Starter bolt woes

Bigbondo007

Member
49
39
18
Location
Arabi, ga
Just picked up a 1984 m1028 with 26k original miles and someone did a botch job on the time sert install. Anyway I converted to helicoil with great results and a problem occurred to me. With the original holes drilled to 13/32 the knurl will no longer contact the block below the helicoil correctly I'm assuming. Has anything been designed to correct the issue? Or should I ignore it? Are bolt shims available?(wrap around)

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

dependable

Well-known member
1,668
98
48
Location
Tisbury, Massachusetts
I had a civilian chevy with a 6.2 I had to helicoil years ago. I never added any shims, and did not have any further problems with starter bolts, drove the truck a long time after repair, truck retired due to rust, still have the engine. I used a gear reduction starter, since they put less strain on the block.

It might be a good idea to check the repaired starter bolts once in a while, make sure they aren't backing out, when you are under there for other maintenance.
 

cucvrus

Well-known member
8,927
1,917
113
Location
Jonestown Pennsylvania
I used a gear reduction starter, since they put less strain on the block.
Please explain how a gear reduction starter puts less strain on the block. I am anxious to hear this. Where would the strain be transformed to? Just asking. Reminds me of which weighs more a ton of bricks or a ton of feathers.
 

2deuce

Well-known member
1,352
36
48
Location
portland, oregon
I was wondering the same thing and the only thing I could think of is possibly the GR starter might start more gradual at the instant it begins. If it does, it can't be heard at least by me.
I would say a ton of bricks weighs more than a ton of feathers, most, if not all the time. That is because if someone says they have a ton of feathers they mean they have a lot of feathers, and didn't weigh them. That reminds me where someone was asked on TV, if you're traveling 80 miles per hour, how far did you go in 1 hour? and they had no clue.
 

Bigbondo007

Member
49
39
18
Location
Arabi, ga
Compared to the factory starter the gr I have will spin the heck out of the engine. I like reduced strain on my batteries and cables as well. However I find it hard to believe that my 2 new 6tl batteries would care otherwise. The second the light goes out I hit the key and this thing starts faster than my '14 gmc with no smoke. I'm loving the 26k original miles on the truck.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

2deuce

Well-known member
1,352
36
48
Location
portland, oregon
How does it provide the reduced strain? Do you feel it is more efficient? It takes the same amount of energy to spin the motor a certain speed. It seems like adding a gear is going to lose efficiency. I have used both starters and feel the direct drive starter is built more robust. It seems to be able to handle more amps at reduced voltage, but if you have a low battery situation burning up either starter is easy to do. I was just wondering if the GR starter may start a tiny bit slower at the instant you turn on the key to give the reduced strain?
 

Bigbondo007

Member
49
39
18
Location
Arabi, ga
The same way a manual trans reduces strain on the engine. Or an electric golf cart motor being attached to a differential. 3:1 or lower is always better on an electrical system than 1:1. Take a lower Amp motor that is wound for higher rpm and attach it to a gearbox(starter drive) and enjoy lower amperage and electrical strain.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

dependable

Well-known member
1,668
98
48
Location
Tisbury, Massachusetts
The gear reduction starters weigh significantly less, so they might be more advisable to hang on a helicoil repair. They may torque a little less too, as they spin a little slower.

The argument about which is better has been done here before several times, I say, use whatever type you have or like. Some of mine are direct, some are geared, makes no difference to me as long as they start the truck. If I had a messed up starter mount again, I'd go with the gear reduction just to be safe. If the helicoil ever fails, the next set of options to save the engine are considerably more involved.
 

JD4044M

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
217
286
63
Location
Okanogan, WA. 98840
I have tore the starter in haft racing off road in my 75 heavy 1/2 ton 350 block nose diving it off a jump that stopped the truck. The bolts held no problem just busted the nose off the starter. I have never had a problems with starter bolts on my Chevys and I have a 468 in my 1 ton 79 4x4 Dually. I have owned a lot of Chevy Trucks in my life. I just replaced the starters on 2 - 454s due to being worn from wear and heat. I went with a High Torque Starter in my 79 but not a Gear Reduction. Wondering if you had a loose bolt at one time causing the threads to strip?
 

2deuce

Well-known member
1,352
36
48
Location
portland, oregon
Dependable, the weight and the lower speed benefits make sense to me. With a GR starter needing to run faster because of the reduction, it probably takes just an instant longer to reach full speed, which would give it a slightly softer start and a lower amp draw at the start. It is starting to make a bit more sense to me.
 

Bigbondo007

Member
49
39
18
Location
Arabi, ga
The po shot ether to it and blew the starter off, went to the parts store and someone gave him sbc 3/8x16 bolts. Shot ether to it again and snatched the threads out. Sits for 15yrs till I get it and the enjoyment and proper repair began.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

chevymike

Active member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
392
174
43
Location
San Diego, CA
I have tore the starter in haft racing off road in my 75 heavy 1/2 ton 350 block nose diving it off a jump that stopped the truck. The bolts held no problem just busted the nose off the starter. I have never had a problems with starter bolts on my Chevys and I have a 468 in my 1 ton 79 4x4 Dually. I have owned a lot of Chevy Trucks in my life. I just replaced the starters on 2 - 454s due to being worn from wear and heat. I went with a High Torque Starter in my 79 but not a Gear Reduction. Wondering if you had a loose bolt at one time causing the threads to strip?
You cannot compare the load on the starter between a gas and diesel engine. Even a rowdy SBC or BBC is likely no more than 12:1 compression, most are below 11:1. Diesels are typically 18:1 to 21:1 compression ratios. You are basically doubling the load on the starter and hence starter bolts. If the bolts are not torqued correctly, the threads have stretched or no front brace is installed, a diesel can easily put enough load to break the bolts or pull the threads out.
 

JD4044M

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
217
286
63
Location
Okanogan, WA. 98840
Did not know it was a Diesel was not up on the newer Chevy engines that is what you get for being old school. I do know my Dodge 2005 Hemi had the starter quit on it. It has the reduction starter. I found one bolt missing from when they put a new clutch in it for me!! When I tried to put one in I found it was sheared off and I removed the threaded piece. The starter was held in by one bolt for a couple years and it stayed there. So the gear reduction ones must be easier on the process of starting for only one bolt to hold it in place. I looked up the 6.2 and could of swore it was a Gas and thought to myself when did the military go all diesel I know they are now? My Daughters Military Dodge Pick Up is Gas and I think a 72. Now I know better just looked it up there is a 6.2 Gas and Diesel and 22.5-1 compression on the Diesel. My 79 is the newest Chevy I have owned most were much older. My last Chevy I have had 13 years and still have is my 79 1 ton 4x4 Dulley.CHEV%2027.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks