Mini starter on 400CI motor

[quikbird]

the powermaster is the one I have

 

[vso737]

the powermaster is the one I have

Hi 'quick bird', I have one of those on top of my radiator on my Model A hot-rod. The dove is suppose to indicate how QUICK the Model A was for its time...…LOL

I see you have the 440 block. I have a 1972 400 CI motor. I'm new to all this MOPAR stuff. My '69 dream car is the FIRST MOPAR I have ever owned and boy have I owned cars since getting my CDL in 1963, when I was in the 9th grade...………..LOL
I've learned a lot in the past couple of days about MOPAR starters. What I really like is the fact the nose of the starters rides in the bellhousing to line the gears up. I've had so many issue with past Chevy starters and shims.
The MOPAR starter is NOT suppose to use any shims.
The starter I purchased is the PWM 9300 model...……..the one that has the adjustable mounting capabilities is the PWM 9463. The negative with this one is lining it up since it does not center itself in the bellhousing.

Here is some info on the PWM starters WITH THE NOSE CONE:
3257 OEM replacement
9300 160 ft. lb., 10:1 comp
9613 180 ft. lb., 13:1 comp
9523 200 ft. lb., 18:1 comp
9533 200 ft. lb., 18:1 comp

You most likely have one of the above.
Maybe this info will help someone in the future.

I'm still trying to decipher my engine PAD STAMPING. I have all the books for CHEVY and used them quite a bit when I restored my 1957 Corvette to "NCRS" standards but when it comes to having info on MOPAR cars, I'm completely lost.
I know my motor is a 400CI. I have come across info that it could be a 1971-72. I also came across info that the 400CI came out in 1972.
The PAD STAMPING should indicate the year and month, I would think.
Any help in this area would be highly appreciated. Would be real nice if I could narrow it down to which MODEL it came in...……….

Picture of the 9463 which has the adjustable mount but NO nose cone. Cost $100 more than the 9300 model.

LG,
Mike

 

[Basketcase]

the powermaster is the one I have

I thought this thread was about starters......

 

[quikbird]

Sorry Dave, can’t use one of those until get the other hip fixed. That will be next month.

 

[Basketcase]

well we can't have you walking in circles.....

 

[quikbird]

Yep, that roll back and forth because the one leg shortened up is pretty funny to watch. I know, I know, funny to watch anyway.

 

[Big John]

it needs a world is flat good ol Chrysler gear reduction starter

One of the greatest things about that starter is it fits everything in the sixties/seventies era with only two exceptions... Hemi 4 speed and some slant six taxis.
There's some more powerful versions, but otherwise, they all bolt up.

 

[Basketcase]

Big what would be different about the taxis?

 

[Big John]

Big what would be different about the taxis?

The 225 /6 with an 11" clutch used the direct drive starter. I guess it's part of the HD clutch/taxi package. I've never seen one and don't know what years, but if you look in your '69 FSM, you'll see the reference to it.

Now that I think on it, there was a /6 truck with a HD clutch (probably the same 11" clutch) that used the direct drive starter too. I have seen one or two of those.

 

[Basketcase]

Thanks

 

[vso737]

Well, it NEVER ends...……….that's what keeps me young...……….LOL

I replaced the ignition switch. Next thing to go was the starter. All I get is a loud CLICK.
So, I purchased a RECONDITIONED mini high torque starter. The parts guy could not tell me who the manufacturer is...…….running the numbers, it appears to be the same one Autozone sells, "Duralast Gold".

NOW, I don't get the CLICK but I do get a strong SPIN and still the motor does NOT turn over and I don't believe it is engaging the flex plate at all.
I replaced the stock starter and used the SHIM that the starter had. I suspect that this is my problem. I don't think the mini starter should have a shim at all.

I will have my mechanic's helper work the ignition while I take a close look at the starter.

Any suggestions highly appreciated...………..THANK YOU in advance.

LG,
Mike

PROBLEM SOLVED:

Not bad, ONLY had to take off the hooker header and do everything TWICE...…...usually, for me, it is at least three times and sometimes four. If I had to do this for a living I would starve to death...………….LOL

I went with the PWM 9300. It has all that 'black plastic' garbage removed. I can tell you, I ONLY have approx. 1/6" between the starter battery post and the block. That inspection digital camera I purchased a while back is great.

I purchased from "Summit Racing". The salesperson was very helpful and the starter did not take long to get. I highly recommend them.

As someone suggested, make sure you install and tighten the cable BEFORE you tighten the starter to the bellhousing. I was able to retighten the nut since it loosened up on me but it is a very difficult task to do with these headers.

I also noticed that I did NOT see any GROUND cables coming from the engine to the frame. I rather err on the side of too many ground cables. A good ground is also recommended with this starter because it pulls a lot more amps than stock. I installed a good ground as well.

A couple of pictures attached.

Thanks again for all the input,
LG,
Mike

 

[quikbird]

Yes indeed, they are a tight bitch to get in

 

[69hemibeep]

Glad I'm not the only one that has to do things twice LOL

 

[quikbird]

only twice????

 

[Basketcase]

that's all hell admit to

 

[Russ69Runner]

A good motor to frame ground is a good thing to have. Found that a lot of cars lost theirs when some one worked on the motor when pulling it. This resulted in lights not working properly and other electrical devices.