6 replies to this topic

[damiend]

What are the advantages of converting from a inertia to a pre-engaged starter motor. Would it give better cranking power to a highish compression engine?

Edited by damiend, 24 May 2010 - 04:23 PM.

[Cooperman]

One reason is to enable an oil cooler to be fitted behind the grille without having to spacer the grille forward by 3/4"

[mars red mike]

To be honest I not sure that there are any advantages. Everyone says that the pre-verto stuff is better. The whole clutch/flywheel/ring gear assembly is lighter for a start, not to mention that inertia starter motors and solenoids tend to be a fair bit cheaper than verto ones. I have a vauge recollection of reading somewhere that Vetro was introduced to eliminate clutch judder problems with the earlier setup. I may be totally wrong on this one though.

[damiend]

No extra cranking power then?

[lawnmowercrap]

I prefer Inertia's, because they are easily serviceable.

[GreaseMonkey]

You can get a road weight flywheel (means its lighted a little) from Minispares which is Pre verto but with a Pre-engaged starter ring gear. I went with the Pre-engaged as I was told its better than the old inertia setup in terms of reliability and power etc

Edited by GreaseMonkey, 24 May 2010 - 08:52 PM.

[crazycoleman118]

the difference between the two in general is that the pre engaged starter places itself into the slots onto the flywheel ring gear first, where as the inertia one sort of spins out and mashes into the ring gear creating wear... this will intern create wear and cause a loss of starting power as it slips... i may be wrong on this, but its what i have been taught