If you do not get and EXACT fit you are at the very least in danger of damaging your expensive alloy wheels and risking an accident.

I bought some recommended ,in another thread on this forum, replacement lug nuts for my 2005 XJR. When I went to put them on I noticed that the shank was a fraction thinner than the hole in the wheel. So if I had put them on they would have appeared to fit just fine however the wheel would actually have "floated" on the lug nuts. Driving over rough surfaces would cause wear around the holes and eventually probably a fracture in the alloy.

 

When I put the vehicle in the computer box, the listing said they would work on my S. I did put them on and drove last night. No issues that I can tell but I'll check them again in a few days for anything out of the ordinary. Thanks.

 

I fixed your link.


As others have said, these are NOT the correct nuts for your S-type irrespective of what Amazon might say.

The same vendor lists these nuts


which DO fit an S-type, contrary to the Amazon info.

Compare the two side by side to see the difference in profile.

 

Thank you very much for your help. I just ordered the correct ones. I also wrote a review and stated that they should delist the other lugs from working on a Jaguar.

 

Gentlemen, there's a lot of misunderstanding going on here.....




There are two factors that determine what is the "correct" lug nut for a car, any car. One of those factors is the diameter and pitch of the threads of the lug studs. The second is the seat configuration of the wheels. Jaguar determines the lug stud specs, and the OE wheel specs, while an aftermarket wheel manufacturer can determine the seat configuration of THEIR wheels.


Therefore there may be more than one "correct" lug nut for a Jaguar application, depending on the wheels used. The OE wheels use the "shank style" lug nuts, like the ones I posted pictures of. However, aftermarket wheels may use the "tapered seat" lug nuts, such as the nuts purchased by poster "davidladewig".


The problem here, is that many of the "mass merchandisers" such as Amazon, or even auto parts retailers that aren't "brand specific", will refer strictly to the thread specification, to determine if a lug nut "fits". They DO NOT, however, take into account, the wheel that is being used. They leave that up to the consumer.


As an example, on my '09 XF, I have the OE wheels that have performance oriented, all season tires mounted on them, for summer use. They use the "shank style" lug nuts. I also have snow tires, for winter use, mounted on aftermarket wheels. They use the "tapered seat" lug nuts. Same car, two sets of wheels, two different styles of lugs nuts. BOTH are correct, but as determined by the wheels in use.




"jackra_1", I also have noticed that both the OE lugs I have for my XF, as well as the OE lugs for the XJ8 we previously owned, have a rather loose fit in the wheels. While it doesn't make me really comfortable either, I have to assume that it's OK, as that's the way the factory set them up. Possibly, the wheels being aluminum, experience heat transfer from the brake rotors, expand a little, and in order to account for this, the lug holes are purposely a little "loose" at ambient temperatures....

 

I'm going to have to disagree with that the only nuts that can be stated simply to fit a 20XX S Type Jaguar are the original shank design of nut, any other nut needs it's description qualified to state it is suitable to fit on a 20XX S Type Jaguar fitted with XXXXXXX (insert type of aftermarket wheel here) otherwise people may be confused and could use the wrong type.

 

Yes it's getting confusing. There's more than just two factors for determining correct lugnuts but the presumption made here as stated above is that the stock OEM wheels are still fitted to the car. If not, we didn't know that- but neither did Amazon. They only offer ONE type of lugnut (tapered seat) and specifically state that the shank type does not fit an S-type.


I believe Jag uses the hubcentric wheel centering principal vs. lugcentric like most cars with tapered lugnuts. If true, the loose fit of the lugnuts is irrelevant.

 

Prior to ordering the Gorilla lug nuts, I took some measurements, and determined that while the OE lug nuts are of the "shank style", the shank itself is significantly "shorter" than the shank of your typical Cragar, American Racing, et al, lug nut. Therefore, in Amazon's "generic" listings, no, a "shank style" lug nut would not work. You need a Jaguar specific shank length.


Also, the Jag OE wheels are indeed "hubcentric", which insures that the loads are transferred to the hub, as is desired, but I still don't quite understand the "looseness" of the lugs within the lug holes. I've had several sets of "mag wheels" beginning in the early 1970s, and all of them had tighter fitting lug holes......but I'm no engineer!

 

Good grief, a whole bunch of new information - thank you all.

I bought new lug nuts 4 years ago, just wanted solid non-rust lugs, never realized there were different types for OEM and non-OEM wheels.

I have OEM wheels. Here is a pic of one of my lug nuts. Can anyone tell for sure whether or not I have the correct lug nuts? It sure does not look like I do.

 

Robin,


It looks like you are toast.

 

Those are wrong for OEM wheels Robin. 4 years you say?

 

Well, better late than too late. Yep, been 4 years, no problems whatsoever, even changed from all-season to winter and (soon) back again. No one noticed, no one commented, but hardly surprising, all glad to see the end of OEM lugs.

Thanks to all. Really glad the roads in BC are good quality. Gonna fix this in short order.

 

Well I bit the bullet and went to my local Chrysler dealer to order a set of MB579290 lug nuts. They are Mitsubishi nuts that were used in various Dodge and Chrysler cars. I picked them on Saturday and they appear to be of very high quality (thus superior to the ones I obtained via ebay and the ones responsible for the start of this chain).

But I learned something in the process, those lugs were actually used in very few Chrysler cars (the ones that were re-bodied Mitsubishi models) and have become rare in the Chrysler parts empire. The dealer I went to said that they had be collected from various parts warehouses around the country that there was no single place that had a full set of 20).

The other thing I learned was that they were expensive probably because the order was fairly complicated to execute. I paid about $10/nut...

But I am not terribly dissatisfied since the quality seems hi, they came in correctly factory labeled bags, and there is no Mitsubishi dealer near me, the Dodge/Chrysler dealer is very near and it turned out that I knew the parts-dude from years past when I had a Dodge and he worked at the dealership I used.

So, those are the correct nuts, require a new lug wrench, are probably no longer available for Dodge/Chrysler, so visit you Mitsubishi dealer instead.

Live long and prosper
================================================
Jaguar - it's not an automobile, it's a Motorcar
'08 Jaguar S-Type 4.2

 

Yes, the 'looseness' can seem strange.

It's obvious that lugnuts of any type keep the wheel from falling off, but the tapered type also act equally importantly to locate the wheel radially with respect to the axle it's mounted on.

With this arrangement, dubbed 'lugcentric' the lugnut holes are precision machined in a pattern making them concentric to the outer rim of the wheel. The location of the inner hole (if any) is not relevant.

The studs protruding from the axle or spindle are precision machined to be concentric to the centerline of rotation and not referenced to the outer diameter of the mounting surface.

The bevel on the lugnut acts against the mating surface of the wheel to align it within the hole. The cumulative effect is a wheel that runs true. Again, the centre hole of the wheel in this mounting scheme is meaningless with respect to any other feature.

Many years ago I met the then-president of Kelsey-Hayes wheels, a huge supplier to the aftermarket and various OEMs such as GM. I had just passed up the purchase of a rare set of original one-year-only wheels for a '68 Corvette. They were perfect except for being horribly 'out of round' or so I thought. In a rare moment of tact and diplomacy, I asked about manufacturing tolerances. It was obvious he knew what I had done to measure the wheels- simply mounted them on a typical tire balancing machine whch fits the wheel's centre hole over a tapered spigot. He went on to say that if I had mounted them using the proper five studs and tapered lugnuts, he was confident that the concentricity would have been well within factory spec.

With that said, our S-types DOES NOT USE this mounting system at all for the OEM wheels. I'd be reluctant to say with confidence that it can be used with aftermarket wheels either.

As much as the centre hole of the wheel is not of consequence with the above system, the opposite is true with the hubcentric method of wheel mounting. The radial location and diameter of the centre hole is done with high precision with respect to the outer rim, as is the spigot that protrudes from the spindle or axle. The location and vertical load on the road wheel is via the center hole of the wheel and NOT the lugnuts as done on the lugcentric system.

As such, the location of the studs and the lugnut holes in the wheels do not need to be done with high precision other than to make sure any wheel will fit on any axle with any lugnut. This is why there is an apparent looseness with the shoulder type lugnuts.

The use of tapered lugnuts on a hubcentric wheel and hub, in addition to damaging the wheel and possibly causing it to crack, is actually creating stress by having the two incompatible mounting systems 'fighting' against each other attempting to locate the wheel.

Hope this helps.

 

I have to disagree with you, here. I also have a 2001 Corvette in the garage, and up until a couple of weeks ago, a 2005 GMC Canyon 4x4. Both of these General Motors vehicles, had wheels that are both hub centric, as well as lug centric. The OE wheels on the Corvette fit snugly on the car's hubs, and use tapered seat lugs. The BBS wheels I bought later on, fit VERY snugly on the center hubs, and they too, use tapered seat lug nuts.


The Canyon is a truck, however its wheels had a centerbore that fit rather snugly on the hubs, and used tapered seat lugs. In fact, thinking of all the various American made cars I've owned, since the early 1970s, (mostly GM products) they all were both hub centric as well as lug centric.


I replaced the Canyon, my winter driver, with a 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee, and tomorrow, I'm off to the tire store, to install a set of tires that are more winter oriented. I'm anxious to see if it's wheels fit snugly on the vehicle's hubs. I already know that it uses tapered seat lugs.....

 

Update!


My Jeep also is both "hubcentric", as well as "lugcentric"......

 

If I can find it, I'll forward you the email address for the ex-prez of Kelsey Hayes. You can thrash it out with him. Ask him also for an alternate explanation for the set of wheels I almost bought.

 

"Mikey", I'm not looking to start any arguments, I'm just passing on my observations, acquired over the last 40 years of working on my cars. As I said, I'm no engineer, but I do think I'm a reasonably intelligent person, most of the time.


Something that I read, a number of years ago, explained it roughly like this...the lug nuts secure the wheel to the flat surface of the hub, while the fit of the centerbore of the rim, to the OD of the hub, is what makes the wheel secure when bumps, etc, are incurred.......or something like that.






BTW, the Corvette wheels you were referring to....were they a set of 15x7s, the only year a 7" rim was put on a C-3?

 

Maybe what you say makes sense.
My original Jaguar lug nuts were a tight fit with no play whatsoever within the holes on the wheel so thats why I went with replacements that had the same diameter and length shanks.
The roads around here are in really bad shape and its impossible to avoid all the potholes.

 

Correct.