9 tooth or 11 tooth chevy starter

Looking at picking up a mini starter for more header clearance on my sbc.
I know I have the large flywheel ( staggered bolt pattern ) but confused as to why some starter drives for the application have different tooth counts.
What tooth count should I be looking for on the starter ?? Thanks for any help.

The tooth count refers to which flywheel you have. You have to match the starter up for the tooth count of flywheel that you have.

I used a Power Master mini starter. It works with either the 153 or 168 tooth flywheels. They way they do this is there are 2 sets of mounting holes on the starter. Which set of holes you use determine which flywheel it will work with. I think the one I have is a Power Master 9100. If I remember right it is good up to 10 to 1 compression. Also, I think it was only about $130.

I use a starter for a 01 4.3 v6 works perfect! Small and turns the engine over better than the stock ever could!

I use one for a 95 Chevy P-cup with the 168-tooth ring gear, and it works great. It was new, not rebuilt, and I paid $85 for it.

Actually I was referring to the tooth count on the starter gear it self spoke to a guy at a shop about it and he's looking up starters and is saying this one has 9 teeth and this one 11 and so on. Is he confused or am I ??

Not sure what he is talking about here but if you are running headers make sure you get a starter that you can clock to different position to get it to clear the headers you have.

Yep got that one covered andrew thanks bud

Spend money on a good one. I have used many and the cheapies tend to have a lot of issues being flat and coming out of alignment over time.

Also, make sure to use good starter bolts and torque them down using blue Loctight.

Spend money on a good one. I have used many and the cheapies tend to have a lot of issues being flat and coming out of alignment over time.

Also, make sure to use good starter bolts and torque them down using blue Loctight.

Any recommendations?

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/tci-351100

I have this new in the box for my current 383 buildup. I also ran the same part number on the last 383 and it turns the engine over very well. There is one cheaper, but this one is for up to 12 to 1 compression so I know it will work well. My engine is 10.7 compression.:yes:

http://www.summitracing.com/parts/tci-351100

I have this new in the box for my current 383 buildup. I also ran the same part number on the last 383 and it turns the engine over very well. There is one cheaper, but this one is for up to 12 to 1 compression so I know it will work well. My engine is 10.7 compression.:yes:

Thankyou sir

Your welcome, there are many that work good. Tilton would be the more expensive one. Powermasters are cheaper, but descent one as long as the solenoid isn't bad like I had on a couple before. One was brand new not even used at all and the other was barely used.

MSD has one, but I haven't used it. I know that TCI spins the engine effortlessly even with some compression.

The older stock starters used 11 tooth drives. The newer PMGR and some aftermarket use 9 tooth. Maybe because of the gear reduction? They will all line up the same as long the starter and flywheel match.

Tim

The older stock starters used 11 tooth drives. The newer PMGR and some aftermarket use 9 tooth. Maybe because of the gear reduction? They will all line up the same as long the starter and flywheel match.

Tim

"Gear reduction" has nothing to do with the amount of teeth on the gear. All of the gear reduction is done further inside the starter with a planetary gear setup. The different tooth count is specific to a certain flexplate/flywheel.

The older stock starters used 11 tooth drives. The newer PMGR and some aftermarket use 9 tooth. Maybe because of the gear reduction? They will all line up the same as long the starter and flywheel match.

Tim

Thanks bud thats what I wanted to hear.

"Gear reduction" has nothing to do with the amount of teeth on the gear. All of the gear reduction is done further inside the starter with a planetary gear setup. The different tooth count is specific to a certain flexplate/flywheel.

I respectfully disagree! I understand how the gear reduction works.

The older GM starter I took off had 11 teeth. The new PMGR starter( from an LT1 Camaro) has 9 teeth. The flywheel stayed the same. The new starters have more torque and output RPM. Hence the lower tooth count on the drive. They work great and saves weight, too. About 23 pounds for the old one, 8 pounds for the new! Hope I helped,

Tim

I respectfully disagree! I understand how the gear reduction works.

The older GM starter I took off had 11 teeth. The new PMGR starter( from an LT1 Camaro) has 9 teeth. The flywheel stayed the same. The new starters have more torque and output RPM. Hence the lower tooth count on the drive. They work great and saves weight, too. About 23 pounds for the old one, 8 pounds for the new! Hope I helped,

Tim

I get what you're saying, but you're not understanding what I'm saying. The old starters don't have gear reduction, they are direct-drive. PMGR starters are called that because they have gear reduction WITHIN the starter. Take one apart. I wouldn't know this little tidbit if I hadn't gone to school for automotive and actually taken one apart myself and held both types in my hands next to each other.

In what you're saying, yes, there is different gear reduction but it is minimal in what you're thinking...11 divided by 153 equals 0.0718. And 9 divided by 153 equals 0.0588. That's minimal but still an increase in torque. But that increase in torque that you're seeing isn't because of that, and on a large scale. It's because of the planetary gears inside the starter. Even automatic transmissions have the same mechanical design from planetary gear sets, one set can provide 3 different speeds depending which gear is being held (called the reaction gear).

And the PMGR starters are a lot lighter because of the permanent type magnets. The older style starters weren't permanent magnets, they were electro-magnets designed of copper coils....copper ways a ton and that's where that boatload of weight comes from. And with the PMGR starters not being the electro-magnet type it allowed the physical dimensions to be smaller...further again making it lighter.

I'm not trying to start a pissing war, I'm only laying out the facts. The dead on facts, there is no wrong about it. It really bugs me when I see misinformation or even worse the wrong information being given out as advice and taken by like its the word of god. If you disagree with this, then feel free to consult any ASE Master Tech in your area that has some years on his belt, and he will confirm what I am saying. I promise you all of what I speak of is pure fact and not at all opinion.

And here's another, and never mind that the article mentions Ford starters because it's the same exact story. http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2001/08/ministarter/ Which also reminds me, if you have a PMGR starter that is inop. NEVER EVER strike it with a hammer or other object trying to get the commutators of the motor to move slightly in order to attempt starting it. The permanent magnets will break and shatter if hit hard enough (doesn't take much) and when a permanent magnet of any kind, size, or shape is broken down in size it's magnetic capacity is greatly diminished.