Paul,
I used an '89 or newer Trooper starter with part
number 16878. This from the 4 cylinder motor. Not a 6
cylinder. There are some concerns from Peter C. about
the bevel on the ring gear. I am not worried and am
trying it. As you can see these emails from the
archives are 1 year or so old and I have not heard of
any one saying their isuzu starter was not working
with the ring gear.
John Holliday
Here are some emails from the archives I used to
select my starter:
Date: 30-Mar-2000 12:46:14
From
Subject: Re: This Isuzu Trooper Starter Conversion
Thing
I recently put an Isuzu starter in my ' 67 vintage
race Midget based on the
info from some old List messages. I got it at Pep
Boys, but Advance Auto
also said they had it. I asked for an '89 or newer
Trooper starter with
part number 16878. That is the key, it must be that
part number regardless
of what car it's for. It bolted right up to the rear
engine plate as though
it was made for it. I had to install a short jumper
wire for the trigger
circuit but the counterman showed me how to do that.
It does, however,
require some sheetmetal to be bashed in at the corner
of the footwell. The
previous threads included the right instructions, i.e.
heat the area with a
propane torch and use a hammer to dent the corner
until the starter clears.
It did take a few in and outs of the engine to get it
right.
Somebody subsequently mentioned that the direction of
the bevel on the
starter drive is counter to the bevel on the flywheel
and that this may
cause problems eventually. Makes sense, but I am
keeping my fingers crossed
that it won't. Next time I pull the engine I will
check it out. The starter
cost $89.99 at PepBoys and $73 at Advance Auto. Much
cheaper than the $250
to $300 at the Spridget race shops and a better
starter than the $50 Lucas
rebuilt. In the short term, I'm happy with it.
Date: 28-Mar-2000 17:28:41
From
Subject: Re: This Isuzu Trooper Starter Conversion
Thing
Well Mike, I've seen one that was bolted on to a 1275
Midget. Bob
Spruck has one. As he detailed in a post to the list
last week, the
starter is a straight bolt on but does require some
hammering of the
outer skin of the right footwell. I visited his shop
to see this and
take photos. I ended up not taking photos because the
visual
difference is so slight that I did not think that it
would come out
in a photo. I don't know if this qualifies as a
_reliable_ source or
not - Bob's reliable, I'm pretty fuzzy!
Hope this helps,
Jeff
Date: 28-Mar-2000 18:05:00
From
Subject: Re: This Isuzu Trooper Starter Conversion
Thing
4 Cylinder.... 4 cylinder!
NOT V6! 16178 is for a 4 Cylinder Trooper
86-91: Rodeo 91-97 Isuzu
p'up 87-95 Amigo 89-94 Passport (by Honda (right!))
94-97
There I'm better now.
Cheerio! Peter C
Date: 29-Mar-2000 10:46:11
From
Subject: RE: This Isuzu Trooper Starter Conversion
Thing
Listers one and all,
I had to leave shortly after my post and wasn't able
to follow-up Tuesday.
1) An apology, I typo'd. The number in question is
Lester #16878
2) Fits those Isuzu trucks I mentioned 2300 & 2600
4-cylinder gas engines.
3) I compared it this morning to a Spridget starter
and I can see how
someone would say it will work.
4) There IS a but......
The Spridget starter drive, at rest, is on the
transmission side of the
flywheel. When the starter is energized, the drive
moves toward the ring
gear, back toward the body of the starter, toward the
engine. Both the ring
gear and the drive have beveled teeth designed to
assist engagement. Hence,
the bevel on the ring gear teeth are on the tranny
side.
The Isuzu starter (and most "modern" starters) are
designed so the drive,
when the starter is energized, is moved away from the
body of the starter.
The drive moves toward the transmission. Therefore, if
this starter were
actually designed for this application, the ring gear
would have to have
its teeth beveled on the engine side.
Apparently, experience has shown that this works
anyway. Being in the
profession, I can not recommend it. There will
necessarily be wear
different from the original design, and the engagement
of bevel to
non-bevel teeth is, er.... contrary to convention.
YMMV
Peter C
ps. I would probably try it on my own car, though.
I'd think about
beveling the teeth on the ring gear.
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
|