'64 SB Starter Question

[Garry E.]

I recently had the internals on my 327/300 SB starter "upgraded" to the internals of a BB starter. Now, it clearly cranks with more torque than before. However, it also appears that the starter may be moving out of alignment with the flex plate (I have a PG trans...) after the intial start due to the added torque. The starter also has a new "nose piece". Here are my questions:

1) I'm using my original mounting bolts. Should these be changed? If so, are there different mounting bolts for BB starters or are they the same for SB starters? Any recommendations as to where to buy these?
2) I'm not using shims under the mounting bolts. Should I consider adding these to see if they make a difference?
3) What is the recommended torque for the starter bolts? I'm temped to tighten them to "white knuckle" tightness to prevent any movement of the starter body, but I don't think this is correct. Also, if shims are needed, over tightening the bolts could negate the value of the shims....

Any thoughts on this matter

Garry Eastwood
#38705

[Jean C.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

[quote=Garry Eastwood (38705);474287]I recently had the internals on my 327/300 SB starter "upgraded" to the internals of a BB starter.

Garry, why was it necessary or desired to change the config of the 327/300 starter ? Just wondering because I have not heard of 327/300's having a problem with cranking over with the stock starter. Is this a Powerglide issue? Thanks.
Best regards,

[Joe L.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

I recently had the internals on my 327/300 SB starter "upgraded" to the internals of a BB starter. Now, it clearly cranks with more torque than before. However, it also appears that the starter may be moving out of alignment with the flex plate (I have a PG trans...) after the intial start due to the added torque. The starter also has a new "nose piece". Here are my questions:

1) I'm using my original mounting bolts. Should these be changed? If so, are there different mounting bolts for BB starters or are they the same for SB starters? Any recommendations as to where to buy these?
2) I'm not using shims under the mounting bolts. Should I consider adding these to see if they make a difference?
3) What is the recommended torque for the starter bolts? I'm temped to tighten them to "white knuckle" tightness to prevent any movement of the starter body, but I don't think this is correct. Also, if shims are needed, over tightening the bolts could negate the value of the shims....

Any thoughts on this matter

Garry Eastwood
#38705

Garry------


A starter used for 63-67 Powerglide applications should use the same starter nose as used for manual transmission applications. It should be an ALUMINUM nose with "straight across" bolt pattern. It uses one bolt of 1.84" length and one bolt of 4.65" length. The configuration of the starter nose is more-or-less independent of the starter's internal parts. So, whether it's a standard torque or high torque starter it still needs to have the same aluminum nose described.

The bolts used MUST be starter bolts with KNURLED shanks. Torque is 35 lb/ft.

[Tom P.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Garry------


A starter used for 63-67 Powerglide applications should use the same starter nose as used for manual transmission applications. It should be an ALUMINUM nose with "straight across" bolt pattern. It uses one bolt of 1.84" length and one bolt of 4.65" length. The configuration of the starter nose is more-or-less independent of the starter's internal parts. So, whether it's a standard torque or high torque starter it still needs to have the same aluminum nose described.

The bolts used MUST be starter bolts with KNURLED shanks. Torque is 35 lb/ft.

Joe is 100% on the money. But also, there is NO SUCH THING as a "BB" starter. There is a regular torque starter and there is a Hi-torque starter.
Also, starter noses are NOT related to the size of the engine. The size of the flywheel/flexplate (14in diameter, 168 teeth and/or 12 3/4in diameter, 153 teeth) is what dictates which starter is used. USUALLY, BBs always get a Hi-torque starter, but SOME SB applications also receive a Hi-torque starter. The smaller flywheels require a starter nose with the straight across bolt pattern and the large flywheel requires a starter nose with a staggered bolt pattern. Now, there are TWO staggered bolt pattern starter noses: Cast iron and alum. For a vehicle (NOT just a Corvette) with the large flywheel and a MANUAL TRANNY, a starter with a CAST IRON nose and staggered bolt pattern MUST be used. The alum nose with a staggered bolt pattern WILL NOT fit into the starter bulge of a bell housing for a large flywheel.
Next, regarding regular torque and Hi-torque starters, they can be distinguished VERY easily. The big, flat brass strap which comes through the starter case and attaches to the lower terminal of the solenold, is in a different position. The regular torque starter has this flat strap attached right up against the lower terminal, whereas a Hi-torque starter has about a 3/4in spacer between the strap and the terminal.
A comparrison is shown below.


Here is a comparrison between a cast iron nose and alum nose, both are the staggered bolt pattern version and as can be seen, the cast iron nose on the RIGHT is slightly smaller and fits into the bulge of a big bell housing.


Here is a top view, the iron nose is on the LEFT.


Also, I need to add that the 55-62 V8 engines used a totally different type starter nose because the starter bolted directly to the bell housing, NOT the bottom of the block. The block mounted starter noses were introduced in 63.


And as a final comment, ALL GM V8 starter cases (Chev, Olds, Pont, truck, etc) are interchangeable. IT IS THE NOSE THAT MAKES A STARTER SPECIFIC TO A PARTICULAR ENGINE! This includes BOTH regular and Hi-torque starters. For example, a Hi-torque starter from an Olds 455 can be swapped out with the nose on a regular toque, low performance 2bl 283 engine to provide more cranking power.

[Jerry W.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Tom....the 7242 starter which bolts to the engine block was used on 62 models with power gluide only....The 7233 starter was used on 62 models w/manual transmission only and bolted to the bell housing....per JG

My original manual transmission car ....( original 62 block ) had drilling for engine mtd. starter ( the General machined the engine for either transmission option)

all 63 models used the 7242 starters regardless of transmission type.....the 7233 ( 62 only starters ) are very hard to find.

[Joe L.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Joe is 100% on the money. But also, there is NO SUCH THING as a "BB" starter. There is a regular torque starter and there is a Hi-torque starter.
Also, starter noses are NOT related to the size of the engine. The size of the flywheel/flexplate (14in diameter, 168 teeth and/or 12 3/4in diameter, 153 teeth) is what dictates which starter is used. USUALLY, BBs always get a Hi-torque starter, but SOME SB applications also receive a Hi-torque starter. The smaller flywheels require a starter nose with the straight across bolt pattern and the large flywheel requires a starter nose with a staggered bolt pattern. Now, there are TWO staggered bolt pattern starter noses: Cast iron and alum. For a vehicle (NOT just a Corvette) with the large flywheel and a MANUAL TRANNY, a starter with a CAST IRON nose and staggered bolt pattern MUST be used. The alum nose with a staggered bolt pattern WILL NOT fit into the starter bulge of a bell housing for a large flywheel.
Next, regarding regular torque and Hi-torque starters, they can be distinguished VERY easily. The big, flat brass strap which comes through the starter case and attaches to the lower terminal of the solenold, is in a different position. The regular torque starter has this flat strap attached right up against the lower terminal, whereas a Hi-torque starter has about a 3/4in spacer between the strap and the terminal.
A comparrison is shown below.


Here is a comparrison between a cast iron nose and alum nose, both are the staggered bolt pattern version and as can be seen, the cast iron nose on the RIGHT is slightly smaller and fits into the bulge of a big bell housing.


Here is a top view, the iron nose is on the LEFT.


Also, I need to add that the 55-62 V8 engines used a totally different type starter nose because the starter bolted directly to the bell housing, NOT the bottom of the block. The block mounted starter noses were introduced in 63.


And as a final comment, ALL GM V8 starter cases (Chev, Olds, Pont, truck, etc) are interchangeable. IT IS THE NOSE THAT MAKES A STARTER SPECIFIC TO A PARTICULAR ENGINE! This includes BOTH regular and Hi-torque starters. For example, a Hi-torque starter from an Olds 455 can be swapped out with the nose on a regular toque, low performance 2bl 283 engine to provide more cranking power.

Tom------

There is one, and possibly two, "wrinkle(s)" regarding the identification of high torque and standard torque starters.
First, John Pirkle has advised in a previous post that it is possible to install high torque "guts" in a starter frame originally drilled for the standard torque field coil terminal location. So, such converted starters appear like a standard torque starter but are, in actuality, a high torque starter (i.e. "a wolf in sheep's clothing"). This would be a very viable option for someone with a standard torque application and an original starter part number that wants to convert it to high torque "without anyone being the wiser".

Second, based on a little research I've been doing, there MIGHT actually be THREE starter "torque" configurations.

The "standard torque" is "officially" known as "5MT"; the "high torque" is "officially" known as "10MT". However, I think there is one "in between" known as "8MT". I THINK this MIGHT be a starter with high torque field coils but using a standard torque armature.

Something else: I have seen many slightly different configurations of the cast iron nose for block-mounted starters. In fact, I have NOS examples of every one ever available in SERVICE. However, I have seen some on original starters that differ from any that I have. The one you have pictured is different yet from any I have previously seen. All would be functionally interchangeable, of course, but they have slightly different features. The block-mounting pad configuration on the one you have pictured is different than any I have seen.

[Kenneth T.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

I recently had the internals on my 327/300 SB starter "upgraded" to the internals of a BB starter. Now, it clearly cranks with more torque than before. However, it also appears that the starter may be moving out of alignment with the flex plate (I have a PG trans...) after the intial start due to the added torque. The starter also has a new "nose piece". Here are my questions:

1) I'm using my original mounting bolts. Should these be changed? If so, are there different mounting bolts for BB starters or are they the same for SB starters? Any recommendations as to where to buy these?
2) I'm not using shims under the mounting bolts. Should I consider adding these to see if they make a difference?
3) What is the recommended torque for the starter bolts? I'm temped to tighten them to "white knuckle" tightness to prevent any movement of the starter body, but I don't think this is correct. Also, if shims are needed, over tightening the bolts could negate the value of the shims....

Any thoughts on this matter

Garry Eastwood
#38705

Dumb question for you Garry. Are you using the rear brace that bolts the starter to the engine block? That will cause a wiggle if not.

No offense except I have seen it before.

Ken

[Tom P.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Tom------

There is one, and possibly two, "wrinkle(s)" regarding the identification of high torque and standard torque starters.
First, John Pirkle has advised in a previous post that it is possible to install high torque "guts" in a starter frame originally drilled for the standard torque field coil terminal location. So, such converted starters appear like a standard torque starter but are, in actuality, a high torque starter (i.e. "a wolf in sheep's clothing"). This would be a very viable option for someone with a standard torque application and an original starter part number that wants to convert it to high torque "without anyone being the wiser".

Second, based on a little research I've been doing, there MIGHT actually be THREE starter "torque" configurations.

The "standard torque" is "officially" known as "5MT"; the "high torque" is "officially" known as "10MT". However, I think there is one "in between" known as "8MT". I THINK this MIGHT be a starter with high torque field coils but using a standard torque armature.

Something else: I have seen many slightly different configurations of the cast iron nose for block-mounted starters. In fact, I have NOS examples of every one ever available in SERVICE. However, I have seen some on original starters that differ from any that I have. The one you have pictured is different yet from any I have previously seen. All would be functionally interchangeable, of course, but they have slightly different features. The block-mounting pad configuration on the one you have pictured is different than any I have seen.

You are exactly correct, a standard starter can be, and there are alt-starter shops that have, converted a standard torque starter to a Hi-torque starter. I was simply attempting to to illustrate the differences in starter applications.
Also, I have seen 3-4 types of iron-staggered noses. That one in the picture above is a replacement nose that I obtained somewhere many years ago. I also have another iron nose that has a DUAL bolt pattern! I guess it is more or less a generic or universal nose.
Since I'm not a numbers matching person (although I have a trememdous admiration for immaculately restored cars), these are not the things that I get hyped up about. My objective on many mechanicals is functionality FIRST. Thus, over the years, whenever I've run across a Hi-torque starter, I rebuild it and use the case/guts along with an appropriate nose so that all my engines end up with a Hi-torque starter.
The AVERAGE person (as you can tell by various comments here) has no clue about things such as Hi-vs regular torque starters and nose configurations. ALLLLLLLLLLLL they look at is the stamped numbers/date codes on the case.

[Jean C.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Tom,
Your post and accompanying photos is a good explanation of the differences in the starter nose and mounting configuration on GM engines. The information you provided, along with Joe's comments, provide a source of information for people who want to understand what will work and what will not when it comes to putting together a starter for a Corvette.

What are the advantages of having a hi-torque starter on a small block application such as that referred in Garry's original post?

Best regards,

[Garry E.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

To all who responded to my question..... Thanks so much....

Ken.... that's not a dumb question, but a very good one..... yes, I'm using the brace/bracket on the end of the starter.....

Charlie..... You raise a very good point..... The original starter was working fine when I pulled the engine at ~ 56K original miles.... It seemed to make sense (at least to me....) to go through the starter at that point since it would be one less thing (potentially....) to go wrong with a newly rebuilt engnie..... Boy, was I wrong.... I ended up violating my own long-standing rule of mechanics - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".....

As an aside..... I picked up a new set of starter mounting bolts yesterday at AutoZone.... these bolts have "significant" knurling below the threads - much more than the thin etched lines that are running length-wise down the shafts of the original mounting bolts.....

One last question..... would you guys advise converting this re-built starter w/ the BB internals, back to the original configuration w/ the SB internals....? As per Charlie's comment - I've never had any problems with the original starter cranking the SB engine.....?

Again..... Tom - thanks for the great photos and Joe - thanks for the asute comments (as usual.....)

Garry Eastwood
#38705

[Joe L.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

To all who responded to my question..... Thanks so much....

Ken.... that's not a dumb question, but a very good one..... yes, I'm using the brace/bracket on the end of the starter.....

Charlie..... You raise a very good point..... The original starter was working fine when I pulled the engine at ~ 56K original miles.... It seemed to make sense (at least to me....) to go through the starter at that point since it would be one less thing (potentially....) to go wrong with a newly rebuilt engnie..... Boy, was I wrong.... I ended up violating my own long-standing rule of mechanics - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".....

As an aside..... I picked up a new set of starter mounting bolts yesterday at AutoZone.... these bolts have "significant" knurling below the threads - much more than the thin etched lines that are running length-wise down the shafts of the original mounting bolts.....

One last question..... would you guys advise converting this re-built starter w/ the BB internals, back to the original configuration w/ the SB internals....? As per Charlie's comment - I've never had any problems with the original starter cranking the SB engine.....?

Again..... Tom - thanks for the great photos and Joe - thanks for the asute comments (as usual.....)

Garry Eastwood
#38705

Garry------


The hi-torque starter is, basically, over-kill for your application. But, other than the expense of doing it, there's no downside to it. So, at this point, you've already done it and there's nothing to be gained by reversing it.

[Garry E.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Another question for Joe Lucia and those of you who may know..... I've been told there is a difference between the "noses" on SB starters for mide year cars with a Powerglide versus thoses with a standard trans..... If you order a replacement nose for a rebuilt starter, do you need to specify if the starter is connecting to a PG or manual trans....? Is this fact or myth..... Thanks

Garry Eastwood
#38705

[Joe L.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Another question for Joe Lucia and those of you who may know..... I've been told there is a difference between the "noses" on SB starters for mide year cars with a Powerglide versus thoses with a standard trans..... If you order a replacement nose for a rebuilt starter, do you need to specify if the starter is connecting to a PG or manual trans....? Is this fact or myth..... Thanks

Garry Eastwood
#38705

Gary------


It's a myth. There is no difference between the Powerglide and manual transmission starter noses for 63-67 Corvettes. These particular starter noses did have a few slight changes in configuration over time but ALL are 100% functionally interchangeable.

[Tom P.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Gary------


It's a myth. There is no difference between the Powerglide and manual transmission starter noses for 63-67 Corvettes. These particular starter noses did have a few slight changes in configuration over time but ALL are 100% functionally interchangeable.

And Joe is 100% on the money.
What determines WHICH starter nose to use is the SIZE OF THE FLYWHEEL/FLEXPLATE: either the 12 3/4in diameter, 153 teeth or the 14in, 168 teeth version. That's it, that's all, just that simple. Now, as I tried to clarify above, there is an alum staggered bolt pattern nose and a cast iron staggered bolt pattern nose. The alum will ONLY fit into an auto tranny starter bulge. But the iron nose will fit EITHER an auto tranny or a manual tranny bell housing for the BIG flywheel. And the the iron nose MUST be used with the big bell housing. It's so simple, that it becomes kind of confusing for some people.

[Garry E.]

Re: '64 SB Starter Question

Joe/Tom.....

Thanks for the responses....... the current nose on the starter is an aluminum casting and it "fits", so it must be the right one....

Regarding the bendix drives..... was there a difference in the number/size of the teeth on these drives? I've been told there was no difference between the bendix drives used on the SB and BB starters and that they are interchangable.... Fact or fiction?

Garry Eastwood
#38705