My Tractor Forum banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
1981 Ford 1100 4WD
Joined
·
876 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have a Kohler M14 on a Ford LGT14H. I was cleaning a mouse nest from under the covers when I noticed the power cable to the starter was really close to the oil fill tube. In fact the previous owner stuffed a piece of inner tube between the starter terminal and the oil fill. I removed the oil fill tube and found that they had pounded a huge dent in the tube to clear the starter! :fing20: So this is why the dip stick is hard to put back in.

So the question is: Does this sound like the wrong starter? It's not "Kohler black" but rather silver. And the part number on it is something like "uni-0010". Also, I think the proper start is Kohler #4109806S ?

Next question - anyone got an Oil Fill for an M14 they want to part with?
 

·
JD318
Joined
·
990 Posts
Someone probably installed one they had layin' around and "made it work".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
310 Posts
Several Kohler single-cylinder starters can be interchanged yet align well with the flywheel's ring gear by the two 9/16" head bolts which screw into the engine block's side. The early shorter starters were fitted to lower horsepower engines which didn't need as much cranking force to overcome the several engine's similar internal friction but significantly different compression resistance. I've rebuilt a few of them and have noted some differences. The longer version that I recently disassembled has only two brushes which push toward the armature's spinning axis. It has 10 electromagneticly-excited spinning bars which are pulled and repelled by the 2 fixed-position surrounding permanent magnets. The shorter version has four brushes which push parallel tot the armature's spinning axis. It has 16 electromagnetically-excited spinning bars which are pulled and repelled by its 2 fixed-position surrounding permanent magnets.

I've heard people say that the longer version must be able to deliver more starting torque just because it's longer. But none of those people acknowledge simultaneously considering the fact that the shorter version is exciting twice as many electromagnets (4 brushes instead of 2) at any moment. I expect that manufacturing cost to build the shorter but more complex starter may have been significantly higher than for the longer simpler version. So it would not surprise me if torque testing revealed the shorter version produces as much or even more spinning torque than the longer version. Kohler's decision to convert to the longer 2-brush design may have been entirely driven by the desire to reduce manufacturing cost. Generally, more pulling poles = more spinning torque but higher manufacturing cost.

As for clearance, clearly the longer version occupies more length space, but their diameters appear to be interchangeable.

Racers who have modified Kohler singles have sometimes increased their compression resistance so much that original Kohler starters don't spin them well. For that reason, some Toyota, Honda and perhaps a few other auto starters have been fitted with mounting brackets which accept both the auto starter's original mounting bolts and both the original Kohler starter-bracket bolts. So they run 4 mounting bolts rather than just 2. These setups can spin Kohler singles aggressively. But as you have observed, just beyond the starter's end away from the ring gear is the engine's original oil-fill tube. Modifying the original oil-fill tube so it clears a non-original starter is not uncommon. Some people do that with class. Some have done it with a hammer. So long as the bottom gasket still seals and it can perform it's function, at least it works.

Does anyone reading this know about the comparative spinning torques produced the the shorter 4-brush circuit starters compared to the slightly longer 2-brush circuit starters?

For your amusement, here are photo showing one of the 4-brush starter assemblies and an automotive starter conversion adapted to a Kohler single cylinder engine. Nice work Tom.


John
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top