Weak starter?

Since the day I bought the boat, the starter seems abnormally slow, almost like the battery is very low. Both batteries always register 12.7 to 12.9 volts before starting and the engine starts just fine, every time. But it makes me a bit nervous because even with the dual battery setup I installed, I'm afraid the starter may give out while I'm in a remote area somewhere.   Is it normal for the GT40's to crank so slowly or maybe the starter is old and weak? Or is it perhaps something else ....

Thanks for your input

If properly tuned a GT-40 with the proper fuel pressure starts on the first turn of the starter 9 out of 10 times. Shouldn't have to crank more than a revolution or 2 at most.

SNobsessed wrote: Before buying a starter, check the voltage drops across the cables, also could be bad contacts in the solenoid. You could have corroded connections or cables.

Yeah, buying a starter was going to be a last ditch, especially since the engine has never failed to start in just one revolution. I have checked the contacts & cables and they are tight with no corrosion.

gt40KS wrote: SNobsessed wrote: Before buying a starter, check the voltage drops across the cables, also could be bad contacts in the solenoid. You could have corroded connections or cables. Yeah, buying a starter was going to be a last ditch, especially since the engine has never failed to start in just one revolution. I have checked the contacts & cables and they are tight with no corrosion.

I agree with Chris. He said "voltage drop"!!!
So does Paul!!

gun-driver wrote: The info chris gave you is a good start.

Ken's test could work two fold as in after a long crank I would bet that the suspect cable/wire/connection will be warmer than the other.
Of course a meter would be your best bet.

You can do a lot with a GOOD heavy gauge set of jumper cables too, like bypass all of the wiring to the starter

Since you have a 95, you should have the newer small starter with a starter mounted solenoid and also the remote solenoid/relay mounted to the back of the engine.

Hook one cable from battery negative to the engine for a good ground and hook the other from the big terminal on the starter solenoid to battery positive.

Then a short small jumper from the same big terminal touched to the starter mounted solenoid connection will let the engine crank while you're touching the wire. This could be a 12 gauge wire with an alligator clip on one or both ends about a foot or 18 inches long to give you a little extra to work with. The 2 connections are only a couple of inches apart on the starter. solenoid. See the picture, the jumper goes from the big nut on top to the spade connection in the picture. You might have the spade terminal or just a nut. Just a momentary touch to start the engine. No need to disconnect any of the normally installed wiring as long as you can make electrical contact with the spade terminal or the mounting nut for it.



If the key is OFF it will only crank

If the key is in RUN it will start and run even after you remove the small jumper and you then turn it off with the key.

This bypasses all of the wiring to the starter including the heavy gauge cable from the battery to the remote solenoid, the remote solenoid to the starter, and the remote solenoid itself.

If it cranks faster then you know you have a problem in one of those bypassed areas.

If it's no better, then your starter or battery or in your case batteries, would be suspect if it cranks slower than you think it should.

Notice that I emphasized GOOD heavy gauge battery cables and your starter should look like the one in the picture. If it's the older starter you can do the same test but a little differently.

This is harder to try and explain than it is to actually do it   

Duane in Indy wrote: Good info Ken.   I might add that make sure you are in neutral because you have also bypassed the safety switch.

Good thought there Duane

UPDATE:

I've done the test as Ken has described and the engine does in fact crank at the same speed as before. So apparently the cables and connections are just fine, as I had suspected. This does however bring up a more pointed inference of the original question   that I had posed - Is the engine cranking more slowly than is normal for a GT40, or is the starter just weak?     I suppose this is ultimately a subjective question relative to who is listening to the cranking speed and what they consider to be "slow".    

However, most of us at some point in our lives has had a very weak battery in their cars or boats to the point that the engine will just barely turn over. Continued cranking does nothing but drain the battery quickly to the point that it won't turn at all within a very few revolutions.   THIS is the sense I get when cranking the boat.   The difference is that when doing Ken's test, the cranking speed increased slightly after a revolution or two and stayed at that speed for a sustained amount of time. But again, just a small increase in speed.   So, back to the dilemma: is this just the normal cranking speed of every GT40 out there, is it a weak starter, or is it just the normal speed of this particular starter?   Who's to say, I guess.   Suffice to say that at this point I now know it is not the wiring or the batteries and since she does start, first crank every time ....

Thanks for everyone's input !!

one could disable the ignition and give it an extended crank.
Then quickly find the warmest component in the loop, from lugs, cables, connectors, solenoid, starter, battery post, not just POS but GND also.

The warmest component, is then the most suspect component.

Gary S wrote: I flooded out my starter last year with saltwater and just didn't feel like fooling around with it. Not being a weightlifter or 30 I bought the smaller gear reduction starter like you have.

Gary,
With myself getting up there in age like yourself and dealing with 80 lb. bags of concrete and 1/3 sq. bundles of shingles wearing the orange apron, I certainly understand the weight issue. However, you being one of CCfans best tinkerers, I'm surprised you didn't mess with the starter!! You know like I've said a few times, a good commutator and bushing cleanup is all it would probably have needed. I'm sure Ken would have tinkered!

davidg wrote:    I even took the starter to AutoZone, and they confirmed it was "good"....just because the drive gear engaged when hit with juice.

David,
Now you know how good of a job they do with their "testing". I am surprised they didn't tell you it was bad and then tried to sell you a new or rebuilt one. That however is probably good since chances are high that Autozone would have sold you the wrong rotation!!

KENO wrote: 8122pbrainard wrote: ! You know like I've said a few times, a good commutator and bushing cleanup is all it would probably have needed. I'm sure Ken would have tinkered! What's a commutator?

Ken,
For the benefit of others who may not understand your "tongue in cheek" :

"A commutator is a moving part of a rotary electrical switch in certain types of electric motors and electrical generators that periodically reverses the current direction between the rotor and the external circuit. It consists of a cylinder composed of multiple metal contact segments on the rotating armature of the machine."

Its no wonder it's so hard to find someone who rebuilds starters around here, when you can get rebuilt units on eBay for $90.. I wonder if the internals are of decent quality... but with a 1yr warranty I can't imagine they're that bad.

KENO wrote: Being one of those types that likes to have spare parts on hand, I'd buy another starter and put it in. Then you'll know if there's a difference and you'll have a spare starter too for the day when you need it..

Being a kindred spirit, this is exactly what my inner voice was telling me to do...
The wife was hoping I was deaf to the inner voice   

Dave if your going to the Cary one will you check and see if they have any Spitfire spark plugs and some Slick 50? I can't wait on a JC Whitney order.