Reply to Old Magnet:
I don't think much of those conversions because you are still using the vulnerable latch mechanism. Much better to bore the flywheel housing (if required) and use the solenoid engagement drive, either the late 40MT, 50 or 42MT starter.
Rotation is always checked by view from the drive end (in this case starter drive). Clockwise in this case so that the flywheel rotates in a counter clockwise direction when viewed from the seat.
[quote="Old Magnet"]I don't think much of those conversions because you are still using the vulnerable latch mechanism. Much better to bore the flywheel housing (if required) and use the solenoid engagement drive, either the late 40MT, 50 or 42MT starter.
Rotation is always checked by view from the drive end (in this case starter drive). Clockwise in this case so that the flywheel rotates in a counter clockwise direction when viewed from the seat.[/quote]
Thanks Old Magnet, I appreciate and respect your opinion.
Neither of the machines has an existing opening for a starter on the flywheel housing.
One has a certified rops canopy, with one of the front supports welded to the frame right near where one would bore the hole for a starter. Not impossible but definitely tricky to work around.
That one is a 1953, and has the D318 and a dry clutch.
The other machine has the 6 cyl. diesel from the 40's, but the rest of the unit is 1950's, hydraulic/hard nose, dry clutch.
No ROPS excuse, it is wide open in the starter area.
Question: with that older diesel, would there be any reason why one could not proceed with a conventional starter through the flywheel housing?
One thing I have noticed is that the intake manifold seems closer to where a starter would go, compared to the D318. Have not measured it yet.
Thanks for the clarification on rotation. Going to the truck wreckers tomorrow for a starter, now I know what to look for.
Regards,
Toby