Alfa Romeo Forums banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have two flyweels one has 130t, the other has 131t. I also have the starters that came from the same two cars, they both have 9t gears on them. Does this seem correct? I have heard that there are 8t gears and 9t gears for starters. The reason I am asking is because I need to put a ring gear on to my new aluminum flywheel and the one with 131t is kind of chewed up a bit. That is the one that I just removed from the car. The 130t ring gear is in better shape. So does it matter which ring gear I use?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
9,921 Posts
Yes, it matters a great deal which starter and ring gear you pair together.

The "gold standard" for information on this topic is a post that George Willett wrote in March, 2007, in the thread at: http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/gt-1965-1974/39666-starters-ring-gears.html There, George provides a list of Alfa years, ring gear tooth count, and starter part number. Here's the entry from that list that applies to 130 tooth ring gears:

72/74 2ltr 130 9 001-211-987 four brushes/2 bolt solenoid 001-211-025 two brushes/2bolt solenoid. Both .7hp w/3 bolt mounting.
To interpret this, the "72/74" are the model years, "2ltr" the displacement, "130" the ring gear tooth count, "9" the starter pinion tooth count, and "001-211-987" and "001-211-025" the two starter part numbers that were designed for 130 tooth ring gears.

So the question back to you is: "what is the p/n of the starter you intend to use?" The starters that pair with the 131 tooth ring gears were more powerful, so if this is a high compression motor, that might be better. Could you mount the ring gear turned around, so that what was the back side (which is probably undamaged) now faces the starter?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I will have to wait until I get back to the shop before I can tell you the part number of the starter. Are you telling me that I can turn the ring gear around, even though it is not flat on the other side? The side that was against the flywheel was flat and the other side is raised up a bit. Will this matter or does it need to be milled flat?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,207 Posts
Once --- ONLY once, I flipped a 1600 ring gear over on a race engine. There were bevel cuts on the drive side originally,while flipped, the teeth were square. Started, the spruel drive did not disengage, un-noticed because of the open exhaust. The first time the driver blipped the throttle, the starter exploded, and took out a large hunk of the bell-housing, along with the steel reinforcing plate. The starter was a new 1750 3 bolt, that I was using on my own car until I loaned it to the flipped ring gear owner. As I was standing next to the car when the starter exploded, I thought, "Oh my!" ( not my exact thought.), and have NEVER FLIPPED A RING GEAR AGAIN, though I know many that do this and claim no ill effect. My thought is that the bevel is cut into the ring gear teeth for a reason, to help kick the drive gear out of engagement. IF BOTH SIDES of your ring gear have square cut teeth, the drive gear is designed to get itself disengaged, and you will have no problem, but if not, .... why mess with fate?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
9,921 Posts
Are you telling me that I can turn the ring gear around, even though it is not flat on the other side? The side that was against the flywheel was flat and the other side is raised up a bit. Will this matter or does it need to be milled flat?
Hmm - if your ring gear is not symmetrical (e.g., flat on the back face, rounded on the front face), and based on the incident Gordon describes above, then I'm withdrawing my suggestion!

Always learning stuff on the BB.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,207 Posts
Jay,
The other side of the coin is that this works, from my understanding, for some. Just not me, or at least under the circumstances mentioned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I know on the Spruel web site it says that if the one side is to badly worn to just turn it over. It seems to me that this will move the ring gear a little bit closer to the starter, because of the offset on the gear. I don't know if this will change how the starter engages and disengages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,984 Posts
If this is the same as the 2L get the ring for years 75-89
all the info that almost every one uses (parts places) have bad info and show the starters for years 75-89 for all years.
and a 75-89 starter will only just touch the tips of the gear. for me I would get about 12 starts then the starter would no longer have teeth on its gear.
there is 4 starters 2 for each ring gear. I would use the ring for years 75-89 and get the later gear reduced starter late 80's it is super light and so strong that it will spin the tires if in gear. when I buggered my spica I used it to move the car off a flatbed and up the drive way. I have the ring used 72-74;90-on and not being able to get the right starter I had to get a custom 10 tooth gear put on my starter. and used the easy to get 80' starter. if I ever have the fly off again I am swapping. getting a starter for the 72-74,90-on is close to imposable. and the old 72-74 starter is super weak and needed a 1000CCA battery. The new gear reduced starters only needs a motorcycle battery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
OK, the starter that I just removed from the car is #0001311110 12v 1.1ps. The ring gear that was on the car with this starter has 131t, but it showing signs of wear on the edges of the teeth, kind of chewed up a bit, I could reuse it if I had to. The other ring gear that I have is the 130t (starter #0001211987 12v 0.7) these came from a 1974 Spider. I know that I want to use the more powerful 1.1 starter, but can that be used with the 130t ring gear(which is in better shape) or should I stick with the 131t that I has been on the car?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,207 Posts
Greg,
can you post a picture of the worn teeth? I ask as if this apparent wear is uniform, it may be a factory cut bevel to kick out the drive gear. They usually only wear evenly all the way around, if the starter is loose. That makes a horrid sound! When ring gears fail, they usually have one spot that is quite torn up. Here is why. When an engine is shut off, no matter what speed it is running, they stop in EXACTLY THE SAME POSITION each time! This seems impossible, but I was first told this some 45 years ago, and then watched engines on test stands and dyno's with marked flywheels, long enough to confirm it is true. I have seen this mostly on Alfa 4's and Ferrari V12's, but it was also true on a pair of 433 Chrysler Hemi's, a bunch of small block GM V8's and other assorted engines.
Anyway, this leads the starter drive to always initially engage the ring gear in the exact same spot on restart. When the Ferrari ring gears got chewed up, we removed them and reinstalled them with the worn spot in a different location on the flywheel. That gave us a new spot for the starter gear to engage.
If anyone wants to explain why engines stop like this, I would be interested to know. I san see it happen, but do not know why.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,984 Posts
I don't know about the same each time. but say 2 spots on a 4cyl and 3 spots on a v6 and 4 spots on a v8 as it gets much harder on the compression stroke. and will stop when compressing and even go backwards some times.

as for using a 1.1kW starter (fits 75-89) on a 72-74 ring. It will tear up both the ring and the starter. I put paint on mine and saw that it only runs on the very tips of the gears when you do that.
Just get a new (used ring) call APE I do not think it would cost much. normally they look like new. My guess is something bad happened maybe a starter with out the shoulder bolt?
I would also say get the new style starter 0 001 1008 0024 (fits 75-89 years sames as the very large and heavy 1.1KW)
also it does not need the extra bracket. like the large monster does. and the car will start so much better and you can use any battery as that starter does not draw much current.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,984 Posts
some notes: I posted before
=====================
0.7Kw starter 000 121 1987

Note: Permanent Magnet Gear Reduction; 1.4 Kw was used before the Series 4 Motronic (1975-1989 can use 0 001 108 024 )
: it looks like they switched in 1986


Roadtrip's post
"Alfa engines 1972-1974, used a .7 hp Bosch starter with 9 pinion teeth. The ring gear on the flywheel had 130 teeth.

In 1975-1990, Alfa changed the starter to a 1.1 hp Bosch unit and the ring gear was changed to 131 teeth as well as a slightly larger (+1 cm) diameter.

In 1991, with the advent of the Series 4 Motronic injected cars, the flywheel was changed back to 130 teeth and is the same size as the 1972-1974 model cars. Further, a new gear reduction starter motor was introduced."
Note: 1972-1974 and 1990-on use 0 001 108 011<- very hard to find
: so the changed back to 130 teeth was in 1990 as far as I can tell.
===========
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,207 Posts
That's what I've done for 45-50 years now Jim. I've watched a lot of V12's, but never a V16. Wonder if they behave the same way? They probably do ... why not?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
201 Posts
Wear on Ring Gear teeth

Similar to what Gordan and Papajam have said, someone years ago (I don't remember who now) explained to me that an engine will always stop on one of the compression strokes. And the starter will always engage the ring gear wherever it stopped the last time the engine was shut off. So for a four cylinder, the wear will always be on four specific places of the ring gear. Removing the ring gear and reinstalling it in a different position will offer new teeth to the starter gear. It has always worked for me.

Ted A.
OldAlfaGuy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Now I am getting ready to put every thing back together and I noticed that the two bell housings are different. The one from the 74 Spider does not have a hole where the reverse switch is and the other, that I seems to be from a later 70's Spider, does have it. Why is this and will matter which one I use? I have been planning to use the one without the hole, just has a button sticking out, for the reverse switch.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,052 Posts
The bellhousing must match the gearbox. The 73 and earlier gearboxes have longer shift rods and the bellhousing has a hole that they poke out through. The reverse switch is mounted on a bracket inside the bellhousing.
74 ond later gearboxes have shorter shift rods that do not protrude into the bellhousing and there is no hole for them. Every later bellhousing that I have seen has had a screwed hole for the reverse switch but there may have been some with no hole and the reverse switch was mounted at the top of the shift tower.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
So the transmission(has the hole in the top for the shift rods) that I just removed from my 1969 GTV was most likely the one that came in the car. I thought that when they put the 2l motor in the car, they changed the transmission at the same time. but, there is nothing wrong with putting in the one without the hole, just the pin sticking out for the reverse switch.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,207 Posts
Here is further clarification of what Ed just wrote. With the transmission in "N", if you have three shift rods poking out the back of the box, you MUST use the bellhousing with the hole to fit all three. In "N" these rods will all poke out the same amount. On later transmissions, this feature was changed, and the rods will be blocked by the casting. Using the later housing with the earlier box will not work.
In the pictures below, note the three rods through the hole by the back up switch. In "R", the reverse rod will move further out, activating the switch.
 

Attachments

1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top