Jump to content

High Torque Starters - sensible prices!


DippedHeadlights
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, DippedHeadlights said:

Yes, thinking again, too difficult to bring from there to here but I wondered if it was UK origin.

However I've now been reminded of this one which is a lot neater that a friend has been using so will probably go that route even though I think it's quite expensive. 

 

snap2200.jpg

Does that one fit the Triumph engine? I was able to get modern starters from 4x4 vehicles for free a few years ago, but they had to have an adaptor machined up. 

Cambridge Motorsports sell this one at a good price, but then add VAT and delivery:  http://www.cambridgemotorsport.com/node/8968

SVC also have a good selection. https://www.s-v-c.co.uk/category/starter-motors/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found out the pic I posted above is a Powerlite unit, RAC801. Fits the Spitfire and it has a built in solenoid. 

It's lighter, 3kg instead of 4.5kg and there is a little bit more weight saving by not needing the Lucas solenoid. 

Motor itself is more powerful but less current. 

It's still inertia but on the other side of the flywheel so effectively starting from new. 

It's expensive but I'm told they do pop up occasionally on offer nearer £200. 

https://www.powerlite-units.com/starters/rac801.html

Anyone using one? Any thoughts? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you have to watch the length if you have a tubular manifold or thigs get cooked 

i fitted heat shield on the end of  the club HT starter 

the HT all push in rather than the bendix pull in  so yes they trown in the opposite side of the ring gear

note they all should index 1/2 tooth when the solenoid throws in so chamfered pinion teeth always align  as the ring gear chamfer is now  on the wrong side 

pete

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick update, gone off the idea and fitted a 70s recon Lucas (the later shorter sort without the access cover for the bushes, M35J)  When I measured the current of the Powerlite it wasn't a lot less (about 85amps against 95amps for the Lucas) and when it came to speed it sounded quicker as it's a higher pitch but when you measure the speed it turns the flywheel it's no quicker than a good freshly rebuilt Lucas . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DippedHeadlights said:

Quick update, gone off the idea and fitted a 70s recon Lucas (the later shorter sort without the access cover for the bushes, M35J)  When I measured the current of the Powerlite it wasn't a lot less (about 85amps against 95amps for the Lucas) and when it came to speed it sounded quicker as it's a higher pitch but when you measure the speed it turns the flywheel it's no quicker than a good freshly rebuilt Lucas . 

I don't think it's the speed with which it turns, it's the effort - it seems to take so much less. You use less battery power so theoretically you should be able to crank for longer and your battery will take longer to run down. 

I've just rebuilt a 35G (simply because you can remove the cover to get at the internals) and I'll use it on the Herald, but for the 6-pot I bought a hi-torque starter many years ago and never looked back. (except when it rusted inside, quite badly, so I had to strip it down and regrease)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Colin Lindsay said:

 it's the effort - it seems to take so much less. You use less battery power

I really don't see how that can be. The physics is simple - you need to turn over a reluctant engine which is stiff and has compression resistance. This needs a certain amount of power, and the starter motor must deliver that power. The gearing isn't magic - it means the motor itself is a higher speed / lower torque motor - easier to make and smaller, but not necessarily any more efficient. The power from the battery is the same, to within the tolerance of the motor efficiencies (which will be fairly close). And the battery voltage is the same, so the current required for that power must be the same.

What will make a big difference is a worn out starter. A worn motor loses a lot of efficiency before it finally gives up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, NonMember said:

I really don't see how that can be.

Okay, then.

If I reword it to say: your hi-torque starter turns the engine more easily, so it starts more quickly therefore takes less cranking and may use less battery power ie percentage of capacity for each start of the engine, does that sound ok?

I know what I mean but it's not as clear as it could be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doesnt need to replace a knackered one  they just do what it says on the tin

faster with just any battery state ,   less amps, just try a start with headlamps on   they dont dim like the olde 

the starter stalling load is much higher , the thing spins at thousands of revs . you not stalling a direct drive which consumes many many amps as the load goes up and the volts go down 

they just make one heck of a upgrade   never any more rruru rruru rrruru  just whiz .... va va room  

again all down to preference 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes blow the science........ they are just amazingly  better 

the powerlite site gives graphs of amp/volt/stall loads/ etc   which does show some higher current as the loads grow 

but just from the experience of those who fit them   the low current faster crank even with a low battery  wins 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be able to give an impartial view shortly, as I've never had a classic car fitted with a HT starter before, and my shiny new WOSP starter (based on a generic Denso unit) has arrived and is waiting to be fitted. Typical that the starter should arrive in record time, whilst the new power cable is kicking its heels in some sorting office somewhere!

Anyway, I'm sure that 'losing my High Torque virginity' will be all that I've dreamed of for all these years, and expect a suitably emotional and gushing report in due course.

Ian   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...