Author Topic: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?  (Read 3234 times)

pbf777

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #15 on: August 07, 2020, 01:24:10 PM »
During the engine rebuild process, I was so focused on what was being done to the block that I had the wrong ring installed on my flywheel (157 instead of 164) at the machine shop, and I missed it.  That would explain why my starter is now being an issue. 


     Please realize that my purpose is to assist; and I suppose anything's possible but,............ in this instance of the 157 vs. the 164 tooth ring gears, one cannot mount the wrong ring gear to the flywheel as the inside diameters are not the same (not even almost) which is critical as the ring is an interference press-fit or heat-shrunk in place!         :o

Quote
Since I have the rebuilt motor and transmission already back in the car (getting the T pan to clear the radiator support was something else, I'm not pulling to the motor to change out the flywheel).


     Well, let's start with the 164T ring gear & flywheel will generally in my experience not fit into the O.E.M. aluminum 157T application bellhousings,............... and the 164T bellhousings & separator plates will misposition the stater in relation to the 157T flywheel & ring gear.             ;)

     So, I'm just a little confused here, but somehow I'm fearful that as I read your description, it just ain't gonna work!  But maybe I'm wrong, but maybe I'm not?              ::)

     Scott.
     



pbf777

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #16 on: August 07, 2020, 01:55:10 PM »
Sounds like a hairy situation to me!


      No, not really to bad,.............that is unless you've got a hairball!         ::)

      Scott.

Jbrooks

  • SAAC Member
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #17 on: August 11, 2020, 11:25:07 PM »
Scott,

To be completely transparent, I'm very new with this engine rebuild.  When I tore down my motor, I found that I had bad head gaskets and piston rings, which was causing me to burn both oil and anti-freeze.  With that being said, I have completely loved tearing down and building this motor back together (with a help of a knowledgeable on building engines (Pontiac guy) friend), as I have learned so much on how special these 289 K codes truly are.  So I am learning here, and I greatly appreciate the help.

On the fly wheel, I didn't know that the 164 and 157 teeth flywheels would be different sizes.  I assumed that the ring would be the same size, but one just had 164 count vs one with 157 count; so I learned something new.  I do have the aluminum bell housing (see attached picture), and the ring that was installed on my flywheel is 157.  Tonight, I installed the Ford Performance mini-starter (FMS-M-11000-B51).  When I tried to start the car, I can hear the starter spinning; however, there was no engagement with the flywheel. 

To try another starter, I ran over to O'Reiley's and purchased their Ford Motorsport 157 teeth standard starter.  When I tried to start the car with this starter, I could hear the starter spinning, but it wasn't contacting the flywheel at all.  At this point, I have no freaking clue what is going on.  As I mentioned before, my original starter would grind when I attempted to start the car (no damage to the flywheel, see picture taken tonight) after the rebuild (I had no issues with the starter before I pulled the motor); which lead me to believe the 164 tooth count was the  issue instead of 157 (now i know that my flywheel has to be for a 157 tooth count). 

Any help would be greatly appreciated, as I'm not sure what my next steps need to be.  I verified that the ring that the machine shop installed is for a 289 flywheel with a 157 tooth count. 
67 GT350 #2260
“If you ain’t first, you’re last”

shelbydoug

  • SAAC Member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4123
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #18 on: August 12, 2020, 07:27:31 AM »
The Tilton type mini-starters work great.

There are a number of companies making them including a Summit Racing in-house version for less money.

They are all based on a Toyota starter. I've got the Titlon brand and I just can't kill them. I have a pile of Ford starters morto bene.

The exception to that is the Accell starter which is made in the pattern of the original Ford version. It's a great starter also. That one is in my Pantera.

You COULD paint that one to look stock if you want to be a tricky devil?
« Last Edit: August 12, 2020, 08:57:01 AM by shelbydoug »
68 GT350 Lives Matter!

Cobrask8

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 337
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #19 on: August 12, 2020, 08:14:34 AM »
My current 331, based on a 68 302 block is a very "Big" motor, roughly 450 HP, has 10.6:1 comp. A regular starter would not spin it, especially hot. Did all the grounds, battery, everything electrical.

Used a mini-starter, did the trick, spins it and starts, no matter the temp. Get the issues straightened out, and use/enjoy the mini-starter

shelbydoug

  • SAAC Member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4123
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #20 on: August 12, 2020, 08:51:44 AM »
My current 331, based on a 68 302 block is a very "Big" motor, roughly 450 HP, has 10.6:1 comp. A regular starter would not spin it, especially hot. Did all the grounds, battery, everything electrical.

Used a mini-starter, did the trick, spins it and starts, no matter the temp. Get the issues straightened out, and use/enjoy the mini-starter

+++1

It will keep going even when the starter solenoid is smoking because it is so hot. 347 here on my 68-302 block.
68 GT350 Lives Matter!

KR Convertible

  • SAAC Member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 574
  • Paul Orr
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #21 on: August 12, 2020, 10:17:37 AM »
In your last picture, it looks like the flywheel may be too small.  Try putting your starter in the sheet metal plate without the bellhousing on and see if the starter gear looks like it will mesh with the flywheel gear.

Jbrooks

  • SAAC Member
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #22 on: August 12, 2020, 12:29:43 PM »
In your last picture, it looks like the flywheel may be too small.  Try putting your starter in the sheet metal plate without the bellhousing on and see if the starter gear looks like it will mesh with the flywheel gear.

The flywheel is the original one for the car.  The only thing that has changed is the ring was changed out due to the previous well showing some minor wear, so I changed out the ring since I pulled the motor.  Right now, I have everything back in the car, and I'm just trying to start it for the first time.  If I end up dropping the transmission (if no other solution is out there), I'll try this idea, thanks!
67 GT350 #2260
“If you ain’t first, you’re last”

pbf777

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #23 on: August 12, 2020, 12:48:13 PM »
     O.K., the first question to be answered: "Is" or "is not" this the flywheel, currently bolted to the back of the engine, "THE" flywheel that was attached to said engine prior to your initial disassembly, with the sole servicing of cleaning, surfacing and a new ring gear installed?  And are you sure?

     Next:  Is the bellhousing currently attached to the back of the engine the one that resided there prior to your initial disassembly?  And again, are you sure?            ???

     Assuming that this vehicle was, as far as the starter cranking the engine over, operating properly before, I'm suspecting that you have the mismatch installation of the 157 tooth flywheel crammed into the 164 tooth application bellhousing?  If your car had a 164 tooth flywheel prior (this is an example of why one should always retain all of the old parts, for reference, at least until the entire repair, restoration, modification, etc. is concluded)  but now has a 157 tooth wheel, then this is the problem!           :o

     And if so, no brand of starter motor is going to work, none!             :(

     Now, this is what one would label as a "wild-ass-guess" (highly techno. terminology   ::)  ), as I'm not there making the observations, but I think I would rule this possibility out, before proceeding in any other venture.

     Perhaps one could acquire the engineering/casting numbers from flywheel and the bell housing in order to aid in its' identification? In the case of the flywheel, look for numbers stamped into the outer inertial ring band facing forward (toward engine block) and exposed to observation thru the starter opening upon rotation of the engine. Of the bellhousing, this may require removal of the transmission, as these numbers if not observed elsewhere, may be present on this rear facing surface currently shrouded by the transmission, but we,re trying to avoid the removal of the engine here.        ;)

     Scott.
           

TedS

  • SAAC Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 166
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #24 on: August 12, 2020, 03:35:23 PM »
I'm going to jump in with limited knowledge and crappy memory but here goes:
I once got a replacement starter for my 289 4 speed and the alignment boss on the starter would not go into the hole on the bellhousing plate. As I remember I was given a starter for an auto instead of 4 speed by mistake.  If my memory is correct, could OPs original starter been having bendix issues therefore grinding. The replacement starter was mistakingly for an auto therefore won't fit the whole and won't engage ring gear? I look forward to my failing memory and poor knowledge being corrected where necessary.

Jbrooks

  • SAAC Member
  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #25 on: August 12, 2020, 04:12:20 PM »
     O.K., the first question to be answered: "Is" or "is not" this the flywheel, currently bolted to the back of the engine, "THE" flywheel that was attached to said engine prior to your initial disassembly, with the sole servicing of cleaning, surfacing and a new ring gear installed?  And are you sure?

     Next:  Is the bellhousing currently attached to the back of the engine the one that resided there prior to your initial disassembly?  And again, are you sure?            ???

     Assuming that this vehicle was, as far as the starter cranking the engine over, operating properly before, I'm suspecting that you have the mismatch installation of the 157 tooth flywheel crammed into the 164 tooth application bellhousing?  If your car had a 164 tooth flywheel prior (this is an example of why one should always retain all of the old parts, for reference, at least until the entire repair, restoration, modification, etc. is concluded)  but now has a 157 tooth wheel, then this is the problem!           :o

     And if so, no brand of starter motor is going to work, none!             :(

     Now, this is what one would label as a "wild-ass-guess" (highly techno. terminology   ::)  ), as I'm not there making the observations, but I think I would rule this possibility out, before proceeding in any other venture.

     Perhaps one could acquire the engineering/casting numbers from flywheel and the bell housing in order to aid in its' identification? In the case of the flywheel, look for numbers stamped into the outer inertial ring band facing forward (toward engine block) and exposed to observation thru the starter opening upon rotation of the engine. Of the bellhousing, this may require removal of the transmission, as these numbers if not observed elsewhere, may be present on this rear facing surface currently shrouded by the transmission, but we,re trying to avoid the removal of the engine here.        ;)

     Scott.
           
Scott,

Yes, this is the flywheel that was on my engine before and after the rebuild.  Anything is possible, but the flywheel appeared to be the same one that I dropped off.  It's possible that it was changed out, but there weren't any other 67 Ford blocks being worked on when my motor was there.  I did a quick visual inspection of the balancer, crank, counter weight, and flywheel to make sure they were the same.  I went to the machine shop and found previous flywheel ring and verified that it 157 count.  I check out the stamped numbers that you referenced.  In short, it looks like I'll be dropping the transmission here soon. 

Thanks for the help. 

I'm also going to test the collection of starters that I have now, and see how the bendix is actuating.  In short, I just want to start my dang car...
67 GT350 #2260
“If you ain’t first, you’re last”

Bob Gaines

  • SAAC Member
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5536
  • Original Posts:14706
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #26 on: August 12, 2020, 06:12:56 PM »
     O.K., the first question to be answered: "Is" or "is not" this the flywheel, currently bolted to the back of the engine, "THE" flywheel that was attached to said engine prior to your initial disassembly, with the sole servicing of cleaning, surfacing and a new ring gear installed?  And are you sure?

     Next:  Is the bellhousing currently attached to the back of the engine the one that resided there prior to your initial disassembly?  And again, are you sure?            ???

     Assuming that this vehicle was, as far as the starter cranking the engine over, operating properly before, I'm suspecting that you have the mismatch installation of the 157 tooth flywheel crammed into the 164 tooth application bellhousing?  If your car had a 164 tooth flywheel prior (this is an example of why one should always retain all of the old parts, for reference, at least until the entire repair, restoration, modification, etc. is concluded)  but now has a 157 tooth wheel, then this is the problem!           :o

     And if so, no brand of starter motor is going to work, none!             :(

     Now, this is what one would label as a "wild-ass-guess" (highly techno. terminology   ::)  ), as I'm not there making the observations, but I think I would rule this possibility out, before proceeding in any other venture.

     Perhaps one could acquire the engineering/casting numbers from flywheel and the bell housing in order to aid in its' identification? In the case of the flywheel, look for numbers stamped into the outer inertial ring band facing forward (toward engine block) and exposed to observation thru the starter opening upon rotation of the engine. Of the bellhousing, this may require removal of the transmission, as these numbers if not observed elsewhere, may be present on this rear facing surface currently shrouded by the transmission, but we,re trying to avoid the removal of the engine here.        ;)

     Scott.
           
Scott,

Yes, this is the flywheel that was on my engine before and after the rebuild.  Anything is possible, but the flywheel appeared to be the same one that I dropped off.  It's possible that it was changed out, but there weren't any other 67 Ford blocks being worked on when my motor was there.  I did a quick visual inspection of the balancer, crank, counter weight, and flywheel to make sure they were the same.  I went to the machine shop and found previous flywheel ring and verified that it 157 count.  I check out the stamped numbers that you referenced.  In short, it looks like I'll be dropping the transmission here soon. 

Thanks for the help. 

I'm also going to test the collection of starters that I have now, and see how the bendix is actuating.  In short, I just want to start my dang car...
Before you go to the trouble of dropping the transmission confirm the engineering number on the bellhousing. That will determine if you have the 65-67 or 68 -up bell .They both have C5 numbers but the suffix is different. One version of the bell has the engineering numbers on the driver side and the other on the passenger side. I suspect a different problem and a possible relative simple solution.It is hard to diagnose sometimes by remote especially if you don't have all of the information. I will stand by.
Bob Gaines,Shelby Enthusiast, Shelby Collector , Shelby Concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby

pbf777

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #27 on: August 12, 2020, 07:59:51 PM »
       Common examples of the period as I recall, and perhaps there are others:

       Casting/engineering number: C5DA-6394-A, located on the starter cone (right side) and I think I've had them with numbering also on the flange of the starter kick-out, facing rearward;  this should be 157 tooth application.
                                                     
                                                      C5AA-6394-B, located on the bellhousing adjacent fork opening and I have seen examples both on the "bell" and on the flange facing rearward; this should be 164 tooth application.

                                                      These units do not require the removal of the transmission to acquire these numbers, but there are others, although perhaps out of period.           
                                                       
        Over the decades, I quit searching for the numbers (and sometimes they're illegible or missing) as I can discern the 157t vs. 164t application by just looking at it (with good pictures or better with bell in hand).           8)

        But still do try to acquire the numbers (if pressent?) on the flywheel also.                :)

        B.T.W. did you read and follow the instructions for the modification of the electrical wiring strategy for the M-11000-B51 starter assy.?             ???

       Scott.
       

67350#1242

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #28 on: August 12, 2020, 09:20:52 PM »
Quote
To get the car started tonight, I tried a rebuilt starter, but it was 3/100” bigger than my original starter and didn’t mate up to the flex plate.

Was this rebuilt starter a "long nose" or a "short nose" style? From the pictures the distance from the block plate to the ring gear appears to be about 3/4" which would indicate a long nose style.
The short nose style also has a slightly larger flange on the mounting surface to block plate as you indicate above.
Forget about "auto" and "manual" lingo when describing these starters.  The 157 and 160 tooth ring gears all require the "auto" or "long nose" starters. This applies to both auto and manual transmission.
The only application for the "short nose" or "manual" starter is with the larger diameter 164 tooth flywheel manual trans.  Here is a link to Speedway Motors pdf explaining.
https://static.speedwaymotors.com/pdf/91067430.pdf
« Last Edit: August 12, 2020, 09:22:56 PM by 67350#1242 »
67 GT350  SJ 02/01/67  Gray 4spd A/C
67 Coupe  SJ 11/16/66  White Auto A/C PDB

TedS

  • SAAC Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 166
    • View Profile
Re: 289 Starter needs to be changed out, anyone try a mini starter?
« Reply #29 on: August 12, 2020, 10:10:44 PM »
Quote
To get the car started tonight, I tried a rebuilt starter, but it was 3/100” bigger than my original starter and didn’t mate up to the flex plate.

Was this rebuilt starter a "long nose" or a "short nose" style? From the pictures the distance from the block plate to the ring gear appears to be about 3/4" which would indicate a long nose style.
The short nose style also has a slightly larger flange on the mounting surface to block plate as you indicate above.
Forget about "auto" and "manual" lingo when describing these starters.  The 157 and 160 tooth ring gears all require the "auto" or "long nose" starters. This applies to both auto and manual transmission.
The only application for the "short nose" or "manual" starter is with the larger diameter 164 tooth flywheel manual trans.  Here is a link to Speedway Motors pdf explaining.
https://static.speedwaymotors.com/pdf/91067430.pdf

I figured out where I got the auto vs manual lingo. There are numerous threads on the VMF forum on this subject. Those threads say some, perhaps outdated, parts house books had a different part number for each and they were reversed, or in some way wrong which resulted in getting the wrong starter for a manual. The first symptom was it wouldn't fit the whole in the plate.  I had that very experience in about 1970. Long nose vs short nose may also be in that mix.