First start after rebuild

[gjz30075]

Timing could be too far advanced

[berni29]

Timing could be too far advanced

Hi possibly yes, but not with the plugs out……

[Slowtus]

Sorry, should have responded to the suggestion. Yes, i have turned it by hand, not least when I was setting the timing. It turned over fine.

David

Aha, then you need to 'zap' the starter directly, bypassing all the wirey bits from a known good battery and if that fails...new starter.

[Billmack]

Pretty much narrows it down to bad connection or wiring on the car or engine ground

[davidj]

Update and maybe the cause of the problem.

I purchased a new starter and initially the engine spun over fine. Then it jammed and I could not even turn it over by hand. So, to recap. The engine could initially be turned over by hand. With a good second hand starter it struggled to turn over; fitted a known good starter from my +2, slow and stopped. Fitted New starter, not much better. All electrics checked and found to be good. New solenoid. Battery fully charged.

Checked the starter through the bell housing dome cover and noticed the bendix mechanism was still engaged. Pulled out the new starter and noticed a wear ring on the bendix housing. Looking into the bell housing I noticed the clutch housing fitted by the engine rebuilder (black in the pic) is proud of the flywheel and scuffing can be seen on the edge. With the starter removed I can now turn the engine over by hand and noticed the clutch is more proud of the flywheel in some areas than others. I assume the clutch housing should be the same diameter or less than the flywheel and it is a manufacturing error (or an incorrect clutch)

So, my conclusion is the bendix is jamming on the clutch housing when energised. This will explain the ring on the bendix mechanism, why the good +2 starter would not work and why the engine could be turned over by hand,

Anyone else good enough to comment and any solutions would be welcome! I don't wish to take out the engine and buy another clutch!

Thanks in advance for any suggestions / comments / moral support!

David

[SENC]

That ring gear looks altogether wrong to me... this is a standard ring gear (from elsewhere on this site).

I'm afraid there is no solution other than engine out to replace, unless this ring gear is designed for a pre-engaged starter.

[types26/36]

That ring gear looks altogether wrong to me...

I agree, paint a tooth, turn and count the number of teeth on the flywheel……...if I remember correctly its 110 for a standard starter and 132 for the pre-engaged type.

[davidj]

This is going from bad to worse. I will count the number of teeth when I pluck up enthusiasm but this is a better pic of the ring gear which looks similar, if worn, to the picture above.

Cheers.

[oldelanman]

Seems that the clutch is not centred. I would check that the locating dowels are fitted in the flywheel - I think you should be able to see them through the clutch release arm aperture in the bellhousing.
Starter motor jamming can also be caused if the sandwich plate between engine and gearbox has been left out or the engine/bellhousing dowels are missing from the back of the block - the plate is also located by the dowels and ensures the starter is correctly positioned relative to the flywheel ring gear.

[ericbushby]

Hi David,
It looks like you have found something.
That gap does look odd but I do not know enough to comment further on that.
When I bought my car the seller said there was a tinkling noise after starting. It turned out that the clutch housing was touching the bendix somewhat similar to yours. I ground 10 thou` off the bendix diameter to cure it temporarily.
There is no need for a different starter ring tooth count for a pre-engaged starter. Mine was designed for the twin cam and has a 9 tooth pinion to match. Powerlite RAC 472 which has now been on for 8 years. It can also cope with starter rings that are not chamfered on the working side.
As the pinion enters the teeth from the opposite side any wear caused by the old starter may be irrelevant.
Keep going
Eric in Burnley
1967 S3SE DHC

[Craven]

Looks like the pinion is riding up out of the seriously worn ring gear, a 2 bolt starter can flex a long way out of alignment.

[SENC]

Maybe my eyes are deceiving me, but in your pictures it looks like the ring gear has teeth running perpendicular to the face of the flywheel. The standard ring gear teeth are on the peripheral to the flywheel, ie. facing outwards not forwards or backwards.

Another pic from this forum...

IMG_1346a.JPG (55.49 KiB) Viewed 340 times

In the configuration yours appears to have, I don't think the cogs of the starter are able to catch the gears. Perhaps a pre-engaged that from from the other side would?

[rgh0]

I agree with others that you need to pull the engine and investigate exactly whats going on with the clutch and flywheel assembly as it clearly has issues.

cheers
Rohan

[2cams70]

It actually looks like someone has forgotten to install some or all of the pressure plate to flywheel securing bolts and the pressure plate itself has come loose. Perhaps things were left loose so the clutch plate could be correctly centered but then the wife or someone else yelled "dinner" and the gearbox and engine were mated before that bit of the process was fully completed. Very weird whatever it is.

[davidj]

That ring gear looks altogether wrong to me...

I agree, paint a tooth, turn and count the number of teeth on the flywheel……...if I remember correctly its 110 for a standard starter and 132 for the pre-engaged type.

I can confirm the ring gear has 110 teeth (lying on my back, turning over the engine 10 teeth at a time! )