Heavy duty "stock" SBC starter?

Page 3 of 4  
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, Terminal Crazy wrote:


This would tend to support the idea of using welding cable (stranded-strand construction) instead of nominal battery cables (stranded construction) if, in the range of lengths and gauge sizes used in automotive cables, the effect were significant or even practicably measurable. It is neither, though.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Terminal Crazy wrote:

Not at DC. Skin effect is a high-frequency phenomenon, at DC the entire cross-section of the cable carries current.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:26:34 +0100, Terminal Crazy

Absolutely true. Just like human brains can fire more neurons in a given space by having the surface of the brain not be flat.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SgtSilicon wrote:

I think you guys are mixing methaphors and rewriting electrical engineering rules.
I am not an electrical engineer, although I do sit with one. According to the rules as I understand them,
1) For DC currents, the skin effect is trival, so solid wires carry as much current as stranded wires 2) For DC currents, it is the crosssectional area that matters, so two wires with with the same cross sectional area as a single wire will not carry more current - unless you are worried about the wires heating up. Two independent wires do have more surface area, for dispating heat, than the single wire. However, for most situations, the difference should be trivial and this won't apply to stranded cables anyhow, since the effective surface area is the same as the solid wire.
The arguements about welding versus battery cables has been interesting. I have the following idea based on this arguement:
- Welding cables may or may not have insulation suitable for automotoive use.
- The biggest problem with using welding cables as battery cables is the lack of suitable teminals, although I am not sure that this is actually true. I do comprehend the idea that the thinner strans of welding cable are more easily damaged by typical crimp type battery terminals, but I suspect that better terminal are available and that careful application of commonly avialble terminals can overcome this limitation. Several jumper cable manufacturers actually advertise that they use welding cable.
- Welding cable is not a specification. There are a large number of cables of different gauges and construction styles (stranding, insulation) that are called welding cable. Some are more suitable for automotive use than others.
- Good quality welding cable is likely to be more expensive than similar gauge battery cable.
- Persoanlly, I can see any reason not to use welding cable instead of battery cable as long as you are careful about how you handle the terminals (a crimp terminal reenforces by soldering and shrink tubing to stiffen the connector cable interface seems like a good idea). The increased flexibility of the welding cable would be a plus.
Here are a couple of interesting references:
http://www.eagle-access.net/solar/debate.pdf1.pdf - an interestiong article on the use of welding cable in home power systems http://www.colemancable.com/catalog/Portable23b.htm - this company claims their welding cable is suitable for battery cables
Thanks for the info.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Charles Bendig wrote:

Which means that welding cables are more flexible, nothing more. Wire strand size doesn't make ANY difference with DC current, only the total cross-section of all strands added together. If you were talking 500 megahertz radio signals, then there might be a difference.

Don't believe everything you read online, though. There are some people who believe in "uni-directional" cables for stereo gear... nevermind the fact that the signals carried are AC!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't believe every thing I read on-line, or off-line. On line you will find all sorts of people who post info regardless of facts.
Yet on the topic I was talking about the information on it should be on-line, and easy to locate.
I have not heard of people using uni-direction wiring in audio systems. Although I could see where Feedback from one item such as inputs for multiple amplifiers could be an issue. As for control signals, it should not be an issue. Most Uni-directional audio stuff I have seen is where a unit has different output and input jacks, instead of a combined jack. Charles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:44:37 GMT, "Charles Bendig"

In audio, as it concerns speaker cable or any analog signal cabling, the current path is alternating. So any claim that a cable is optimized for the single direction that current flows is, well, flat out bogus. You should see the religion some people have on this stuff though. It's a real ugly scene.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thankfully the only Audio systems I deal with are for my own personal usage. Nothing super impressive, just stuff that work. Beaters usually get used equipment.Something like my T/A only gets good quality stuff. I'm not big on Home Audio, heck I haven't even hooked my tuner up since I moved. Charles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:43:45 GMT, "Charles Bendig"

Yeah, I hear ya. Even though I have the nice (for OEM) 500 Watt Monsoon system in my Z28, sometimes it's just more pleasing to take the Ts off and listen to the sounds of the LS1.
On a side note though, I did buy a OEM Delco 12 disc changer on Ebay and installed it myself, for about 1/3 the cost of the price the dealer gets just for the unit. It's funny, GM gets $700 for this OEM changer. For the Corvette I think it costs $1200 (even though I think it is completely functionally equivalent, perhaps even same part as used on F-bodys and probably a lot of other GM vehicles). I saw the things sell on Ebay for like $80 to $100, but I paid $250 for mine because the guy says he took it out of his 1998 Camaro and I wanted to be sure the control signals from the head unit were right on the money. I still bet I could have bought one of the ones that went cheaper though.
Maybe Ian knows what works with what. Hell, my car even had the signal/control cable already run back to the rear changer mount area from the head. I guess GM does this at the factory even if they end up not putting in the changer. I suppose easier to route before everything is carpeted etc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

God this could get ugly if an audiophile were to drop in. Have you seen any of those fights in those types of forums? Whew. Makes political and religious forums seem tame.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/bbs.html
--
Alan Gallacher
Born to Tinker!
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:33:07 -0400, "Anumber1"

Yeah, like that. I've been there and read a lot. There is another site devoted to truth in audio, but I forget the url right now. Let me check my faves... Okay it's www.audioholics.com granted, it's not gospel either, but it is much more truth oriented than some.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, C. E. White wrote:

Charles is badly misinformed or perhaps deluded. There is *zero* reason not to use welding cable as battery cable. Gauge size for gauge size, current capacity is practically identical (difference so tiny it takes extremely precise instrumentation to measure it), welding cable is more flexible over a wider range of temperatures, welding cable is more resistant to internal breakage, welding cable is frequently better insulated -- all due to welding cable's much harsher working environment than automotive battery cable. Welding cable gets handled, sparks and hot bits of molten metal dropped on it, stuff dropped on it, pulled, stretched, kinked, knotted, etc, EVERY day. Battery cables get installed and then practically never touched again until the battery is next replaced.
DS
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Daniel J. Stern wrote:

And the reason they don't use welding cable for car batteries? I'd be willing to bet it's $$$$. Last time I checked, welding cable was about $1 per foot (or more for the really big stuff.) That doesn't include ends...
Ray
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, ray wrote:

That's correct.
Stranded cable insulated with a single layer of PVC or vinyl ("battery cable") is *vastly* cheaper than stranded-strand cable with a foil wrap and hypalon and/or silicone insulation ("welding cable").
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Charles Bendig wrote:

I butchered that part of the post - I blew up the 305 and went to a 350. Had to reuse the starter because the 350 had the small flywheel and I have an automatic and a large flexplate. The 350 has both types of bolt patterns.
Ray
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

then - since they very often use Japanese mini starters put together by Tilton or the like - based on a Hitachi starter motor. Although I like the Nippondenso better for my application, I know for a fact that those "cheep" Japanese starter motors have won the 24 hours of Daytona more than once. Mind you, Tilton does a very nice tune-up n them before they sell them with their sticker on the side.
Brian
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You did not read what was written. I said "Cheep" as in $150 US and under. I'm not talking about name brand builders that are using new parts, that will work together. I'm talking about idiots that take apart a Used 4AGEZ starter and make it in to a mini-starter for a small block Chevy. That is a used starter motor intended for a super charged 4 Cylinder that displaces 98 CI. Now where near the resistance when hot as 350 CI.
Nor are these cheep units gear reduced. Which is what is used in high end race cars. Not to mention they are made from all new parts.
Personally I would rather use a conventional High Torque Chevy Starter over a gear reduced mini-starter. The only time I install them, is when doing engine conversions where regular starters will not work. Charles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As time goes on, the rebuilt High Torque starters become more of a crapshoot...the cast aluminum starter drive housing you get on a rebuild could be 20+ years old and has a high chance of cracking and ruining your weekend.
I'd go with a decent reduction gear starter; some of these allow you to rotate where the starter-motor is mounted which helps for header clearance...
I believe the truck starter mentioned ('97 3/4 ton pickup) is a reduction gear "mini" starter; not to sure about the drive housing construction though.
--Ken
--
Ken R. Dye '67 Bonneville ragtop "Juan": suncar
Chicago, Illinois '01 Z28 ragtop "???": funcar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ken R. Dye wrote:

seems in the 3/4 ton world, some are regular, some are hd. I got the right part # - go with a 1 ton big block. Now I just hope I don't have the wrong flywheel on there. (I can't remember if it's the 153 or 168.) Race car night tonight, I'll let you know the results tomorrow. :)
Ray
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.