Have been reading thru the forum lately and decided to join the fun. I have a question concerning a starter motor that I pulled from a junk yard F100/292/4-speed. The starter has what appears to be a clutch assembly on the elongated bendix gear shaft . Best I can determine, the setup is designed to retract the bendix gear aft of the flywheel, rather than forward. After pulling the starter, I also noticed that the bell housing area that houses the starter is deeper than usual in order to accomodate the unusually long shaft. I've never seen this type of starter setup and was somewhat surprised, since I've been around the block several times (mechanically speaking of course). Does anyone know the purpose of this particuliar starter setup?
Welcome to the only family Ford Truck site, on the net. The members in these forums are very knowledgeable about these engines; they will eagerly help you…with your question. If you have a minute check out the Guidelines, it will help you to navigate through FTE.
I believe that 1964 was the last year of the bendix gear type starter in ford. My 64 F250 has this, all thereafter use the prestolite overruning clutch type. When the motor starts and flywheel speed increases, it thrusts the gear forward to disengage, where the newer ford starters use field magnetism to pull the gear into the engaged position, similar to the way the solonoid does in on GM starters
as for what the purpose of this setup ,I dont know, I have also seen this bendix setup on a cummins V12 marine engine that was on an air starter motor. Most older auto parts salesman will tell you that years ago they sold these like hotcakes, today your local antique parts shop normally has a couple in stock, or others can order within a day or two.
Thanks to motorcyclist for the explanation on the starter motor.
Just in case anyone is interested in what is presently happening with my truck......It just happens that I'm in the middle of a total engine rebuild. It slung a rod bearing and damaged the crank beyond the simple machine shop visit. Alas, it seems it's never simple nor cheap for my repairs but at least I will know what I have when finished.
The cylinders were already bored to .40 over so now they'll be at .60. I looked up the casting numbers on the block and I discovered that the block was manufactured in 1959. According to what I've read, and the reassurance of the machine shop, there's lots of room in the block so I don't feel uneasy about stepping up to that size overbore. I did find that one of the piston rod numbers did NOT match the numbers from the other seven. I pointed this out to the machine shop and asked that they verify it as okay before mounting the new pistons. I wouldn't be surprised to find that it has a different weight that the others.
Since the truck is a 1963 and I am at least the third owner, the presence of a 1959 block proves there has been some under-the-hood swapping already. Not a problem for me since I'm not necessarily a purist and don't plan to enter it in any shows. Just goes to prove that you never know what surprises await you in a total teardown.
Both of my exhaust manifolds were bad and I was extremely fortunate to find that the junk yard truck had both manifolds still available for the taking. It took a bit of effort to make one of them servicable since it was completly blocked with carbon. A couple hours of hours of ramrodding with long drill bits and a long 1/2" socket extension did the trick.
I attempted to pull a vacuum on my distributor's vacuum advance diaphram and discoved it was totally not working. That explains why the truck was stumbling during acceleration prior to teardown. The distributor and vacuum advance from the junker motor distributor seems to be in great shape so I think I'll swap out my distributor also since they both have the 14 tooth drive gear.
I also discovered that this junk yard motor had a valley pan with the crankcase vent tube that wraps around the right rear of the engine. My plan is to convert it to a PCV system and route it directly into my existing aftermarket Holly carb air breather system. I should then be able to close off the original breather tube located on the lower left of the block. If anyone has had any experiences with this, either negative or positive, I would appreciate the feedback.
While waiting on the machine shop to rebuild the heads and bore the block, I will clean and repaint the engine bay so that I don't have to visit that area again when i have the body repainted later this year.
If anyone is interested in my progress I will continue to post updates on the rebuild over the next three to four weeks . Hopefully it might inspire or otherwise motivate someone else out there to finish up on their project also.
I just bought a 64 f100 with a 292....that starter does sound awesome. do any of you have some pictures of the starter/flywheel/clutch/tranny area of one of these trucks? My truck has the tranny and flywheel and clutch out....(t-86 manual) and I need to see a diagram/pictures so I know what its supposed to all go together like when I get a new tranny and cltuch and flywheel and reassemble it all.
My 64 F250 has a pcv valve(I believe started using it in 61 calif.model, and 63 for other 49) if it has a vent in valley pan, all you need is the fitting for the top of the pan with a 5/8 hoze fitting and pipe it to your intake, if it is a 2 bbl manifold there should be a plug for the fitting. a fram F1 pcv valve works great, I have no problem with emulsified oil in my filler tube, no sludge buildup.
Just thought I'd post an update on the progress of the rebuild. After bringing the major motor parts to the machine shop I learned that the heads had never been retrofitted with hardened valve seats so that will definately be a must. A reconditioned crank is also required since one of the journals on the original was trashed beyond a simple re-grind. All in all, the machine shop work and master rebuild kit will set me back about $2100.00, including taxes. That was a bit of a shocker since I have rebuilt several late engines, including a GM 350 that cost only about half as much to completely rebuild. It appears that the prices on rebuild parts for older engines are being raised significantly in comparison to more modern engines. I suppose it follows the law of supply and demand...but in this case perhaps, the less the demand (uniqueness) then the greater the price. Well, enough lamenting about the price but I do fell somewhat better after venting.
With the motor removed, my son (18 y/o) and I decided that the opportunity to clean, repair, and repaint the front clip was now optimized. So, the proverbial snow ball at the top of the mountain was started (can you see my wife's eyes rolling?). We removed all the front body parts so that we could sandblast the frame. With two medium sized air compressors connected in series, and a sandblasting tank rig from the local "made in China" tool store, we were able to sandblast all the rust from the entire front portion of the frame. I had a fleeting urge of removing the remaining rear body section (it's a uni-body) to complete the frame restoration but thought better of it since I'm doing this in my front drive (which has a significant uphill slope) in a residential neighborhood and am probably pressing my luck already.
So, as it stands now, I'm waiting for a warmer day to paint the frame and then will move on to the firewall to deal with that section. Heck, might as well replace the worn steering components while they're exposed also. See how big this snowball is already? Hopefully, by the time the machine shop is finished with the main engine parts we will be ready to begin the motor build-up and set it back in the frame. Then we plan to bolt on all the front body parts around the motor in a inner to outer build-up sequence.
This if my first project of this magnitude and although it's quite tasking it is enjoyable and it gives me some quality time with my son as well. Besides, he's learning a lot during this journey as well.
I am contemplating the use of the sandblaster to clean up the rust from the inner side only of the outer fenders but have read somewhere that this is a no-no for body panels but then we're talking about 1963 metal here in lieu of lightweight modern body panels. If you have any words of wisdom for me from your experiences I would be happy to hear them! I'll post pics of the progress if anyone shows an interest.