Possible starter trouble

[Axkiker]

Im finally getting back to finishing up the xp I rebuilt over the winter. When rebuilding I used a starter off a 657 because the original on the 787 was shot.

I installed a new battery and the motor will turn over without the plugs in but acts as if its weak. With the plugs in it just doesnt have the umph.

I was under the impression that the 657 starter would work. Is there a difference in starters or could I possibly just have a bad one. Or could I have something wrong in the motor. Everything seems to turn freely when you spin it by hand so I cant see there being anything in a bind.

thanks

 

[Axkiker]

anyone ?????

 

[Thumper3322]

If it is weak without the plugs in then it definitely won't turn over with them in. Make sure your battery is %100 charges. You can also do a volt reading when cranking. Your starter could be warn out.

 

[Coastiejoe]

If you are certain the connections and battery is good, then the starter is bad.

 

[Axkiker]

Thats what I was thinking as well. My only couple concerns were that I am not accustom to a starter just being weak. Seems like they either work or dont so I was just looking for a 2nd opinion.

Also since this came from a 657 and is now on a 787 I was worried maybe there was a difference. Granted it bolts up fine and engages as expected. Still I was wondering if there was difference I was not aware of.

Thanks looks like ill be ordering a rebuild kit.

Anyone have recommendations as to whom to order from

thanks

 

[Coastiejoe]

A couple thoughts.

There may be a teeth count difference on the Bendix which would turn the engine over differently even if the starter was perfect.

A poor connection will create a weak starter as it is getting enough amps to work but not enough to work properly.

Like filling a gallon buck with a garden hose vs a straw. Both will do it but one will do it efficiently. Electricity works EXACTLY the same way.

 

[Axkiker]

A couple thoughts.

There may be a teeth count difference on the Bendix which would turn the engine over differently even if the starter was perfect.

A poor connection will create a weak starter as it is getting enough amps to work but not enough to work properly.

Like filling a gallon buck with a garden hose vs a straw. Both will do it but one will do it efficiently. Electricity works EXACTLY the same way.

Well I thought about the whole teeth count issue... I kinda figured that if there were a difference it would not work at all. I figured that as soon as the starter were to try and engage the difference in gear would have caused issues.

Checking teeth count is a good idea though. Does anyone out there have the tooth count to a 787 starter ???

thanks

 

[CReynoldsMIZ]

Both the 8 tooth and the 9 tooth will work just fine for your application, trust me. I have read through threads that talked about this same thing. Hell I used a 580 starter on a 787. You probably just need new brushes. $20 on fleabay

 

[nitr0genics]

I read yesterday 787 carbd are 8 tooth and rfi are 9 tooth, however my starter just went on my 787 carbd n it was a 9 tooth... I know that hasn't helped in the slightest but just my 2 cents lol

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[Coastiejoe]

Others have talked about about the teeth difference and from what I recall, they work but spin at a different rate.

 

[smc0922]

Just a difference in crank speed, that is all. It shouldn't be noticeable to the point that it sounds weak, so I'd say the same, rebuild the starter or if your time is money, get a good used one from Minnetonka4me or 99spxxx

 

[purple_people_eater]

check the battery, this sounds to me like the issue. battery has to be above 90% (12.2 volts) and hold be able to hold it. other wise it will do exactly what you're describing.

 

[Coastiejoe]

As mentioned above, brushes are a common failure on the OEM starters.