I had to go to one for two reasons. The stock starter would spin the motor
only if batter was at peak charge. For me that meant for about the first 6
cranks after taking the charger off as I don't run a charging system at all.
When you start running compression ratios in the 14:1 to 15:1 range the
stock starter didn't cut it. For most people I'd assume the gear reduction
starter is reliability issue. With my TR6 I had one new starter from a
normal supplier fail in a year, and another starter rebuilt by the best guy
in town that lasted 2 years. I don't think I've ever heard of a car with a
gear reduction starter ever having a failure.
Aaron Johnson
#38 F-Prod Spit MkIV Oregon Region SCCA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Rhodes" <krhodes1@maine.rr.com>
To: <spitfires@autox.team.net>
Sent: 03 June, 2003 06:26
Subject: Re: Gear Reduction starter
> Not to be a wise@ss, but why would you bother? My original Lucas starter
> lasted 20+ years, the rebuilt one from Moss\LBCCARCO cost under $100, and
> it spins my high compression 1296 over with gusto. What does the gear
> reduction get you? Other than a big hole in the wallet?
>
> Kevin Rhodes
/// spitfires@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|