Re: [Chrysler300] Re: Power Window Gearbox Failure

Mike Moore 300H

On Sep 5, 2014, at 6:08 AM, Jamie Hyde jamie.hyde@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [Chrysler300] <Chrysler300-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

To quote John Grady

”The little cap of plastic between motor and gear box is there
to throw water off .”

I also found that the early style of Chrysler overhead valve seals works well to replace that little cap. Those valve seals are the ones that come in the big Felpro complete gasket kit that you did not know what they fit. I have collected several bags of them. In my case the little water slingers were broken, so when I took my boxes apart I replaced them with the valve seals. Additional notes to consider, I had one motor that “looked fine” but when I bench tested the motor unloaded, it turned ok but the motor exhibited a large current draw and the circuit breaker opened. I removed the rubber motor coating to examine the internals and found that the parts were rusted beyond belief, I could not save it, and had to use a parts motor that had broken mounting ears. I think that the overall design of the gear box and cantilevered motor is bad. You have this heavy motor and gearbox hanging down inside the door and if one were to slam the door closed in a fit of anger the motor breaks off the mounting ears. In one of my front doors the motor was laying down inside the door just a whirring away and doing nothing when I attempted to lower the window. I went to a junk yard looking for a modern solution and I took about thirty doors apart searching for something that I could make work. The way the motor and gear box is mounted and the drive gear makes it a unique part and nothing I found would work, even modified. I contacted a former club member who sold me a ton of parts. In those parts boxes were a complete set of 63 motors but with broken ears, bad gears, or rust, it took me 8 of them to make a set of four. I discovered that the 62 motors and gear boxes are different than the 63’s as the 63 motors and cases are all the same, front to back and right to left, where as the 62’s have a right and left gear box. Also do not mix the gear case casting numbers up if you dissemble all the boxes at one time like I did and wonder why two out of the four box’s would bind upon reassembly. Look at the housing and you will see a number 5, or a 2 inside a circle. When I inadvertently took the cover from a “five” and placed it on a “two” housing it was binding, I swapped on the other cover and all is well with both of them. Look at the Merle Wolfer article and you can see the 5 casting number clearly displayed in one of the images. With my eight gear boxes I only saw a 5, or a 2 casting number used, the part numbers are the same. I wire brushed and painted the motor housing after is pealed the rubber coating off then used silicone to seal the top of the motor, also count the shims on the motor shaft when you open it up, they have an order to them. I polished the drive motor shaft, cleaned the commutator, and also placed a few drops of oil on the felt pad in the lower motor bearing cap that is only accessible from the inside. There is a “drain port” on the lower of brush side of the motor case that was covered in the rubber factory applied rubber coating. I uncovered, and cleaned it out so I did not have to drill a drain hole as John recommends. I also discovered that there are slight differences in the actual motor housings suggesting that there may be two different suppliers or manufacturing revisions during production. I did not mix housings and motor shafts up, I selected the longest brushes and soldered them onto the best motors. And people wonder why it takes so long to restore, or repair one of these cars.

Jamie Hyde