Starter motor recommendations?

-
canyncarvr

canyncarvr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Messages
312
Reaction score
122
Location
State of Jefferson
Greetings!

Is there a general favorite replacement for the OEM Chrylser starter from those that have tried 'em? I see 'mini' gear reduction units, 1hp, 3hp rated motors..lots of choices.

I'm replacing my '69 340 OEM unit. It's getting tired.

I used to spend more time on my Duster than I spent sleeping..but that was a lot of years ago. I'm afraid I've likely forgotten more than I ever knew about it. Crikey, that's sad, 'eh? IIRC, last time I had the starter out, t'was a miserable task. I've got a 8-qt. Milodon pan (low profile..flared) that I think gave me no end of grief. Think I had to dang near take the pan off to get the starter out.

For those close readers on the board..yes. I did say '69 and I did say Duster. It's a '69 steel/X-head 340 IN my '73 Duster. Just in case someone was gonna' 'whack the newbie'.:wack:

I would appreciate some input from those that know what fits better/best..and what works.

Oh...it's nothing real fancy. 10.5:1 motor, vacuum distributor, set to 5º BTDC mechanical advance, ceramic coated headers that might reduce the heat somewhat.

Point being, it's NOT some .500" positive-deck, 58cc headed, Trick 114 required hot rod.

(hyperbole intended)


Thanks much!
 
I've read..on this site..about the Dakota starters and them being a good swap. But, not anything as to the 'why' of it.

They're smaller? Less current? Higher torque? Prettier?
 
there just cheap mini starter basically... just go to autozone and pick one up for alot cheaper than a new aftermarket mini...

now SSdan will say they are junk and only get a certain brand or rebuild a junk yard peice but they have life time warranties and you can always get another one...
 
well, they are smaller, they provide more torque, they are lighter, and yes, they certainly more prettier...lol


i dont usually get my starters from the parts stores either....lifetime warranty means a lifetime of changing them....F*ck that...
 
Re: I see them listed as '2.7kw'..whatever that means.

Statistically, that is 3.6HP..which is higher than even the 'high output' LA replacements I've seen.

Fit with 340 headers is notable in some way?

I'm sure if there was any fitment problem I'd have no trouble returning a Dakota starter:

'Why are you returning it?'


'Because it didn't fit my '73 Duster. I thought it would 'cuz I don't have a '73 motor in it.'

:bounce:
 
canyncarvr said:
I've read..on this site..about the Dakota starters and them being a good swap. But, not anything as to the 'why' of it.

They're smaller? Less current? Higher torque? Prettier?
Click to expand...

?? You don't know ?? You said you were replacing your '69 starter. So I assume it is a "full size" electrically wound field type starter like this one:

3250.JPG


The '90's starters are affectionately known as a "mini starter." They do not have an electrically wound field, they are smaller, but the BIG THING about 'em is that they REALLY crank and they DO draw less current.

For the record, ANY (old style) Mopar gear drive starter will fit ANY engine that used them. That is, they fit /6, small and large block V8s, except early and 426 Hemis, which used a different starter. The "minis" such as fits 90's Dakota 5.2/ 5.9 also fit this series of engines. Some industrial and large trucks used other types, IE "not" gear reduction.

The one thing I don't like about 'em is they don't SOUND like a Mopar starter is supposed to sound.
 
canyncarvr said:
I've read..on this site..about the Dakota starters and them being a good swap. But, not anything as to the 'why' of it.

They're smaller? Less current? Higher torque? Prettier?

I see them listed as '2.7kw'..whatever that means.

Statistically, that is 3.6HP..which is higher than even the 'high output' LA replacements I've seen.

Fit with 340 headers is notable in some way?

I'm sure if there was any fitment problem I'd have no trouble returning a Dakota starter:

'Why are you returning it?'


'Because it didn't fit my '73 Duster. I thought it would 'cuz I don't have a '73 motor in it.'

:bounce:
Click to expand...


if a stocker fits than any mini will... the daks starter is shorter and smaller in dia...
 
?? You don't know ??
Click to expand...

That's true a lot.....

Yes. It is a 'real' Mopar starter, as in the picture.


They are NOT 'electrically wound' as opposed to...what? Permanent magnet?


..getting off into the weeds here...

What 'type' of motor isn't the deciding point.

Hate to say it, being a 'form follows function' kind'a guy..but I don't know I'd want to give up that Mopar sound. Hhhmmm...I'll have to ponder that one.

Thanks for the input(s) though!
 
I picked mine up at the local junkyard for $30. It was alot easier to install with the typical a-body 3-tubes hanging down headers, and it was much lighter. Which also means it didn't make my arm want to snap trying to hold it in place and put a bolt in (because my stud backed out of the trans). I wrapped the heat shield around mine, and it was good for thousands of miles, until I took the engine out, and sold the car. I still have the starter, but I broke a lug off of it and I'll probably just try to fix it and re-use it. I'd recommend the newer style.
 
I have used all 3 common types personally.

The mini-style starter cranks fast and is efficient but I sure don't like the sound of it.

I think the large-frame starter is the happy medium..cranks as fast as the mini-starter and sounds like a Chrysler. Might not play well with headers though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top