|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gear reduction starter for W126 diesel?
Does anyone know where I can get a gear reduction starter for an '87 300SDL?
__________________
1987 300SDL 167k The Diplomat- Powertrain Out 1993 300TE 121k 2000 Jetta 193k "we're all civilized 'til the oil runs out" |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Ive heard they sell them here > http://www.mean-green.com/products/starter.html
But, that may only be for the 617, not the 603? Someone? |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
1987 300SDL 167k The Diplomat- Powertrain Out 1993 300TE 121k 2000 Jetta 193k "we're all civilized 'til the oil runs out" |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
ahwell.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
So are these actually a good item? My starter probably has a couple years left (it still does ok in the cold) but when the time comes I'd consider one like that company sells if it would be an improvement. I take it all the advantage is in more consistent cranking/speed? and the lack of huge current draw on the battery? Explain please.
__________________
-diesel is not just a fuel, its a way of life- ![]() '82 300SD 289k -mine Mein Auto ist eine Geldgrube.... (OC-293,855)'90 300E - 145k - wife's (OC- 148,823) '82 300SD 321k -dad's (OC- 325,422) '83 300D 235k - brother's (OC-11/14/10) '83 300SD 307k -dad's (OC-310,300) '93 190E 2.3 - 198k - sister's - (OC- 5/31/10) '82 300SD - 300k+? - thrown rod - Parts car! |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
1987 300SDL 167k The Diplomat- Powertrain Out 1993 300TE 121k 2000 Jetta 193k "we're all civilized 'til the oil runs out" |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well, I think that it has a motor about 1/3 the power of a normal starter but has a gear reduction of 4.4, and the smaller motor is a lot faster, so it more than makes up for the speed reduction, and the overall output of the assembly is probably consistantly faster than using a direct drive starter. The smaller but faster motor means a lot less power is drawn off the battery, so it can run longer and faster, especially in the cold. I wonder what it sounds like, its probably pretty cool.
I'll have to consider getting one in the future.....
__________________
-diesel is not just a fuel, its a way of life- ![]() '82 300SD 289k -mine Mein Auto ist eine Geldgrube.... (OC-293,855)'90 300E - 145k - wife's (OC- 148,823) '82 300SD 321k -dad's (OC- 325,422) '83 300D 235k - brother's (OC-11/14/10) '83 300SD 307k -dad's (OC-310,300) '93 190E 2.3 - 198k - sister's - (OC- 5/31/10) '82 300SD - 300k+? - thrown rod - Parts car! |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
reduction drive starter
My guess/opinion is that with the same battery you are going to get slower cranking speeds with the reduction gear starter. Generally, reduction gear starters are used in applications where the engine is very hard to turn over, that is, more pistons, more compression, etc. My opinion is that if the engineers called for a direct drive starter in the new car, then that is what you need. A new or high quality rebuild (rebuilds are a gamble; they are generally bench-tested under no or low load conditions) direct drive is the way to go, in my opinon.
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
1987 300SDL 167k The Diplomat- Powertrain Out 1993 300TE 121k 2000 Jetta 193k "we're all civilized 'til the oil runs out" |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
The only reduction gear cars/trucks I have had are all Mopar's (Dodge) from the 60's. The V-8's were all relatively large displacement engines with high compression ratios (my '63 Polara 500 383 had 11:1 c/r). So a reduction gear starter was used to turn them over; but, it's a tradeoff, they actually would turn over quicker if they had direct drive starters, but the greater torque with the reduction gear ensured they'd turn over fast enough to start. Without the reduction gearing if the motor didn't fire fairly quickly the battery would run down pretty quick. So, in my opinion, stick with the starter engineered for your particular car, have a good battery / connections, engine in tune. Diesels do like to be spun fast to start and the reduction gearing slows the spin of the flywheel.
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
What if the motor in the reduction starter spins VERY fast, and is actually giving an overall output from the assembly thats faster than a stock starter?
__________________
-diesel is not just a fuel, its a way of life- ![]() '82 300SD 289k -mine Mein Auto ist eine Geldgrube.... (OC-293,855)'90 300E - 145k - wife's (OC- 148,823) '82 300SD 321k -dad's (OC- 325,422) '83 300D 235k - brother's (OC-11/14/10) '83 300SD 307k -dad's (OC-310,300) '93 190E 2.3 - 198k - sister's - (OC- 5/31/10) '82 300SD - 300k+? - thrown rod - Parts car! |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
more torque at near stall speeds than a direct drive starter....a DC motor isn't nearly as efficient at slow speeds...even with a reduction it CAN spin faster that a direct motor..OEM didn't do it becasue these are more complex and therefore more costly to produce. Remember Bean counters rule the roost these days. why pay extra for a gear reduction unit if a direct will do the job acceptibly.
|
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Chrysler had a gear reduction starter for years. You could tell it was a Chrysler a block away.
Never could understand how the engines actually got running. The cranking speed seemed unbelievably slow...............
__________________
1984 300SD 1986 300SDL 1986 300SDL 1998 740iL |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|