Lots of good Tech info from y'all.! At the end of the day, bigger / heavier is best on Battery cables, which is NO place to economize; may be harder to find these days, but truck suppliers have heavy ones. Clean terminals / connections diligently. Those electric fuel pump suggestions will help too. Rick Sent from my BlackBerry - the most secure mobile device - via the Rogers Network
Hi Dan, just some EE here; the output of an electric motor is set by the volume of the windings, so “rewinding to get more output” for the same duty cycle is not physically possible. However they may put heavier wire in, but that is going to be fewer turns (same winding space restricts that) you end up with a lower nominal volt starter, of the same power, still has same “rated” watts (or HP) out as before ..unless you beat it up by using same prior voltage which makes windings get really hot and burn up, as heat goes as the square of current, and 6v will force 1.5 x more current into a 4 v winding. . Which means heat per unit area of copper will go up, if you run your now 4 V starter on 6 volts. And brushes etc all overloaded. Not much room. Just saying… But might get away with it, if no long cranking spell.
Probably best tech , but not aesthetic/ appearance solution-- if keeping car 6 volts ---is the old 6/12 relay that Whitney once sold, 2 - 6v batteries, , one on each side? …. Or 12v period.
But 6 V is good and works if all is correct inside starter motor. . Short heavy leads help. Which might mean stock 6 v rebuilt starter not souped up in any way, just new brushes and brush springs, cleaned up commutator, mica below copper . After all , millions and millions of cars started every day all winter in Minnesota on 6V from the 20’s to the 50’s. It works fine. While on this, someone mentioned 6V pertronics. Conceptually that is a can of worms, as a transistor switch drops 1 volt, you only have 6, and energy in spark goes as square of volts on coil too. 25 compared to 36 ratio of spark strength loss not so good, = keep the points at 6 V.
Also got into this on Studebakers, where a few people had gotten away with , and recommended just use 6V starter on 12v; But what happens there is it hits flywheel so hard it can break tooth off, as about 4 X the torque (man does it crank! ) (old small 6 cylinders) ; big redesign by them in ~56 when they went to 12v on flathead six involving different ring gear count , flywheel, pinion and starter .
I remember vividly GM (olds) V8’s of early fifties developed stretched timing chains, which drastically slowed down cranking , (not sure why, but it did? Late valve action? ) , and I remember putting a 6/12 Whitney deal in a friend’s ? 50 Olds. Sort of started it, but problem in engine remains. The point being a high mileage hemi might need a new timing chain .
The starter in question may have been on last legs, but really on a DC motor, all that really goes , wear wise, if windings are intact are the brushes and the springs pushing them, --leads to burned / dirty commutator bars--(forgetting obvious bearing failures) ; so a “more powerful starter” if of the old style will have to be a larger, heavier or longer starter. I learned about that here on forum , where 300F has a heavier (larger) starter, several sizes interchange, were used in 60 Chrysler, I did not know that. My car had a wrong one. . But experience with 6V Packards , 1937, they crank like a 12v car, big starters well done. New design “small” hi performance starters use permanent magnets and significant gearing down within the starter, a better way to get at this, but I do not think made for 6 V. . Might be worth a try….And then you have the Ford flathead guys with the 8 v setup…
Just don’t want someone to be parted from a lot of $ without understanding the trades here.
John G From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dan300f dan300f@xxxxxxx [Chrysler300]
Hi all:
If hard starting is a problem and the starter seems to be working overtime, then besides installing a heavier cable, perhaps the starter itself needs a little extra muscle. About 40 years ago, I invented and patented a 4 cyl. 2-stroke engine. I designed it with a compression ratio of 17:1 as I was going to feed the cylinders with a very lean fuel mixture. None of the starters I tried could turn the engine over so I had a shop put a few more windings on it. The extra power I got from the starter really made the engine spin. I never had a problem after that. None of my test runnings exceeded 4,000 rpm's as I was afraid of it flying apart. I proved that one could run an engine on gasoline and a 17:1 compression ratio. At 4,000 rpm, the exhaust (no exhaust pipes or muffler) was no hotter than blowing breath against your hand in front of your mouth. We even had it in a car for test driving. But, the engine is now a $40,000 boat anchor sitting in my garage because all the companies that my rep contacted had basically the same comment as Ford, i.e., "Not invented here."
So, if I had a car with a 6-volt system, I would certainly have my starter reworked.
Good luck.
Dan Reitz Bell Canyon, CA _____________________________________________________________________ In a message dated 6/26/2019 6:48:27 AM Pacific Standard Time, Chrysler300-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
__._,_.___ Posted by: Rick Haynes <rdr_inc@xxxxxxxxxx> To send a message to this group, send an email to: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or go to https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/all/manage/edit For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang __,_._,___ |