Mustang GT 99-04 vs 05-09 painted aluminum wheels?

GT97222

Junior Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Posts
10
Reaction score
9
Location
Milwaukie, OR
Hi,

Is there any difference between the Ford painted aluminum wheels that came on the Mustang GT in 99-04 and 05-09?

did Ford offer them in multiple shades of silver? It seems to me some where silver and some where more gunmetal gray. Thanks

 

Juice

forum member
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
4,622
Reaction score
1,904
Yes, I have a set of each. I always thought those were for 05 & up GT wheels. V6'ers got a 16" wheel.
 

Juice

forum member
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
4,622
Reaction score
1,904
The wheel offsets are considerably different. Like at least 15 mm different.


Norm
Interesting. Not sureif there is that much difference.
I got my FR500 replicas, I compared the 99-04 vs 05&up and there was almost no difference iirc. (Was like 7 yrs ago lol) I actuallu got the 99-04 wheels and those fit perfect on my 07.

Ps: I wont be needing my 17"s as they dont clear the 11-14 brakes. Willing to part with the darker set. The light silver ones are going on the wife's car when its time for tires. Running the stock mustang 16's on the Grand Marquis now.
 

stkjock

---- Madmin ----
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
S197 Team Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Posts
40,221
Reaction score
3,138
Location
Long Island NY
Norms right. Been covered many times on the board. They boot up but don’t have proper figment
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Posts
3,615
Reaction score
316
Location
RIP - You will be missed
People do run the early wheels on the S197, specifically to push the wheels out for a "because more flush" appearance.

Have to say, I never did understand trying to make wheels and tires look like they're wider without making them actually be wider . . .


Norm
 

Juice

forum member
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Posts
4,622
Reaction score
1,904
To clarify, Im talking about the difference in offset of a set of aftermarket fr500 style wheels. There was maybe 2mm offset difference in specs between 99-04 vs 05-09 18x9s. Dont remember what my reason was for picking the earlier wheels, but it was NOT to "push them out flush".

Why wouldn't the adtermarket wheels have the oem offset difference?
99-04 specs Item 28274G99 AM
Size: 18x9
Placement: Front or Rear
Offset: 1.18 Inches, 30mm
Backspacing: 6.18 Inches, 157mm
Weight: 25.40 Pounds

05-09 specs Item 28274G05 AM
Size: 18x9
Placement: Front or Rear
Offset: 1.18 Inches, 30mm
Backspacing: 6.20 Inches, 158mm
Weight: 25.40 Pounds

I stand corrected, it is a 1 mm difference.
 
Last edited:

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Posts
3,615
Reaction score
316
Location
RIP - You will be missed
OK, I understand that that might not be your reason, individually, for choosing them. But AM is an aftermarket entity that caters to the mass market where the popular appearance preference gets the lion's share of attention during the shopping process. And by extension, in aftermarket product design as well. Aftermarket wheels don't have to match Ford's OE offset specs, and in this case they absolutely are not.

From the 2008 FRPP catalog,

Ford's 17 x 8 S197 wheels are +45, as are the GT500 18 x 9.5 wheels. The 18x8.5 GT wheels (both the torq-thrust and fanblade styles) are +50

Ford's similar-finish SN95 torq-thrust-style wheel is +30


Norm
 

GT97222

Junior Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Posts
10
Reaction score
9
Location
Milwaukie, OR
Thanks Norm and the other replies. I'll get the late model rims I want them to fit properly. Found some on Ebay that look good. $600 refurbished with 30 day warranty. I'm going to try to contact them and find out what they do to refurbish them. Autorimshop.
 

RED09GT

Equal Opportunity Offender
S197 Team Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Posts
2,630
Reaction score
488
Location
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
The stock 01-04 17x8 bullitt wheels do not have any fitment issues on an S197. I prefer the look of the wheels sitting more flush. The tucked in look and the stock 4x4 look was to facilitate the use of winter tire chains. If you never plan on using chains, why not have the wheels further outboard- as long as they don't poke out. If you go the other way and put stock s197 17x8 bullitt wheels on a 94-04, it looks absolutely awkward.

I do agree that wider wheels are better but if you are on a budget, why not pick the ones that look better if the function is pretty much identical?
 

GT97222

Junior Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Posts
10
Reaction score
9
Location
Milwaukie, OR
Just for my reference, do you know what to offset is on the 05-09 17" painted aluminum wheels? on one site I saw 45mm. The V6 and the GT have the same offset right?
 

GT97222

Junior Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Posts
10
Reaction score
9
Location
Milwaukie, OR
Just for my reference, do you know what to offset is on the 05-09 17" painted aluminum wheels? on one site I saw 45mm. The V6 and the GT have the same offset right?

I just found the answer to my question. Yes and Yes.
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Posts
3,615
Reaction score
316
Location
RIP - You will be missed
The stock 01-04 17x8 bullitt wheels do not have any fitment issues on an S197. I prefer the look of the wheels sitting more flush. The tucked in look and the stock 4x4 look was to facilitate the use of winter tire chains. If you never plan on using chains, why not have the wheels further outboard- as long as they don't poke out. If you go the other way and put stock s197 17x8 bullitt wheels on a 94-04, it looks absolutely awkward.

I do agree that wider wheels are better but if you are on a budget, why not pick the ones that look better if the function is pretty much identical?
Ford most likely had scrub radius in mind as opposed to a BMW-esque appearance, for both the SN95 and S197, and the different platforms/sheet metal contours just ended up forcing different offsets. For an OEM, getting the steering right is more important.

Sensitivity to braking and stability through cornering are involved, with wheel offsets ending up putting the scrub radius at or very close to zero not being preferred.


Norm
 
Last edited:

RED09GT

Equal Opportunity Offender
S197 Team Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Posts
2,630
Reaction score
488
Location
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
I'm trying to find the source. In early 2004, there was an interview with Thai Tang, the chief engineer for the mustang and one of the questions was about the wheel tuck and the ride height. His response was that the engineering team had to make compromises due to a ford corporate requirement that vehicles needed to have clearance for tire chains and they had to sit so that if a chain came loose, it would not cause damage to the body of the car.
I'll post it f I can find it, only excerpt that I have found so far is for a suspension bolt-on project in a magazine.

From Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords January, 2011:
Ford's official word on why Mustangs are given the high stance has been snow-chain clearance (and they're actually serious). Although we begrudgingly understand the concession, the truth is that the factory ride height is stilted. Not only does the stock stance look goofy, it really does hinder a 'Stang's handling potential.
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Posts
3,615
Reaction score
316
Location
RIP - You will be missed
I'm trying to find the source. In early 2004, there was an interview with Thai Tang, the chief engineer for the mustang and one of the questions was about the wheel tuck and the ride height. His response was that the engineering team had to make compromises due to a ford corporate requirement that vehicles needed to have clearance for tire chains and they had to sit so that if a chain came loose, it would not cause damage to the body of the car.
I'll post it f I can find it, only excerpt that I have found so far is for a suspension bolt-on project in a magazine.
No surprise there. OEMs tend to have such corporate standards. Though the S197 at least has the sheet metal folded back on itself around the rear wheel openings. What we don't know is whether it was the sheetmetal that got there first (and drove the choice of wheel widths and offsets) or if the wheels and tires had any influence on the sheetmetal contouring.


From Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords January, 2011:
Ford's official word on why Mustangs are given the high stance has been snow-chain clearance (and they're actually serious). Although we begrudgingly understand the concession, the truth is that the factory ride height is stilted. Not only does the stock stance look goofy, it really does hinder a 'Stang's handling potential.
I am going to take issue with that last bit. Unless they're talking about fully developed, caged, wheel-to-wheel road-race cars, a lowered ride height doesn't mean nearly as much to cornering and handling as the appearance suggests. By itself, 2" of lowering (pretty serious lowering representing 10% of about a 20" CG height and 35% of a 5.7" ground clearance) might buy you another 0.03g on a car that's already cornering at 1.1 lat-g at full stock height.

Nearly all of the improvement from "lowering" comes from the springs and sta-bars being firmer than stock, if they're enough stiffer to overcome the effect of the front roll center dropping faster than the amount of lowering. Only then is body roll in any given corner reduced. Strut suspended cars will roll more in a corner when lowered if the springs and bars are left at OE stiffness.


There does seem to be some variation in ride height from one specific car to another here, so at least for some cars MM&FF's "stilted" description is overly exaggerated. Certainly to me, any amount of lowering that visibly un-centers the wheel in its sheetmetal opening is already too much (round shapes look better together when they're concentric). And when the gap at the top of the tire gets too small it makes the car look like it's never supposed to be driven hard enough to make its suspension move at all, or be steered through a corner without the risk of rubbing. It just looks wrong (tired springs, overloaded car), and anti-functional as far as actual driving is concerned.


Norm
 

Enfield

Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2020
Posts
101
Reaction score
18
Location
Shenandoah Valley
My car came with 17x8 oem Bullitts in front, shod with 235x55's, and AM 18x10 replicas in back running 295/45's. Both ends are the correct 45mm offset, but there's way too much stagger and a 2" rim width differential. I'd like to eliminate the height difference but keep a little wider rear wheel and tire for aesthetics. So, either an 18x9 front or 17x9 rear in a Bullitt with a black center and "machined" outer edge; problem is, neither of those size wheels can be found with correct offset. The only wheel I've found that meets the criteria costs $346!!!
Is there a more reasonably priced wheel out there in 17 or 18 with 45mm offset?
 

RED09GT

Equal Opportunity Offender
S197 Team Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Posts
2,630
Reaction score
488
Location
Kelowna, B.C. Canada
A 45 mm offset on an 8" wheel is much different than on a 10" wheel.
Having a 45mm offset does not make a wheel the correct offset.
Find an offset calculator online and see the difference for yourself.
 

Enfield

Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2020
Posts
101
Reaction score
18
Location
Shenandoah Valley
A 45 mm offset on an 8" wheel is much different than on a 10" wheel.
Having a 45mm offset does not make a wheel the correct offset.

True, but 45mm on the 17x8 is the oem offset. I can't find either a 17x9 or 18x9 that even comes close to 45mm. Most are 20-30mm. Further, the 45mm 18x10 AM replicas are marketed as "rear only." Some wider wheels are apparently OK for the front, like the Apex EC7 in 18x11 with 52mm offset. Nice auto-x wheel, but not what I need for cruising/touring. Also costs $379.

Just looking for a black/polished lip Bullitt in 9" with ~45mm ET. Or, for that matter, a set of used 2007 GT500 rims at a reasonable price. Every ad I've seen asks at least $750 for used with maybe a couple of decent tires. The GT500 rims can now be had new for ~$800 a set.
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Posts
3,615
Reaction score
316
Location
RIP - You will be missed
True, but 45mm on the 17x8 is the oem offset. I can't find either a 17x9 or 18x9 that even comes close to 45mm. Most are 20-30mm.
Those are SN95 and possibly Fox-body offset numbers, back when a 9" wide wheel was considered wide. But 9" is hardly any wider than the 18x8.5 wheels that came stock on S197 GTs up through 2008 or maybe 2009 (and narrower than the GT500 wheels for the same era), so I can see why 9" with S197 offset might be a rare animal.


Further, the 45mm 18x10 AM replicas are marketed as "rear only."
AM and most other wheel sources tend to be cautious. They don't necessarily know what size tires people are going to try to run, and with most of their customers tending to choose bigger tire sizes rather than smaller size tires and living with a little 'stretch' they're just going to discourage that much wheel.

10" wide with +45 offset will let the wheel clear the strut, but you'd be limited in tire sizes to 265/40 (figure a little less than 1/4" strut clearance which should be plenty). 275/40 would almost certainly call for thin spacers, somewhere between 1/8" and 1/4".

Some wider wheels are apparently OK for the front, like the Apex EC7 in 18x11 with 52mm offset. Nice auto-x wheel, but not what I need for cruising/touring. Also costs $379.
Those Apex wheels need spacers and longer wheel studs to work up front. I think Apex sells 25 mm spacers, though 20 mm might be enough in cases where 285/xx tires are being used.


GT500 wheels would be the easy answer, with (preferably) tires in either 255/45, 265/40, or 275/40 sizes. 285/xx is OK'ed for 9.5" wide wheels, but it's really too much tire for a 9.5" wheel if you're ever going to take corners very hard (and may simply be too tall and too wide for the front anyway).


Picture below shows a 285/35-18 Pilot Super Sport tire on a 18x11 Forgestar wheel. At a little over 1.2mm strut clearance it didn't rub. Not even on the track at HPDE.


Norm
 
Last edited:

Pentalab

forum member
Joined
Mar 5, 2013
Posts
5,211
Reaction score
1,093
I use 18 x 10 AM (45mm ET) chrome bullitt wheels on the front of my 2010. All that is required is a 3mm spacer....(.118"), I used a HR hubcentric spacer, fits like a glove...with plenty of thread left over, to clear oem front brakes and struts etc. I tried both a 275-40-18 tire..and also a 285-40-18 tire on the 18 x 10 rim..and both require the spacer. With the 3mm spacer, the effective offset is now 42mm. I also installed the steeda HD front adjustable camber strut mounting kit, and tweaked for max camber, aprx -1.5 degs.
 

Latest posts

Support us!

Support Us - Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Sponsor Links

Banner image
Back
Top