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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 03 June, 2003 06:26 Subject: Re: Gear Reduction starter > Not to be a [EMAIL PROTECTED], 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 /// [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list /// Send admin requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] /// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool /// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive /// Send list postings to [EMAIL PROTECTED] /// Edit your replies! If they include this trailer, they will NOT be sent.
