Hi Torque starter motors

[PeterCrespin]

It probably would have, but slower. I used to 'wind' a non-running FHC into and out of a barn (uphill and over a steel channel on the way in). It was the only 'driving' I ever did in it before it got nicked.

Useful trick for getting out of a flood with a dead engine, especially in reverse which is the lowest gear.

Pete

[malcolm]

abowie wrote:
Mine saved my life. Well maybe a slight exaggeration.

My car stopped dead in a 100km/hr zone on the freeway last month. There were huge trucks going past my driver's door less than a foot away. I could not safely get out of the car nor push it. I was able to use the starter to drive the car over 100m in first gear and this got me out of the lane and over onto the hard shoulder. The stock unit would not have done this.

At least you know you've got a good battery too - or did have!

[abowie]

I was surprised that it went as far as it did. The starter still seems to work too...

[44DHR]

44DHR wrote:
The high torque motor with studs fitted is considerably easier to fit than using the stock motor method of bolts.

The high torque starter motor can easily be removed and the old stock unit refitted when required.

Au contraire, assuming the studs are fitted to the motor flange? I have never removed/replaced a starter requiring access to the bell housing side of the fasteners and on a car without an access hatch in the tunnel I wouldn't fancy trying.

I've always used bolts fed from the back forwards so that you do all R&R work from the front of the engine, using stacked 3/8 socket extensions to remove the nuts, leaving the bolts in situ, welded together by a hoop of round bar a la Mk2.

Pete

Pete, I would not normally question your responses, but I'm now confused by this one. On my May 1967 Series 1 original starter motor, the motor flange was threaded and the motor held by two bolts passing through the bellhousing from the rear to the front into the starter motor. To remove the two bolts I could relatively easily access the top bolt with a spanner from above, but to access the lower bolt, I had to work from inside the car by removing the cover from the access hatch specifically put there by Jaguar to enable a socket to pass through and undo the bolt.

My comment on the ease of fitting a high torque motor with studs, was based on the fact my Fosseway starter motor came with two studs already fitted. When offered up - which was easy due to it's low weight - the two studs passed through the mounting holes and it just needed a simple spin up of the top nut to hold the motor in place. With that taking the weight of the motor and the lower stud already located in the lower hole, the bottom nut was easily fitted and tightened from the rear through the access hatch inside the a car.

Am I missing something in your response, or did some motors have bolts and nuts passing through an un-threaded mounting flange on the motor ?

Cheers,

Dave

[christopher storey]

Andrew in Oz : before I rebuilt my FHC, my party trick was to put the car in top gear, press the button, and drive away. It demonstrated both the torque of the motor , and that of the engine . Doesn't do the main bearings any good, though, so I've given it up as a trick !

Incidentally, I often drive my cars in and out of the garage on the starter motor , and they have plenty of spare capacity for this

[Duckham]

I had to work from inside the car by removing the cover from the access hatch specifically put there by Jaguar to enable a socket to pass through and undo the bolt.

Dave - my 63 3.8 does not have the access hatch. Not sure when they came in but presumably with the 4.2 starter motor.
Joe