C, (I think), definitely alloy, with the following embossed into the wheel

7J x 15 H2
KBA 42383
C70535

On car 2, I have borbet type A, chrome plated steel as near as I can tell, with the following embossing

A70525/1
KBA 41732
LK (embossed) with a stamped "981"
ET (embossed)with a stamped "25"

Who can help me decipher this? They are both 5x98 , no problem mounting.

I have a few questions

what size tire is supposed to go on these (obviously 15" but profile/width?)
What size spacer is supposed to be used? I am using the standard Alfa spacer (about .125" thick) -- is this correct?
What length bolt is supposed to be used ? The Type C's have to have a shorter bolt (they bottom out).

Sorry for all the questions -- I am trying to figure out what to do here as I need tires; have been using 195/65's OEM type but on the wheels they look a bit odd -- the outside edge of the tire seems to be nearly on the same plane as the outside rim edge -- just seems weird to me

I need more smarts on this ! Thanks !

Borbet didn't make steel wheels, both types are alloy.

You've got the 5x98 part down it seems.

The other relevant fitment questions are as follows:

Diameter
Width
Hub bore
Offset

Since they fit, the hub bore is likely OK (since 5x98, Borbet maybe manufactured these to Milano spec, which is extremely close to 164 spec).
You provided the offset ("ET") for one wheel, but not other. ET 25 for a 15" is OK. If you were running a 17" wheel, it might cause some rubbing issues on arches. And, unless your offset is really low (i.e. 15 or less) on the other wheel, you should be OK with a 205 series tire. Unless you have a serious itch to run a 215, stick with a 205. They are less expensive, they won't "tramline," and won't accentuate changed scrub radius (and steering feel).

I would suggest running 205/60 15.

I ran BF Goodrich G-Force sport tires for about 50,000 miles of driving on a 164, mounted on a couple different sets of OEM wheels. They are great tires. Nice tread design, ride is reasonably compliant, but great grip. Certainly less vague than the 195 series. There shouldn't be any problems running your 195 on those wheels, though (as mentioned earlier).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Rob thanks!

and no need to edit, you are 100% correct-- I need WHEELS EDUCATION! Theres a lot I don;t know about (practical) and wheels are up there!

I totally get the dimensioning and wheels specs -- offset is easy to understand, bead shape, hub vs bolt centric -etc -- pretty straightforward. And I can easily see by taking the extreme cases of inset/offest how that can dramatically affect suspension characteristics -- the theoretical is easy enough for me; its the practical application - For example-- did every 164LS come from the factory with spacers?


What is more confusing to me is the car suspension design elements, especially 164LS. This car was designed to run a wheel offset of ????mm? On my car, with the 7J 15 (type c) I do get some wheel rub in the front -- at extreme steering angle--- might be due to the rack being slightly offset tho. Are fronts and rears always designed (in cars like this) for the same offset? How much offset is allowable / reasonable? Presumably spacers are used to compensate for offset being too small, right? For me, less offset and wider tires means that I have a greater chance of fouling up in the wheel well -- but the 195's look kind of narrow, and are already rubbing up in there -- I know, so many questions!

FOr the original PHONE DIAL LS wheels, what is the offset? And should they be used with spacers or not?
PS I am pretty sure the type A's are steel -- but will give them the magnet test! I have never seen chrome over aluminum!
Thanks in advance for the help!
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,074 Posts
Looking at an original 94LS wheel, it is labeled as 6Jx15 H2-40. I would assume then that the offset is 40 mm for this 6x15 wheel, maybe. The 94-95Q wheel is listed as 6 1/2J-15, not the same as the 91-93S or LS wheel. Don't know its offset as I don't' have one to look at. The 91-93S wheel is also listed as 6J-15 H2-40.

The Fiat ePer shows no spacers for the LS/Q but does for the 91-93 B, L, and S models. Interesting that my 91S came, with only a few miles on it, with no spacers with the stock wheels. My LS of course wouldn't have them. Even running with 7Jx16 wheels, 205/55 tires, 35 mm offset, I have no problem with needing spacers, car feels/steers same as stock, no clearance problems.

With your wheels having offset of only 25 mm, the tires are outboard just a little from stock, not optimum. I wouldn't use spacers.

I think that all 164s tend to get a little tire rub with the plastic shields inboard at full lock. And, yes, the 195/65 tire will look slightly skinny on 7 inch wheels. 205/60 will work fine.

I still suggest you contact SerpentAutoSport and Jason (Alfissimo) for more Alfa specific information. Don't make this overly complicated, lol.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 · (Edited)
yep the type C is 35 mm

offset, Del as you predicted its stamped on the inside spoke

So I have a set that are 25 mm and a set thats 35 mm; orginal supposed to be 40 mm.

So by adding the alfa spacer, for the 35mm jobbers I get close enuf to 40mm

But for the 25mm ones, I only get to 30mm - seems like 10mm not enough to really worry about-- would that be the consensus? I guess I could double stack or get thicker spacer -- but will I really notice -- or is 30mm practically OK vs 40mm original?
AND Rob you are right as rain-- the chromed wheels fail the magnet test -- so I wonder what material they are --- has anyone seen chrome plated alum? How do they do it? I didn;t think you could nickel plate on AL for the chrome substrate! Also -- Rob are the g-force tires reasonably quiet? One thing I no longer like in my life is loud tires!!

And I really don;t want to overly complicate this --!!!! ;-) Just don;t want to plunk down 500 bucks for a set of michelinos only to find out that they dont fit well!!!

thanks all
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,074 Posts
Ummm, study this web site: Wheel Offset Calculator

I don't think your problem is with the tire size, just buy 205/60-15 whatever's. They will work. The only problems you have are understanding the spacer problem, and the wheel bolt length needed. You need to replace the bottoming out bolts. SerpentAutoSport has them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,358 Posts
Spacers can only decrease positive offset (think about it for a moment).

40 mm sounds correct for a fwd car, Volvo wheels are about 40 mm for their fwd cars. Adding a 3 mm (0.125 inch) spacer to a 40 mm ET would reduce offset to 37 mm and the outer edge of the rim would be closer to the fender by 3 mm.

Offset calculations are tricky to do in your head because less positive offset moves the wheel further out.

Makes me think I got the SAAB info backwards. Wider wheel and less offset keeps the inside edge of the rim in the same place, not the outside edge, doh!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
the plot thickens!!!

OK -- lets stick with my TYPE C borbets for a minute.
I just tried to drop a hub into the center (hubcentric) 'spigot' hole (the centering hole). It does NOT fully seat. On the other hand, a true LS PHONE DIAL wheel does fully seat, but very tightly toleranced== very close fit!!! Now, I believe that the Borbets center hole is a RCH too small in diameter-- and since I cant get a vernier caliper in there (it fouls on the wheel ID) I am left with gauge plugs, which (obviously) I don't have in that diameter.

SO...

It seems that perhaps these borbets were made for a (very very very slightly smaller, < .015" at most, more like .008" or so...) center hub -- Milano perhaps??? Now, I have to open up that diameter so very slightly, but still true-- any ideas ??? I do not have a lathe big enough to do that! I was thinking a cylinder hone type of thing.... any ideas from the group collective?
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,074 Posts
"Spacers can only decrease positive offset (think about it for a moment)"

That was my conclusion as well if you define the final offset as the distance between the wheel/tire inplane centerline and the mounting face of the hub. The wheel offset as manufactured is defined as the distance between the inplane centerline and the mounting face of the wheel. Add a spacer between the hub face and the wheel face, and the centerline moves outboard by the same amount by reducing the distance between the (new) wheel face and the wheel/tire inplane centerline.

So you have to remember that there are two offsets to think about, so to speak, the as manufactured wheel offset, and the as assembled final offset (measured from the hub face), perhaps including a spacer as well.

I don't think spacers are needed. Adding a spacer to the wheel with 25 mm offset would only make things worse by moving the wheel outboard further. It is already outboard from OEM by an inch closer to the fender. Lol, what is needed is a (negative) spacer.

My own experience driving the LS with 7x16 wheels with 35 mm offset indicates no problems at all, so no worries there.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,074 Posts
You haven't mounted these wheels before on the LS?

Do your Borbets have the concentric rings the hub fits into? If so, you might just need the correct ones? Mine needed ones for the 164, with the proper inner diameter to fit the hub. If so, maybe all you need to do is remachine the inner dia of the rings out just a smidgen. Maybe you could do just the rings in the lathe, turning with just emery cloth?

If in fact there are no rings in the wheels, then yes, something else will have to be dreamed up. I reckon a wheel repairing place could do the work to enlarge the hole ever so slightly. Or, get new wheels?

Usually, however, the wheels include rings, which is how they make them to fit a different number of make cars, just using different rings. You may have just bought wheels with the wrong rings. Let's hope so.

When I bought a couple of extra Borbets, they were for a VW with 5x100 bolt pattern and VW rings. Had to buy new rings and wobble bolts to fit the 164. Got them from Serpent.
 

·
Moderator
1991 164L
Joined
·
27,781 Posts
Alfa 164/GTV6/Milano wheel hub center info

Note of info: the GTV6 and Milano wheel hub centers are larger than 164 not smaller.

The 164 is 58.1mm and GTV6/Mliano is 58.6mm

See Charlie's web site for hub centric rings, spacers, etc., and even wheels and studs and bolts. Home

58.1 i.d. Alfa 164/Fiat/Lancia
58.6 i.d Alfa GTV6/Milano/Maserati
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,074 Posts
Yes, that is SerpentAutoSport: Home
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
OK getting smarter

Don;t know what I was thinking about spacer, since the offset is defined as 'within wheel' theres no way a spacer can change that --!!! Had to draw myself a picture to realize that!

AND the type C's, the center bore had a bunch of crap/residue in the ID. I cleaned the bores up with emery cloth, removed a bunch of Al oxide I think, and now the wheel slides onto the hub oh-so-nice, very tight toleranced. The wheels do not have any concentric ring, the bore hole is simply machined into the wheel itself. I pulled the spacers off and remounted the wheels. No issues with rubbing using 195 (old) tires. Given these are 35 mm offset as Del points out, his exact setup, I am not worried about these.

On the Type A's with 25mm offset, this might be a bit trickier but we will have to see. Not sure if spacers will help or hurt this setup. RIght now I have spacers on, might see what happens if I remove them. I suppose I could go have the hub fly-cut / machined to remove another 10 mm or so to reset the offset to 35mm and then not have to worry about it at all.

Prob looking to michelin exalto's 205/60 ; they are pricey -- would like something cheaper but quiet also=--- I really do not like loud tires. The MXV;s I have right now on the one car are pretty quiet----

Thanks to all for bearing with me on this === the older I get the less I know about stuff and I' m thankful for you all on this forum!
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,074 Posts
It is easy to get your head all wrapped up with this stuff, happens to me all the time. I think you are on the right track now. I can only see that using the spacers will move the wheels outboard. Up to you as to whether or not you and/or car can live with that. At least they are easy to remove.

The search for quiet tires is difficult to accomplish, as you basically don't know what you've got until you try them. Some tread designs are worse than others, partially depending on coarseness/direction of the tread blocks, but sometimes you just can't tell.

And, of course, some pavement material surfaces are noisier than others, and depends on the amount of wear as well. Concrete pavements are the worst to deal with, as while they may be quiet when first laid, wear exposes all the large aggregate, making the pavement even worse than old asphalt, IMHO.

Good luck,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,358 Posts
Exaltos are a much better tire than the MXV. I got to try a set on a UK rentacar Ford Focus and they are wonderful tires (they put real tires on rentacars in Europe).

164 rims are hubcentric and rely on the snug fit to align the rim with the hub. the wheel bolts just hold the rim on, unlike older designs where the lug bolt taper actually aligns the rim onto the hub. So, the fit should be as snug as possible and still allow removal of the rim. You should put a little brake caliper anti seize inside the hub/rim face to ease removal in future. I use copper grease and there are other types safe for use near brake discs.

I'd take those spacers out as long as they are not needed for clearance over the brake caliper (a common reason for spacers) as removal will bring the actual offset closer to stock.

The 205/60 tire should fit as it was standard in some markets such as Australia and Europe. Sometimes spacers are used to provide clearance for wider tires.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Chevy (Holden) SS, 1989 Milano (Shankle Sport), 1991 164S
Joined
·
17,074 Posts
"Prob looking to michelin exalto's 205/60 ; they are pricey"

Uh, no, they are not, really. The Tire Rack has them for about $104 each in that size. That's a good deal in my book for a decent midlevel tire. Discount Tire may have them for near the same price.

Remember, you get what you pay for with tires, in my experience anyway.

I buy Goodyear GS-D3 205/55-16 tires, and they are considerably more, unfortunately. About $150 each. However, they are a great tire for the 164.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top