V8 starters, revisited

Tazz · Feb 12, 2008

From years of working on Ford starters, one thing remains true.. at Ford, engine and transmission were 2 seperate empires. Up until the latest versions of Ford starters, the PM ( permenant magnet ) starters, Ford had an automatic and a manual version of its starters. The easiest way to tell an automatic starter from a manual starter is the amount of starter drive that is exposed. The automatic flywheel used to sit farther back from the block than the manual.

Wart · Feb 12, 2008

Thanks Tazz, And Welcome to the Forums!

I have looked through this thread and there seems to be some confusion on bell housings. The mount surface on the front of the bell is flat, the back of the block is flat, the engine/trans plate is between these flat surfaces, 4 surfaces in parallel, the starter indexes off the front of the plate which is the same plane as the back of the block, per application the ring gear holds the same distance from the back of the block, ergo the bell is inconsequential in depth of bendix engagement through the flywheel parallel to the axis of rotation.

Whew!

Of course it's a different story if someone has a bell with a step machined into the bell, or if a starter spacer is used. I think I have heard of such things but they would be way back in the cobwebs.

Anyhow, the problem with the V8 MII starter is the flywheel. The MII used a large heavy flywheel with, IIRC, a unique ring gear placed it's own distance from the back of the engine. Its been a quarter century since I've seen a V8 II flywheel next to a regular flywheel, I don't remember exactly how different they are, but the II flywheel is substantially less in diameter, somewhat thicker, and a bunch heavier than a normal flywheel.

Flexplates I'm not sure about.

MUSTANG J · Feb 13, 2008

Note on Flex plates. Mustang II's have a much smaller then normal Flexplate.
141 teeth. The Bellhousing, Flexplate, and torque Convertor are Mustang II V8 Specific. You can put a regular C4 Automatic Transmission 302 V8 parts in a II, but good luck running headers and exhaust!

Blue Thunder · Feb 14, 2008

MadMark said:
Its been a quarter century since I've seen a V8 II flywheel next to a regular flywheel, I don't remember exactly how different they are, but the II flywheel is substantially less in diameter, somewhat thicker, and a bunch heavier than a normal flywheel.

Flexplates I'm not sure about.

I weighed my II flywheel(which is, if I recall, about 2" thick) and clutch assembly, it was 78 pounds. heh

Dano78 · Feb 16, 2008

MadMark said:
Thanks Tazz, And Welcome to the Forums!

I have looked through this thread and there seems to be some confusion on bell housings. The mount surface on the front of the bell is flat, the back of the block is flat, the engine/trans plate is between these flat surfaces, 4 surfaces in parallel, the starter indexes off the front of the plate which is the same plane as the back of the block, per application the ring gear holds the same distance from the back of the block, ergo the bell is inconsequential in depth of bendix engagement through the flywheel parallel to the axis of rotation.

Whew!

Of course it's a different story if someone has a bell with a step machined into the bell, or if a starter spacer is used. I think I have heard of such things but they would be way back in the cobwebs.

Anyhow, the problem with the V8 MII starter is the flywheel. The MII used a large heavy flywheel with, IIRC, a unique ring gear placed it's own distance from the back of the engine. Its been a quarter century since I've seen a V8 II flywheel next to a regular flywheel, I don't remember exactly how different they are, but the II flywheel is substantially less in diameter, somewhat thicker, and a bunch heavier than a normal flywheel.

Flexplates I'm not sure about.

Here's a screwy thought..... anyone ever check the backspace of the MII flexplate against the more common 289/302 flexplates? One would think that they'd be the same tho.

Mark- I have seen those starter shims. IIRC they were in a Dorman blister pack in the 'Help!' isle at your friendly PepBoys or CSK auto chain stores.

COBRAIIW · Feb 17, 2008

Seems that the easiest way to find the right starter would be to measure the distance from the mounting surface of the bellhousing to the center of the flexplate teeth. (or flywheel)
Then take that measurement to the auto parts store.
Extend the gear manually on the starter, and measure from the mounting surface to the center of the gear.

My personal preference is the starter with the cable tab that faces foward when installed.

15 MINUTES? My fastest time was one hour from placing the jack under, to pulling it back out.

Tazz · Feb 19, 2008

Due to the tight space around the 302, Ford was forced to go to a smaller diameter flywheel / flexplate. The flywheel weight had to be increased to allow for proper inertia to keep the engine running smoothly. In this time frame, Ford ran the manual and auto flywheels at 2 different depths, just the way things were done at the time to protect engineering jobs / kingdoms. Commanility was not an issue at this time. The manual ring gear is closer to the mounting face than the automatic. This is where you run into shims to fit an automatic flexplate starter to a manual flywheel application. You will always run into noise issues when a manual flywheel starter is used on an automatic application. The drive cannot reach into the ring gear and the distance between the ring gear and starter drive pinion is too big. Optimum distance between the ring gear and starter drive is 3mm. Any greater distance causes milling and other bad things to happen.

Wart · Feb 19, 2008

Tazz said:
Due to the tight space around the 302, Ford was forced to go to a smaller diameter flywheel / flexplate.

Weelllllll, not really.

Had Ford extended the frame mount pads for the cross member 1/4 inches the big bell would fit the body, and with a little material removal from the lower ear on the right manifold pipe flange and the manifold clears a full sized C4 bell.

Things are designed to be built, I strongly feel the reason for the smaller bell was so an engine a minute could be stuffed inside the II.

The flywheel weight had to be increased to allow for proper inertia to keep the engine running smoothly.

Yep, the moment of inertia needed preserved, I wish I had actual measurements to run the numbers to see how much heavier the II fly is than is/was needed to equal the standard flywheel of the day.

In this time frame, Ford ran the manual and auto flywheels at 2 different depths, just the way things were done at the time to protect engineering jobs / kingdoms.

Engineering was already done, the flywheel was German/ from Germany. And I believe the RAD transmission was a German design.

The II was a car built in the transition period between the Drawing Board and CAD. That brain fart they started making in '79 ... Never Mind.

Commanility was not an issue at this time.

At least not behind the engine and in front of the rear yoke.

Dano78 · Feb 20, 2008

The story I got was that the new, redesigned Mustang II line was never to have a V8... period. However, there was such a demand for a V8 model in '74 that in '75 a V8 was 'retrofitted' into the II.....hence the reason for all the II specific parts in such that attach to the 302. I believe Lee Iacocca was spearheading the new Mustang II and i find it hard to believe that he had never considered a V8 option. However, He (and I think Jack Roush too) was a big part of the 302's introduction to the II though.

If you look back in Ford's history... Ford never fitted a drivetrain to a car, they designed the car around the drivetrain. There may have been a few pieces in some models, but for the most part most all engine hardware interchanged within that engine family across different model lines. The Mustang II, being one of the exceptions.

Blue Thunder · Mar 2, 2008

Yeah, the II is one of a kind. More reason to admire it.

The Big Blue · Jun 19, 2014

OK so I know this is an old thread, but I didn't want to start another one as the info in this one is great, but, I have been looking at starters for my II build and I see the mini starters but they don't look right, it looks to me like they all have an offset bendix, does this line up, and they also look to have a solenoid mounted on them, why is this when a ford has a solenoid already.

This is what I mean about the bendix, this is one of those "mini starters"

This is what a stock ford starter looks like

Any help would be greatly appreciated, I'd like to buy this starter once.

glitch666 · Feb 22, 2015

Hate to thread necro but I just had the same issues with my 77 Mustang II. This thread helped alot. But I also found this:
http://www.moderndriveline.com/Docs/Ford depth Rev 06_30_2010.pdf
That explains the starter issues that people run into with fords =].

The Big Blue · Feb 23, 2015

Thanks glitch that's good info

V8 starters, revisited

Tazz

New Member

Wart

I'm Mad as HELL and I'M not Gonna Take it ANYMORE!

MUSTANG J

Member

Blue Thunder

Dano78

COBRAIIW

New Member

Tazz

New Member

Wart

I'm Mad as HELL and I'M not Gonna Take it ANYMORE!

Dano78

Blue Thunder

The Big Blue

Member

glitch666

Member

The Big Blue

Member

Similar threads

V8 starters, revisited

New Member

I'm Mad as HELL and I'M not Gonna Take it ANYMORE!

Member

New Member

New Member

I'm Mad as HELL and I'M not Gonna Take it ANYMORE!

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency