Starter issues

[Hybredhog]

 Lets see if I can throw this out there And see if someone may have come across this.
    I'm working on a '67 "shovel" that is anything but, as its been built using a whole bunch of mixed stuff. The starting issue is that the Bendix/ starter clutch will get thrown up against the ring gear and grind, it does fall into the right sync & engage about half the time & start. '65-'69 had a shorter starter shaft, and this bike has a Rivira inner primary, and a aftermarket starter reduction gear housing. Everything is lined up, but it just seem the motor starts spinning before it get engaged. The throw of the fork looks good with the -65 fork clutch ring, but maybe the thickness of the Rivera casting is not letting the Bendix back out as far as original, It does back out & clear the ring gear. The clutch basket is an after market piece.
    Where my head is going now is to shorten the solenoid post that the contact washer is mounted on, the exit post that the longer kick back spring goes over. The theory that the plunger will delay the electrical contact a bit until the Bendix is engaged. Yes, I've  tried a different solenoid.

[Burnout]

As long as the plunger pulls in far enough to properly smash the high current contacts together...

Some solenoids come with a disc that goes in the plunger under the spring (to provide more high current contact pressure) but does the opposite for timing.

Another thing you can do is to space out the solenoid to energize the starter later. Use 2 of the 2 bolt bars or make a thicker one. Heck just use washers for testing.

[david lee]

for some reason my 80 shovel has a spacer block about a quarter inch thick where the solenoid bolts on,some might know why its there

[Hybredhog]

That block is there, and its stock to space the solenoid squarely. I took off 1/8" of the post, and it started twice out of the gate before it did its grinding thing again,  . I'll try to build a case to see if that is working, but to much off will take tension off the contact disc.

[xlfan]

Is your Rivera inner 65-69 or 70-84?

What year transmission case?

[Hybredhog]

  The Rivera inner is 65-69 style with 3 bolt motor pattern. I've used a bunch of them in the later form and short of exterior clearance issues with linkage & frame, but easily remodified with a die grinder, and have worked fine. The area around the starter jack gear housing is pretty thick, and use of the flat seal plate has to be clean out or not used. The outer cover is a late style  FLH, and a extension spacer (from V-twin), has to be used on the early 65-69 shaft. I think those early style set ups were compromised with the chitty bar switch & old relays. As I'm typing, I'm thinking I may try using just a Heavy duty remote button as a back up, That has worked on other big engine build I've encountered. This bike is a Frankenstein 80 inch with S&S hybred panheads, so authenticity concerns have been thrown out the window well before me.

[Burnout]

Extension spacer???  Fat tire frame?

[Hybredhog]

Extension spacer???  Fat tire frame?

    V-twin makes a space that screws onto the lefty thread end of the starter shaft to extend it, BECAUSE, the old One piece outer covers 65-69 are not available or hard to find, and the bearing boss in those are approx. 1/2" inboard. The newer shafts have the spiral in a different area & won't work. I've spent to much time figuring all this chit out, & it's still driving me crazy.

   Another thing I've done in the past was to bevel the ring gear's teeth on the non-drive side to promote engagement. Its a PIA, but does help.

[Burnout]

Wow! I thought this was simple stuff!

6 different housings
6 different shafts
3 different end spacers 33121-79, 31311-80, 31531-69

I could not find an "extended" spacer, is it one of those ^^^

I need a long one to fix my 3 wheeler...
Gotta part #?

[Hybredhog]

  I got this bike and several boxes of chit, and one item was that spacer, unfortunately I pitched the wrapper. I just looked in the Tedd's v-t book and see a 17-0084, it says 65-84, which is BS, same piece doesn't fit all, So if I was to SWAG it, that'd be it. you can call V-T and ask, they're pretty helpful.

[ghostrider]

Seems like this part might help??   

I'm gonna have to deal with all this when my build gets that far.  I have a thick cal products inner, 65-69, a diamond paugcho cover and a compufire starter to try to mate up.

http://www.partsthatfithd.com/StarterJackShaft/StarterShaftNut1.htm

[Burnout]

That is what I am wanting, Thanks!

[Reddog74usa]

I have heard that when combining the early inner primary with a later outer primary requires you to double up on the brass washer on the starter shaft. Just something to consider trying without breakin the bank.

[Burnout]

It's more like add 2 or 3 washers. Then the end of the spacer is not fully engaged in the needle bearing and it eats the spacer and bearing.

[Hybredhog]

I have heard that when combining the early inner primary with a later outer primary requires you to double up on the brass washer on the starter shaft. Just something to consider trying without breakin the bank.

The OEM shaft is a good 1/2" short without the space, and only the end would touch the bearing, you'd need like 6 thrust washer. The one I dealing with now, with the spacer is very close, and no room for a thrust washer, but the end of the spacer has a adequate lip.

     I took the clutch basket out and back cut the ring gear teeth, seems to be working so far.

[JW113]

When I was fighting starter engagement problems, I made this. It made solving the problem about 1000 times easier.

[attach=0,msg1340338]

-JW

[kd]

Yup. Every tool box should have one.  You can start and run the engine for other work too. 

[Racepres]

When I was fighting starter engagement problems, I made this. It made solving the problem about 1000 times easier.

[attach=0,msg1340338]

-JW

Made one years ago... but, we like more than one Fastener...so a Bit Bulkier!!

[kd]

When I was fighting starter engagement problems, I made this. It made solving the problem about 1000 times easier.

[attach=0,msg1340338]

-JW

Made one years ago... but, we like more than one Fastener...so a Bit Bulkier!!

The shovel era primary fastener layout is different than the latest version.  I believe you will see there is 2 fasteners on JW's pic.  He just shaved the excess cover surface off so he could see the depth of engagement of the shaft into the bearing.  I found 2 fasteners to be plenty to provide a stability when cranking. The late model primary would require more of the cover to get the stability of a couple of fasteners.

[Racepres]

When I was fighting starter engagement problems, I made this. It made solving the problem about 1000 times easier.

[attach=0,msg1340338]

-JW

Made one years ago... but, we like more than one Fastener...so a Bit Bulkier!!

The shovel era primary fastener layout is different than the latest version.  I believe you will see there is 2 fasteners on JW's pic.  He just shaved the excess cover surface off so he could see the depth of engagement of the shaft into the bearing.  I found 2 fasteners to be plenty to provide a stability when cranking. The late model primary would require more of the cover to get the stability of a couple of fasteners.

Yes... I see it Now... and I concur...

[Hybredhog]

   I made one of those years ago, and yes, they can be handy. But with a wet/ dripper primary, its messy, and I could see all I needed to see with the derby off, and less oil in my face. Kind of like using a timing light on the flywheel, a piece of hose scraping the wheel worked best for me, but after years & years I got to the point where I could do it better by ear (and a single fire ignition). Every bike is different on what it likes, and timing marks were just a starting point. Now throw in a chitty points advance unit, and all goes out the window.

[JW113]

You are correct, that first start with the outer primary off does fling a bit of oil. I used a towel and air gun to knock most of it off the chain and sprockets, which minimized the oil fling. After a few seconds running, was pretty dry.

-JW

[Racepres]

LO... I can't imagine!!! I always disabled the coil/ignition... I did not wish it to Start!!! Just for the Starter to Work!!

[JW113]

Yeah I think this conversation is cross-pollinating a little. I have fired up the motor with no primary a few times to look for strange noises, or once to figure what was going on with one of those automatic tensioners. For starter drive work, you're right, no need to fire it up.

-JW

[david lee]

Yeah I think this conversation is cross-pollinating a little. I have fired up the motor with no primary a few times to look for strange noises, or once to figure what was going on with one of those automatic tensioners. For starter drive work, you're right, no need to fire it up.

-JW

another good post jw