I'm going to narrow a 68 6 cyl. Mustang rear end for my Metropolitan & putting a Mustang II front end under it, but want disc brakes up front. Mustang II rotors are 4.125, Escort are 4" I need 4 hole 4.5 rotors to match the rear axel & rims. ,
Why not just put 5 bolt axles in the Mustang rear? Why would you want 4 bolt wheels in the rear and 5 bolt wheels in the front? Am I missing something here? Or you want 4 bolt rotors to fit the mustang II front end? get them off of a Pinto, same front end with 4 bolt wheels. Actually stock Mustang IIs were 4 bolt originally as well I believe.
Early 90's Mitsubishi Gallant rotors are 4 x 4.5 and 10.5 or 11 inch. I used them when I converted my 1962 Cutlass 4 lug to disk brakes. Perfect fit.
Yep the factory M II rotors are all 4 bolt to begin with. Small but they should be plenty for that car.
nothing wrong having two bolt patterns......my `28 tudor has 4-1/2 in back and 4-3/4 in front. been that way since 1996 with no ill side effects
Yes, stock MII were what you are looking for. Another option is the earlier (pre 1990) Datsun/Nissan Z car. Very strong parts and some pretty big brakes available, too. The stock spindles will be useless, as they were all strut fronts. I've cut struts down and made double A-arm suspensions out of them in the past, but that's a lot of work... Fox body Mustangs were also 4 on 4 1/2, but you have the same issue with the strut front.
No, M2s, Foxes, Pintos, and English Fords were all 4x4.25 (4x108). The *Ford* Escorts, Focuses, etc are all 4x4.25. The Mazda-based Escorts of the '90s are 4x100 as are FWD 4-bolt Toyotas and most 4-bolt Hondas. Biggest off the shelf rotor for that size with a reasonable hat depth, if anyone cares, is the Euro Sierra Cosworth piece (only a little pricey shipped from ebcbrakes.co.uk) though most 4-bolt rotors can be redrilled. Early 4-bolt Falcon/Mustang is 4x4.5, which you'll also find on some Japanese product eg 80s Toyotas, etc.
I like my wheels to match because I carry a spare. That is my only reasoning on it. I had 55 Ford once that had a spicer 60 rear, if I had spare tires my trunk tires my trunk and backseat were full.
Like Beano,I insist that my bolt patterns are the same front and rear,,In my way of thinking it keeps things simple and having odd patterns just strikes me as cutting corners and not willing to do the job the right way. HRP
well , the car i mentioned has 155R15 tires on 4-1/2 X 15 wheels up front , and 235/75R15 on 7 X 15 on back. one spare will not do both ends , and i'm not gonna put a rear tire in front or a front tire in back granted , it's nice to have the same bolt patterns on both ends. the reason i ended up with two bolt patterns is i got a great deal on the front wheels not knowing they were chevy pattern , i was told ford pattern. and since i had to re-drill bolt patterns in the F-100 front brakes anyway it seamed like no big deal i assure you no corners were cut in the building of my `28 tudor
To me a spare is just to limp home on. I have run bigs n littles on most of what I own I can always find a trade off to use to limp to a tire store or to limp home on. I am not going to be one of those fellas that is stuck out somewhere because I have to have a matching tire to drive the 100 or so miles to my place.
In a similar vein, mid-90's Honda Preludes (1994-96 I believe) were also available with an 11 3/32" front rotor in 4 x 4.5 (i.e. 4 x 114.3 mm) rotor. No idea on fitment with the MII though...
You mean this one: The Rockauto catalog is a wondrous tool for finding potential swap candidates... 282x23mm (11in x a little over 7/8in), '96ish Prelude VTEC ("2.2L DOHC" if you're looking it up in their catalog.) Hat's only 24mm tall so might have caliper clearance problems w some wheel/caliper combos, and of course pay attention to the centerbore size...
The Jalopy Journal
