352 Starter application

[Rob M.]

I have a 1107352 starter with the number, Delco and date stamped on the innner side (against the oil pan). It is also an M 64 date code. What was the original application - don't think it is correct for 396. see pixs

How do you post multiple images? Here are 2 more Thanks,
Rob

[Joe L.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Rob-----

GM #1107352 is correct for a 1965 Corvette with 396. It may also have been used on passenger car 396's, too. It's December, 1964 date code indicates that it was probably used on a very early 396. However, the date code would render it "correct" for most Corvette L-78's built in 1965

[Wayne M.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Rob -- a lot of other 396 L78 components (water pumps, intake manifolds, etc.) were begun to be cast in December of 1964. Nevertheless, this is an interesting piece.

[Bill W.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Hi Rob. I think the Dec date would be fine for early 396 . The starter I have is dated on the outside of the case .I have not seen any stamped on the inside. My stamps look the same as yours. I think your starter was a rebuild due to the drain hole at the case joint and the stamp at the joint. My starter has a 3 bolt nose piece & the date is 5H10..Mr pirkle said it could have been an over the counter part, or he thought a very early 66 425hp part..But he did say it was real & correct. this was at Bloomington many years ago. I would send photos to John Pirkle.....Bill

[Jimmy G.]

Re: 352 Starter application

I think if you ask Mr. John pirkle you will find out this is a Pontaic starter restamped Note that the Stamp is towards the block not where it is readable on a 396 or am I just looking at it incorrectly??

[Rob M.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Yes the stamp in on the inside toward the oil pan. The outside surface where you would expect to see the p/n and date stamping is completely blank. That is what is odd on this piece - also the tapped hole in the bottom by the case split. I am thinking that the original application was not a Corvette? Any thoughts?
Rob

[Joe L.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Rob-----

I thought that your interest was relative to the starter part number, itself, so I did not carefully review the photos you provided. I have now, though.

As far as the location of the stamped part number goes, it is unusual. However, as far as I know, Delco-Remy never made any guarantees with respect to stamping location. Even if the part number location were shown on the original GM specs for the unit, that doesn't mean that it might not vary from time-to-time. This unit appears to be as-original as far as the configuration of the stamping goes, so it would seem that it had to have been done at the factory and was originally installed on some car. The possibility that someone obtained a "blank" starter frame and "stamped it to order" is VERY unlikely. GM or Delco never sold the starter frame as a separate part; they were supplied only with starter assemblies (with numbers stamped on them). All other parts of the starter were available separately, but not the frame.

Also, I originally thought that the GM #1107352 was used on 1965 passenger cars with 396 as well as Corvettes. However, that's not the case. The GM #1107352 starter assembly was unique to 1965 Corvettes with L-78; no other applications across the entire GM car-line that I can find. However, that's not to say that this part number starter, as originally configured, would not be FUNCTIONAL for other applications. As a matter of fact, it would be 100% functional for most 63+ Chevrolet applications with 12-3/4" flywheel and probably a whole lot of other GM applications with 12-3/4" flywheel.

As far as the hole in the bottom of the frame, I've not seen that feature on original starters. If it's, indeed, tapped for a screw, then I think that it was likely added post-manufacture. Easily eliminated, though.

As far as the possibility of a frame that was cleverly "shorn of its original numbers" and restamped elsewhere on the case (to avoid problems caused by restamping the "filled" area), I really doubt it. However, it's not beyond the realm of possibility, especially for a somewhat rare starter part number like this. It's very easy for you to positively determine, though. Just remove the paint from the starter frame using a chemical stripper. Any "re-worked" area will be instantly apparent. Such work, if done very carefully, can be concealed with paint, but once the frame is "naked", it would be impossible for someone to have done it in an indiscernable way.

[Joe L.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Bill-----

What do you mean by a "3 bolt nose piece"? If you are referring to a bellhousing mount starter nose (the only kind that I'm aware of with a 3 bolt configuration), I don't think that any GM #1107352 starter would have been ORIGINALLY manufactured that way. If it was, then it would have a different number stamped on it. The starter nose is one of the variable starter features that determines what the finished part number is. It's, therefore, not possible to have an original starter with different noses but the same starter part number, absent a factory stamping error. Of course, it's VERY possible for noses to get swapped post-manufacture. Then, the part number stamped on the frame no longer identifies the starter configuration.

Also, if any early 1966 L-72 had used the 1107352 starter, then they would have had to also use the 12-3/4" flywheel. To my knowledge, none did. However, I would not absolutely rule it out. If any were made that way, then they would almost certainly have used the 1107352 starter. Any starter for a 1966 L-72 with 14" flywheel (as most, if not all, were made), would have used a starter part number different than 1107352 since it would not have used the same nose as the 1107352.

By the way, 1966 Corvette with L-72 was originally scheduled to be built with the 12-3/4" flywheel. However, as far as I know, this was changed prior to start of PRODUCTION.

[Joe L.]

Correction

I should have said that as far as the 1965 MODEL YEAR WAS CONCERNED, the GM #1107352 starter was unique to Corvettes with L-78. The 1107352 was also used for 1967 Corvettes with L-88 (although, because of its date, this unit could not have been so originally installed). The 1965 Corvette L-78 and the 1967 Corvette L-88 are the only applications I can find for which the 1107352 starter was ever used. It was once a SERVICE-available starter until it was replaced by the GM #1107351 in May, 1970.

So, what's the difference between the 1107352 and the 1107351? Well, the free speed spec for the 1107351 is considerably higher than the 1107352. How they achieved this difference with ALL of the internal parts of both starters being exactly the same is beyond me.

[Bill W.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Joe ,My starter nose has 3 bolt holes . it bolts upward like it should. Robs only has 2. My other starters all also have 3. I have not seen a 2 bolt hole starter .(only 2 out of 3 bolts are used on mine ).....Bill

[Rob M.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Here is a pic of Bill's 3 hole starter nose

[Joe L.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Bill and Rob-----

That's an interesting configuration nose that I've not seen before (or, if I have, I don't recall it). There are 2 elements of configuration that I've not seen. First, the 3 hole, block-mount configuration is unfamiliar to me. Second, it appears to be of cast iron construction. I had not seen that previously for a starter designed for 12-3/4" flywheels. The configuration seen on Rob's starter with the 2 hole, aluminum configuration is what I THOUGHT had been used for all 1962-68 Corvettes with 12-3/4" flywheel. Maybe not, though.

I'd be VERY interested in folks with 1963-68 Corvettes with 327 and 396 and believed original starters checking for the nose configuration. Basically, all that needs to be checked is the "2 hole" versus "3 hole" configuration and/or the aluminum versus cast iron nose construction (a magnet should check this pretty well, although some slight magnetism from the frame might be carried through the aluminum nose).

[Bill W.]

Re: 352 Starter application

Thanks Rob ..I dont no how to post photos..Bill