What's with the giant upper mounting hole in these DB starters?

[bull]

Is this so it's easier to line up and install them? If so, jeez, are we that pathetic?

[bull]

Well, apparently DB doesn't know the real reason either.

"Yes we know. We inquired about this with the distributor and never could
find out exactly why they made this hole that much larger than the other
one.

Thanks, George"

DB ELECTRICAL
5359 KINGSPORT HWY
GRAY TN 37615
www.dbelectrical.com

----- Original Message -----
From: bull
To: <sales@dbelectrical.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 12:03 PM
Subject: Re: 1994 Dakota and 1968 Charger

> Ok. I knew it WOULD work but I still don't understand the principal of it.
> Thanks.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: sales@dbelectrical.com
> To: bull
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 8:12:54 AM
> Subject: Re: 1994 Dakota and 1968 Charger
>
> All of these starters are made this way. We havent had any problems with
> any
> of them not mounting up properly though. So this one should mount up with
> out any problems even though the mounting hole on one side is larger.
>
> Thanks, George

[John_Kunkel]

Looks like the maker is just following the original factory format, the factory gear reduction starters also have an oversized top hole.

[Nacho-RT74]

mine it has the bigger hole to and is stock although a replacement front housing.

I fit a bushing on it, but thinking better next time remove the busing and use a conic nut ( I installed studs on both locations )

[bull]

I like the idea of using studs. Trying to hold the thing up there and line up the holes/start the bolts reminds me of trying to put a wheel on a 70s VW, which pisses me off.

[Nacho-RT74]

originally stud is just on bottom, but depending on which car was installed ( I think related with body and exhaust clearence ) it could get studs on both.

Initally I though stud was on top, but recently learnt about bottom was the original location for it in everyone. It was discused around here

[Chatt69chgr]

I looked on the DB Electrical website and for the classic mopars they list a new gear reduction mini starter.  Weighs 9 # and they say has twice the torque as the original one did (also said it weighed 20#).  Their price is about $64.  Is this the starter that everyone uses when they refer to a mini starter.  That price sure seemed pretty good.  They actually listed two part numbers but from the info on the website, both appeared to be identical.

[bull]

DB charges about the same for the starters as Napa or any other parts store does but they don't have a core charge which works very well for those of us in the hobby who don't typically have a ministarter core. I just bought one of these for my '94 Dakota from Napa but will have to take the old one back to get my $50 core.

As far as the two part numbers, a guy at DB told me they're the same starter. The first half of the part numbers, 17084 and 17466, are the "lister" part numbers which are both superceded and replaced by the second half of the part numbers, SND0088.

[gtx6970]

I have one on a 500 inch Hemi and it spins it rather well .
Fit like a glove

I also have one on a 69 charger 440 , but there is no underhood wiring yet to say how well it spins yet

[GunMetal]

I just installed a '97 Dakota starter in my '73 400. I noticed the large terminal is rather close to the block. Anyone have any issues with their starters grounding out? Anyone cut down the stud? I had to loosen the mounting bolt and nut to get the terminal nut on and tightened.

[Hemidog]

I just installed a '97 Dakota starter in my '73 400. I noticed the large terminal is rather close to the block. Anyone have any issues with their starters grounding out? Anyone cut down the stud? I had to loosen the mounting bolt and nut to get the terminal nut on and tightened.

http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,68280.0.html

[GunMetal]

Thank you sir.