Dodge Dart electrical problems/starting problems
pawn
I have a 1974 Dodge Dart Swinger, straight 6, with a strange starting
problem:
After driving the car for a random amount of time, then stopping, the
car won't start. If I leave it sit for a small amount of time (10
minutes) then play around trying to start it for anywhere between 10 and
30 minutes, it will finally start. If I leave it overnight, it will
start every time. I know this much:
- It's definitely electrically related: the battery is good, there is
no sound, click, etc., when starting. The headlights are bright white
and do not flicker even the tiniest amount when trying to start.
- It's not the neutral safety switch, I replaced that. That is, it's
not the switch on the transmission itself , but for all I know, there
are other parts involved that might be faulty.
I'm hesitant to mention, because I really have no idea, but it's
possible that the starting problem occurs after the car gets wet.
Certainly the above symptoms are consistent with something drying out
after getting wet. They also seem consistent with something heating up
or perhaps a static charge building up, then dissipating.
I'm looking for any starting point here, I don't want to go down blind
alleys.
How likely are the following?
- That the ignition switch in the steering column itself has stopped
working properly?
- That the wiring between the ignition switch and the neutral safety
switch has gone bad?
- There is some sort of relay or solenoid that the ignition switch
wiring goes to, then combines with the battery lead and the ignition
safety switch, then to the starter and starter solenoid. What can I do
to check that each lead is getting it's required current/voltage? This
seems to me to be a good spot to check all wiring.
- A friend (who used to have a Dart) pointed out a ceramic piece just
under the hood, near the drivers side passenger area, that he said once
upon a time had to be replaced a couple of times. This isn't even
shown on my Haynes manual. What could this be and could it be related?
Sorry for the long story, I just wanted to give all the facts.
Thanks for your time.
Mike Romain
starter solenoid. The one where the ignition wire goes to. I would
sure start there.
You can bypass the solenoid with a booster cable to the cable on the
starter side to get it going if needed.
Sometimes a whack with a hammer will make them work again if it is
internal. They are cheap anyway.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Steve
> How likely are the following?
>
> - That the ignition switch in the steering column itself has stopped
> working properly?
Possible, but not very likely your problem, as the column doesn't get
hot enough to be easily affected by the car having been run recently
(IOW, if it were this, it would happen when the car is cold)
> - That the wiring between the ignition switch and the neutral safety
> switch has gone bad?
Ah, there IS no direct link between the column switch and the NSS :-)
The column switch feeds current to the starter relay (mounted on the
firewall or driver's side fender near the master cylinder), and the NSS
provides a ground path from the starter relay to ground. This starter
relay closes and feeds current to the starter solenoid whenever it
receives power from the column switch and the NSS is closed allowing a
completed circuit to ground. The starter solenoid engages the starter
pinion gear onto the flywheel ring gear and finally closes the main
contacts that feed battery current directly to the starter motor.
> - There is some sort of relay or solenoid that the ignition switch
> wiring goes to, then combines with the battery lead and the ignition
> safety switch, then to the starter and starter solenoid. What can I do
> to check that each lead is getting it's required current/voltage? This
> seems to me to be a good spot to check all wiring.
Now yer cookin' with gas! My bet is that its the starter relay or the
starter solenoid itself. The quick-and-dirty way to check for a bad
starter relay on a Mopar is to keep a screwdriver handy, and when the
car is refusing to start, short the screwdriver across the two largest
nuts on the starter relay (with the car in PARK and the brake set, of
course, because if it works the engine will crank). The biggest nut on
the relay is the feed from the battery, and the second-biggest nut is
the feed out to the starter solenoid. When you short them together, your
screwdriver is doing the job of the starter relay and the starter should
engage and spin the engine. If it does NOT, then move on to diagnosing
the wiring leading to the relay from the battery, the wiring from the
relay to the starter solenoid, and the starter solenoid itself. Be
warned, you can expect a healthy but harmless spark when you short
across those two terminals.
> - A friend (who used to have a Dart) pointed out a ceramic piece just
> under the hood, near the drivers side passenger area, that he said once
> upon a time had to be replaced a couple of times. This isn't even
> shown on my Haynes manual. What could this be and could it be related?
Ballast resistor. Its the thing that you replace on an older Mopar
whenever the car cranks, starts, and then immediately dies when you
release the key. If your car doesn't even click when you turn the key,
its NOT your problem.
Steve
>
> My guess is the starter solenoid because I have owned several Chryslers
> from the 1970's and early 80's (RWD) and they eat starters like crazy.
>
Odd. In 25 years of driving Mopars of that vintage, I can count the
number of starters I've had fail on 3 fingers ;-) The old Mopar starter
almost NEVER fails and is a lot sturdier than Delco or FoMoCo
starters... however cheap rebuilt ones do fail a lot. But build one
right, and it'll nearly last forever
My bet is the starter relay or wiring.
pawn
> ke...@linuxmail.org wrote:
>
My server dropped ke...@linuxmail.org's post, I'll answer here (as well
as Steve's post below).
Keys: I don't think it can be the solenoid, since (and correct me if
I'm wrong), the headlights do not in any way change in brightness, as
would happen when turning the key with a bad solenoid.
This is my initial belief as well. The problem is finding out what's
bad, given that, presumably, most of the wires won't have a voltage
across them when any one of the wires (or the relay) are faulty.
Any suggestions on tracing the problem (besides replacing everything ;^)
BTW, if this helps, I mapped out the wires coming in/out of the relay:
White in, white out, 12V when ignition on (probably 10 ga.). Solenoid
power.
Yellow in, yellow out, 9.5V when ignition on (probably 12 ga.).
Ignition switch or neutral safety switch.
Brown in, brown out, 0.95V when ignition on (probably 10 ga.). Ignition
switch or neutral safety switch.
Slant-6 Daniel
> I have a 1974 Dodge Dart Swinger, straight 6, with a strange starting
> problem:
Thank you for mentioning that it is a 1974. This may bear on your problem.
> After driving the car for a random amount of time, then stopping, the
> car won't start. If I leave it overnight, it will start every time.
Good, complete description of the problem.
> - It's definitely electrically related: the battery is good, there is
> no sound, click, etc., when starting. The headlights are bright white
> and do not flicker even the tiniest amount when trying to start.
Means not even the starter relay is getting activated. More good info.
> - It's not the neutral safety switch, I replaced that. That is, it's
> not the switch on the transmission itself , but for all I know, there
> are other parts involved that might be faulty.
Good thinking. There is obviously the wire between the starter relay and
the NS switch; I take it you've checked that. The only remaining test in
this area is to jiggle the shift lever back and forth across both "Park"
and "Neutral" a few times while holding the key in the "Start" position
the next time the car refuses to crank. If this gives no results, look
elsewhere, but if the starter activates, you've got a maladjusted NS
switch or a worn-out plastic foot on the transmission selector "rooster
comb", which is at the bottom of the shift shaft to which the shift
selector linkage attaches.
> I'm hesitant to mention, because I really have no idea, but it's
> possible that the starting problem occurs after the car gets wet.
> Certainly the above symptoms are consistent with something drying out
> after getting wet. They also seem consistent with something heating up
> or perhaps a static charge building up, then dissipating.
Wet and hot: Good thoughts.
Static: No.
> - That the ignition switch in the steering column itself has stopped
> working properly?
Certainly several possibilities here. The key turns the lock cylinder, and
the lock cylinder activates the switch. If the tang on the lock cylinder
no longer *quite* pushes the switch all the way where it's supposed to go,
or if the "start" contacts in the switch are dirty or burned or deformed,
then the normal heat that builds up in the switch when it is in the "Run"
position could easily move one of the contacts that tiny fraction of a
millimetre outside the position where it will still operate. New switch
from NAPA, Echlin KS-6611.
> - That the wiring between the ignition switch and the neutral safety
> switch has gone bad?
There is no wire between the ignition switch and the NS switch. The
starter relay has two small, one large and one medium terminal on it. One
of the small terminals gets +12V when you turn the key to "Start". The
other small terminal is wired directly to the NS switch, which completes
the ground path for the starter relay when the shifter is in "Park" or
"Neutral".
Therefore, this circuit is very easy to test. One wire connects to each of
the two small terminals on the starter relay. One of them must show
low-to-zero resistance relative to battery negative when the shifter is in
"Park" and when it is in "Neutral" and at no other time. The other of them
must get +12V relative to battery negative when the ignition switch is
turned to "Start".
A quick-and-dirty parking lot test the next time the car refuses to crank
is also the test used to diagnose the starter relay itself if the test in
the previous paragraph shows the ignition switch and wiring to be good.
The next time the car refuses to crank, with the shifter in "Park", the
brake set and the ignition switch "On", use a screwdriver to short the
medium-sized terminal to the large terminal on the starter relay (or the
two claws of an open-end wrench, if there is still a plastic guard on the
large terminal). If the starter cranks and the engine starts, replace the
starter relay. (Note that if you have used this test as a substitute for
the previous paragraph's test, you still don't know if the problem is the
relay itself or is upstream, in the ignition switch or wiring.) Starter
relay: NAPA Echlin SR5.
> - There is some sort of relay or solenoid that the ignition switch
> wiring goes to, then combines with the battery lead and the ignition
> safety switch, then to the starter and starter solenoid.
Right thought, wrong image.
The big news in auto "safety" regulation for 1974 was the
seatbelt-ignition interlock system. This little nifty blocked power to the
starter relay unless all front passengers had their safety belts buckled.
A weight sensor was used in each front seat to determine whether someone
was sitting there. Switches were used in the seat belt retractor reel
and/or the buckle latch to determine if the belt had been fastened. A
logic module figured out all the information and passed or blocked starter
relay power. A bypass was provided under the hood in the form of a small
metal box mounted on the firewall or fender on the driver's side. Pressing
the button gave you one "free" start in case the system failed. Taping the
button down would not work; you had to press it each time you wanted to
start the car without fastening the belt.
As soon as legislators bought their first 1974 cars with this hateful
system, the requirement was very quickly rescinded and it was declared
legal to bypass or disable the interlock system. Most such systems were
immediately rendered inoperative, but one still encounters the odd one or
two. Sometimes the manner in which they were rendered inoperative is
subject to deterioration such that the system can start working partially
or fully again, or starter relay power can randomly or permanently be
blocked. The obvious fix if such a system is encountered or such a
situation is suspected is to run a new wire straight from the terminal of
the ignition switch that is hot when the key is in "Start", to one of the
small terminals on the starter relay.
> - A friend (who used to have a Dart) pointed out a ceramic piece just
> under the hood, near the drivers side passenger area, that he said once
> upon a time had to be replaced a couple of times. This isn't even shown
> on my Haynes manual. What could this be and could it be related?
That is the ignition ballast resistor. It has nothing to do with your
present problem. If it fails, the car will crank and fire, but will die as
soon as the key is released from "Start" to "Run".
Working with a Haynes manual is working against yourself; throw it in the
trash. Find and get a *factory* service manual. They are not hard to find,
are not expensive, and are worth triple their weight in gold.
DS
Using an old usenet handle for the first time in a very long time
add .edu to e-mail.
Slant-6 Daniel
> Starter solenoid. These are a very high failure rate item on Chryslers
> of that vintage.
Not in the real world. Perhaps you have discovered a time warp or
something. The failure-prone starter solenoids are in Nippondenso-built
starters on Chrysler products newer than 1989.
> My guess is the starter solenoid because I have owned several Chryslers
> from the 1970's and early 80's (RWD) and they eat starters like crazy.
My guess is that you used junk "remanufactured" starters. I *still* find
Chrysler products of that era in the wrecking yards with a gazillion miles
on the original starter.
DS
Mopar Man
>
> > I have a 1974 Dodge Dart Swinger, straight 6, with a strange starting
> > problem:
>
> > car won't start. If I leave it overnight, it will start every time.
Could be vapor lock.
> > - It's definitely electrically related: the battery is good, there is
> > no sound, click, etc., when starting. The headlights are bright white
> > and do not flicker even the tiniest amount when trying to start.
Could be the solenoid in the starter itself. It may be active but the
contacts are worn or oxidized. I've held starters where you could
hear and feel the solenoid kick on but the starter wouldn't turn - until
you tapped the solenoid housing.
> > - That the ignition switch in the steering column itself has stopped
> > working properly?
It's happened to me ('65 Polara with slant-6). Engine would turn over
and run, but would die when you released the key from start to run
position.
Slant-6 Daniel
> > > After driving the car for a random amount of time, then stopping, the
> > > car won't start. If I leave it overnight, it will start every time.
>
> Could be vapor lock.
Could not. Read all the symptoms.
> > > - It's definitely electrically related: the battery is good, there is
> > > no sound, click, etc., when starting. The headlights are bright white
> > > and do not flicker even the tiniest amount when trying to start.
>
> Could be the solenoid in the starter itself. It may be active but the
> contacts are worn or oxidized.
Could not. Read all the symptoms. He said "Not even a click". That means
it is not active.
> It's happened to me ('65 Polara with slant-6). Engine would turn over
> and run, but would die when you released the key from start to run
> position.
That would have been the ballast resistor.
DS
pawn
As stated in a later thread, this is an excellent diagnosis (you came to a correct conclusion before I offered the apprpriate information!). Thanks.
Nathan Nagel
Completely irrelevant to the OP's problem, but the ballast resistor is
one of Chrysler's greatest triumphs. Why? Let me explain. Once upon a
time I was dating a very pretty girl who had a '69 Valiant. We were
visiting some friends of hers in Cleveland and we'd taken her car. We
went to leave to go see her parents (I think? this was a few years ago)
and the car wouldn't start. From the passenger seat it sounded like it
might be flooded. I told her to let me try to start it. Wouldn't start
for me either - would catch but then die. After trying it 2 or 3 times
I realized that it would die *immediately after I released the key.*
Light bulb went on over my head. I got out of the car and popped the
hood, of course causing her friends to come running out to see what was
the matter. I asked if anyone had a hairpin, paper clip, etc. - got a
paper clip and bypassed the ballast resistor and the car started
immediately. To this day her friends probably think I'm the real life
incarnation of MacGyver or something. Sure, they're not reliable, but
Chrysler's ballast resistors have been helping guys who are in the know
to score easy bonus points with women for decades now :)
nate
pawn
>On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, pawn wrote:
>
>
-SNIP-
>Switches were used in the seat belt retractor reel
>and/or the buckle latch to determine if the belt had been fastened. A
>logic module figured out all the information and passed or blocked starter
>relay power.
>
-SNIP-
>The obvious fix if such a system is encountered or such a
>situation is suspected is to run a new wire straight from the terminal of
>the ignition switch that is hot when the key is in "Start", to one of the
>small terminals on the starter relay.
>
-SNIP-
Slant6: (BTW, yeah, I meant slant 6 in my original post ;^)
I think, instead of beating my head against a wall trying to figure out
what has gone wrong with the bypass as is, I want to attempt to hard
wire the ignition switch start terminal to the ignition relay box (as
you suggest).
One question though: it seem sto me this will only work if the logic
control module that interprets the seat belt information is *after* the
ignition switch in the wiring setup. If it's before, the ignition
switch itself would have no power if it was determined that the
seatbelts aren't fastened, right?
I.e., Good:
______________________
/ bypass \
(ignition switch start)-------------------------------(igintion relay)
/
(seat belts logic controller)------/
Bad:
______________________
/ bypass \
(seat belts logic controller)---(ignition switch
start)-------------------------------(igintion relay)
Do you know whether this is the case (i.e., is the logic module before
or after the ignition switch)? It'd be a shame if went through the
effort to be no further ahead.
Thanks again.
Mike Romain
>
> Steve wrote:
> > ke...@linuxmail.org wrote:
> >
>
> My server dropped ke...@linuxmail.org's post, I'll answer here (as well
> as Steve's post below).
>
> Keys: I don't think it can be the solenoid, since (and correct me if
> I'm wrong), the headlights do not in any way change in brightness, as
> would happen when turning the key with a bad solenoid.
>
Actually, that is the 'classic' symptom of a bad starter relay.
If it doesn't click and the lights stay bright, it is not working.
If it clicks and the lights dim, then the starter is suspect or a dirty
main battery cable.
pawn
ke...@linuxmail.org wrote:
>>Keys: I don't think it can be the solenoid, since (and correct me if
>>I'm wrong), the headlights do not in any way change in brightness, as
>>would happen when turning the key with a bad solenoid.
>>
>>
>
>Actually it's the opposite.
>
>The solenoid doesn't draw any major current just activating, it's the motor
>that draws the current.
>
My understanding is that the solenoid draws enough amperage to cause the
headlights to dim a very tiny amount, but detectable. Mine don't
flicker an iota.
Thanks for the input either way.
Mike Romain
If the solenoid (relay) turns on something, it draws. If it doesn't
turn on, no draw that you can see.
The coil that energizes it from the key's power draws very low amps, so
that coil can be fine and the main battery connections on it can just be
dirty.
If the solenoid or relay are remote to the starter, they can still turn
on and draw very little power if the connection from the relay to the
starter is dirty.
Heat can affect bad connections too.
Steve
>
> BTW Why do you think just about everyone replied starter solenoid for the
> fix?
I thought most people said starter relay....
>
> I'll give you a hint Sherlock:
>
> It's not because they are highly reliable.
In my experience, the old-style starters are EXTREMELY reliable. Far
more reliable than Delco and Ford starters of that era. I tend to use
the new Nippondenso starters now, but only because they're readily
available for cheap because people throw them away when the $5.00
solenoid contacts burn out... which happens often.
Kirk Matheson
I am curious to know who made Chrysler's starters in the 1960's and
70's. I believe that Bendix or Prestolite made some of them. We never
did have to replace a starter on any of the Chryslers that we owned. I
had a '64 Valiant with 210,000 miles on the original starter.
Alternators did not seem to last quite as long.
-Kirk Matheson
Slant-6 Daniel
> I think, instead of beating my head against a wall trying to figure out
> what has gone wrong with the bypass as is, I want to attempt to hard
> wire the ignition switch start terminal to the ignition relay box
Wise move. The reason the "one free start" box was provided in the first
place is that the logic modules of the day were persnickety even when new.
Yours is now approaching 30 years old.
> One question though: it seem sto me this will only work if the logic
> control module that interprets the seat belt information is *after* the
> ignition switch in the wiring setup.
Good thinking, don't worry, it is. Go ahead.
DS
Slant-6 Daniel
> Completely irrelevant to the OP's problem, but the ballast resistor is
> one of Chrysler's greatest triumphs.
<snip>
> To this day her friends probably think I'm the real life
> incarnation of MacGyver or something. Sure, they're not reliable, but
> Chrysler's ballast resistors have been helping guys
Says who they're not reliable? When you drive as durable a car as a
Slant-6 Mopar, you're going to wear-out strange things. I've never had any
trouble with ballast resistors.
DS (And now that I've typed that, I'm going to buy a spare for my truck
TOMORROW! Now watch the original fail tonight...)
Nathan Nagel
An easy way to confirm that this will work is to take a jumper wire and
touch one end to the battery + terminal and the other end to the starter
solenoid. If the engine turns over then bypassing the box as you
suggest should cure the problem. Since IIRC your car is an automatic
you may want to leave the NSS in the circuit however.
good luck
nate
Slant-6 Daniel
> I am curious to know who made Chrysler's starters in the 1960's and
> 70's. I believe that Bendix or Prestolite made some of them. We never
> did have to replace a starter on any of the Chryslers that we owned. I
> had a '64 Valiant with 210,000 miles on the original starter.
Chrysler RWD vehicle starter chronology by model year:
Pre-1961: All starters made by The Electric Autolite Company, a company
that would much later be renamed "Prestolite" and that never had nothing
to do with (Ford's, at the time) spark plug people.
1961: Chrysler introduces an in-house designed and built direct-drive
starter, P/N 1889100. Its design is highly conventional and closely
follows Autolite (Prestolite) practice, except that it includes a
positive-engagement solenoid-shift drive instead of the Folo-Thru Bendix
drive used on Chrysler starters between the elimination of the step-on
starter lever in the early 1950s and 1961. (The step-on starter lever was
also a positive-engagement drive, but the driver's foot did the positive
engaging!) 1889100 was fitted to Plymouth and Dodge models with certain
V8s.
1962: Chrysler introduces another in-house designed and built starter, P/N
2095150. Its design is fairly radical. It uses a 3.75:1 reduction gearset
between the motor armature and the starter drive. The famous whinnying
sound of a Mopar starting is born. This starter is fitted to all engines
except certain special-production large V8s (which get 1889100) for 1962.
1963: Chrysler introduces a variant of 2095150. Instead of three series
and one shunt field coil, it has four series field coils. Its part number
is 2098500. It is fitted to all engines except certain special-production
large V8s (which get 1889100) for 1963.
1964: 2095150 goes back on all engines except the 426 with stick shift and
the 170. The 426/stick gets a slight variant of 1889100 called 1889200
(difference is bolt hole threading on mount plate). 170 gets 2098500.
Situation remains unchanged until 1970, when 2095150 and 2098500 are
replaced by 2875560. This starter has 2095150's 3-series/1-shunt field
coil set, but has an improved brush holder design that is better sealed
against the elements. Goes on all engines except Hemis with 4-speeds.
Situation remains unchanged until 1973, when 3656650 replaces 2875560.
Only difference is part number.
Midyear 1973, 3656575 is introduced and phased in first on 400 and 360
cubic inch engines. It has four series coils that are larger than any ever
installed in this starter frame. Otherwise, architecture is the same as
3656650.
This starter gets many new part numbers (3755900, 4111860, 4145360, etc.)
and many minor improvements between 1974 and 1987. Some of these include a
shock-absorbing starter drive clutch, better weather sealing, capability
for a heat shield, and a 12-degree spline on the driveshaft instead of the
previous 7-degree spline.
1974: 3755250 is introduced. This has the same architecture as all
previous gear-reduction starters, but is physically larger and more
powerful. The reduction gearset is 2:1 instead of 3.75:1. Cranking speed
is significantly higher. This starter is installed on 360, 400 and 440
engines.
This starter gets many new part numbers (4111850, etc.) between 1984 and
1988. Chrysler plays "musical starters" over the model years with which
engines get the small starter and which get the large starter.
1989: Chrysler switches all RWD vehicles to a Nippondenso-built,
permanent-magnet gear reduction starter. It is significantly smaller and
lighter than the small-frame Chrysler-built unit, but it has the power and
speed of the large-frame Chrysler-built unit.
And that brings us to today.
Given available space for the starter motor assembly itself, *all*
gear-reduction starters from 1962 to 2002 on Slant-6, V6 and V8 engines in
RWD Chrysler, Dodge and Plymouth vehicles in North America are completely
interchangeable. I am about to install a 1962 2095150 in my 1989 D100, for
example, and the "Lightweight, high-performance" starter Mopar Performance
sells is nothing more than an off-the-shelf Nippondenso starter as used in
recent V6 and V8 applications. I do not know if the new Hemi truck engine
uses the same starter bolt pattern. Jeep RWDs do not.
This information does not apply to all countries outside North America.
Bosch Australia built a copycat version of 2095150 to comply with
Australia's Local Content laws in the 1960s and '70s, but they also built
variants that do not interchange.
DS the unbelievable geek
Slant-6 Daniel
> My understanding is that the solenoid draws enough amperage to cause the
> headlights to dim a very tiny amount, but detectable.
That is correct.
DS
Slant-6 Daniel
> >> Starter solenoid. These are a very high failure rate item on Chryslers
> >> of that vintage.
> >
> >Not in the real world. Perhaps you have discovered a time warp or
> >something. The failure-prone starter solenoids are in Nippondenso-built
> >starters on Chrysler products newer than 1989.
>
> Who said anything about products newer than 1989?
Me. I did. I was pointing out to you that you had posted incorrect
information in saying that the starter solenoid was unreliable on
'60s-'70s Mopars, and that the correct information was that the starter
solenoids on '89-up RWD Mopars are "unreliable" (relative to the rest of
the starter).
> Oh and BTW as you say the Nip starters are garbage,
Please do not insert words in my mouth. The Nippondenso starter used on
'89-up RWD Mopars is an extremely reliable, durable and powerful unit. The
only thing that ever goes wrong with it is the solenoid -- hence the
comment about the solenoid's "unreliability" *RELATIVE* to the rest of the
starter.
> >My guess is that you used junk "remanufactured" starters. I *still* find
> >Chrysler products of that era in the wrecking yards with a gazillion miles
> >on the original starter.
> How do you know it's the original starter?
There are many ways to tell. Part number and date code on the starter
assembly itself and on its subcomponents are pretty unmistakeable.
> I buy brand new, and they just don't last as long as they should.
Perhaps there is a permanent raincloud that hovers billiously over your
head and dooms all of your starter replacement efforts to fail.
> BTW Why do you think just about everyone replied starter solenoid for the
> fix?
Perhaps because they didn't read the original poster's question correctly.
DS
Slant-6 Daniel
> >I thought most people said starter relay....
>
> It's really a solenoid, but it does the same thing as a relay and the
> principal is the same. I think we are all talking about the same thing
> though, the "thing" mounted on the starter itself, not some relay in the
> fuse panel or mounted under the hood.
Please avoid confusing the issue by muddling-up your terminology. The
original poster's 1974 Dart has both a starter *relay* (mounted on the
left inner fender panel near the battery) and a starter *solenoid* (built
into the starter). There is, by his description, nothing wrong with his
starter solenoid.
> Everyone is going to have different experiences
Yes, but before we can compare experience, we need to have the facts
right.
DS
Slant-6 Daniel
> >I am curious to know who made Chrysler's starters in the 1960's and
> >70's.
> I know Bendix made the pinion gear reduction unit because the Chrysler
> parts people used to refer to it as the "bendix".
Nope. It was called a "Bendix drive" because it was of a general design
(inertial engagement on a helical shaft) invented by Bendix decades before
the '60s.
Bendix was long since out of the business by 1960.
DS
Slant-6 Daniel
> >original poster's 1974 Dart has both a starter *relay* (mounted on the
> >left inner fender panel near the battery) and a starter *solenoid* (built
> >into the starter). There is, by his description, nothing wrong with his
> >starter solenoid.
> You don't know that at all.
You're right. None of us does except the original poster as he goes
through the diagnostic procedures posted, and the rest of us once he posts
the results.
But those of us with knowledge of the systems under discussion can have
some pretty reasonable guesses.
> All he said was headlights don't dim.
Gee, he said a great deal more than that in the post *I* read. The post I
read contained all sorts of good information about his car, what he had
tried, what he had noticed, and so forth.
> I think you're an idiot
You are welcome to your opinion, which affects me not in the slightest.
> you have no clue as to how to troubleshoot.
Your reading disability is regrettable, but not my problem.
DS
pawn
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 21:34:10 -0500, Slant-6 Daniel <das...@engin.umich>
> wrote:
> You don't know that at all.
>
> All he said was headlights don't dim.
>
> Could be key switch/solenoid/relay.
>
> I think you're an idiot because you have no clue as to how to troubleshoot.
>
Hey Keys:
I hate to get involved in a flame fest, but come on: I said a lot more
than "my headlights don't dim". And, regardless (again, I appreciate
your input either way), he was able to determine exactly my problem by
carefully reading *all* of the information I provided, even though I
wasn't aware of how important certain aspects were.
And I still stand by my assertion that a bad starter solenoid will
always draw on the battery, no matter how subtley, which I was careful
to point out, with my absolute surety, that this wasn't the problem.
Hey man, we all love cars right?
> Why do you think Chrysler sells the solenoid as a separate item?
Do they (or should I say, did they?)? Looking at my starter, the
solenoid looks absolutey integral with the starter. Furthermore, when
the starter failed on my '95 Jeep Gran Cherokee, I could only find the
starter/solenoid as a kit, not separate.
>>>Everyone is going to have different experiences
>>
>>Yes, but before we can compare experience, we need to have the facts
>>right.
>
> Which you don't seem to be able to read.
I disgaree totally, I think he read all the facts (in my many years of
Usenet queries in areas such as welding, hockey, Tolkien, home alarm
systems, *especially* linux, engineering, etc., I found his response
unusually thorough and helpful) and provided the answer he felt most
closely matched the informaton I provided.
pawn
>
>>One question though: it seem sto me this will only work if the logic
>>control module that interprets the seat belt information is *after* the
>>ignition switch in the wiring setup.
>
>
> Good thinking, don't worry, it is. Go ahead.
Thanks man. I can only hope you'll be around if bigger issues emerge,
although, given the performance of this liitle gem, I doubt it. Thanks
one more time.
>
> DS
>
Slant-6 Daniel
> I still stand by my assertion that a bad starter solenoid will
> always draw on the battery, no matter how subtley,
Your assertion is correct.
> > Why do you think Chrysler sells the solenoid as a separate item?
>
> Do they (or should I say, did they?)? Looking at my starter, the
> solenoid looks absolutey integral with the starter.
They did, and they do. And so does NAPA, for that matter.
Solenoid coil and body, OE number 2275554, Echlin STK17, for starters
built through '69.
Solenoid coil and body, OE number 2932813 or 3837337, Echlin STK25, for
starters built '70 through '88.
Starter repair parts package, includes brush holder plate, brush holder
springs, brushes, solenoid contact and solenoid overtravel spring,
Echlin STK16, for starters through '69.
Echlin STK19, for small-frame starters '70-'88.
Echlin STK24, for large-frame starters '74-'88.
NAPA sells them for the same reason they -- and Chrysler -- sell
replacement headlamp switches, replacement starter relays, replacement
radiator caps and replacement headlamp bulbs: Because sometimes things
wear out or break and need replacement!
> the starter failed on my '95 Jeep Gran Cherokee, I could only find the
> starter/solenoid as a kit, not separate.
Most consumer-level parts stores do not stock individual starter repair
parts even for the starters for which such components are available *at
all* in the consumer aftermarket. The Toshiba coaxial starter used in your
Jeep is not such a starter. However, a cooperative auto electrical house
would likely have provided the components you were after.
DS
Slant-6 Daniel
No problem. I was a technical representative for a number of years in the
now-defunct Slant-6 Club of America. That does not mean I have all the
answers, but I have some of 'em!
There is *lots* of good tech info on these cars at www.slantsix.org .
And once again: Find and get a factory service manual!
DS
pawn
> There is *lots* of good tech info on these cars at www.slantsix.org .
I've been there many a time. The high performance ideas have me re-evaluating my decision to pursue a stock slant six averyday driver. The tiny rear end on my car usually jolts me back into reality ;^). Never seen anything like that.
> And once again: Find and get a factory service manual!
Yeah, umm, where would I find that? My Haynes manual didn't even show the seatbelt sensors (hard to blame them since the manual covers 1971 through 1980something). Can I find the factory service manual in a major parts store (or book stores?)? Only second hand? Curous: do you have the same opinion about Chilton?
> DS
Nate Nagel
Well, at the time the car was only 30 years old, so I considered that
failure premature :) Actually after that incident the car started
eating points, so I imagine that the replacement ballast was bad as
well, either that or she just kept getting a run of bad condensers.
(at the time we were living in different cities, so I didn't get to do
regular maintenance on the car. This probably caused the car's early
demise as it burned an exhaust valve after a couple years...
apparently the "mechanics" that she kept taking the car to for its
regular tuneups didn't consider setting valve clearances all that
important. Last I heard she sold it on ebay for quite a tidy profit
though so the story isn't all bad, at least for her. I wish she'd
given me first crack at it though... although given the fact that she
was quite literally stalking me for a while I suppose I really don't
mind that she didn't call me... but that's another story that doesn't
really belong here...)
nate
Neil Nelson
<4b6d2dd6.03031...@posting.google.com>,
njn...@hotmail.com (Nate Nagel) wrote:
>>snip<<
> Last I heard she sold it on ebay for quite a tidy profit
> though so the story isn't all bad, at least for her. I wish she'd
> given me first crack at it though... although given the fact that she
> was quite literally stalking me for a while I suppose I really don't
> mind that she didn't call me... but that's another story that doesn't
> really belong here...)
>
> nate
I believe I recall reading that story (umm) elsewhere....
gbravy
I was pointing out to you that you had posted incorrect
> information in saying that the starter solenoid was unreliable on
> '60s-'70s Mopars, and that the correct information was that the starter
> solenoids on '89-up RWD Mopars are "unreliable" (relative to the rest of
> the starter).
FWIW, I have had a number of slants and have replaced starters,
alternators, control module, ballast resistor, water pumps, as well as
those bleeping bleeped up wiper bushings, but have never had to
replace a starter solenoid and on my present almost 30 yr old slant
the solenoid looks to be original (though of course it may not be)...
Slant-6 Daniel
> > There is *lots* of good tech info on these cars at www.slantsix.org .
>
> I've been there many a time. The high performance ideas have me
> re-evaluating my decision to pursue a stock slant six averyday driver.
Well, don't get *too* carried away. No 4bbl, no headers, no dumb stuff
like that. A 2bbl conversion or even some minor tweaks to your existing
1bbl setup, on the other hand, can give tremendous improvements in
driveability. We should talk about your OSAC valve once you've fixed the
starting problem.
> The tiny rear end on my car usually jolts me back into reality ;^).
The 7 1/4" rear axle is weak compared to the larger ones, to be sure. But
it's not fragile enough to worry about behind a stock or mildly-tweaked
slant-6...especially with the highway-cruiser 2.76:1 gears in there.
> > And once again: Find and get a factory service manual!
>
> Yeah, umm, where would I find that?
Hemmings. Pick up a copy of Hemmings Motor News at a well-stocked
newsstand or go to www.hemmings.com . You will find lots of ads in the
"Multi-makes literature FS" section. Half a dozen phone calls at most will
locate your manual, and $50 or less will have it in your hands.
> have the same opinion about Chilton?
Yes. The factory book is the only one worth having. The others are good
for campfire fuel.
DS
Steve
> On 18 Mar 2003, Kirk Matheson wrote:
>
>
>>I am curious to know who made Chrysler's starters in the 1960's and
>>70's. I believe that Bendix or Prestolite made some of them. We never
>>did have to replace a starter on any of the Chryslers that we owned. I
>>had a '64 Valiant with 210,000 miles on the original starter.
All Chrysler gear-reduction starters made between 1962 and 1999 when the
v8s were moved to the Nipponding-dong starter were made in-house by
Chrysler. That covers 99.9% of the rear-drive Chryslers in those years-
the front-drivers used both Bosch and Nipponding-dong starters from the
get-go.
What about the .1% that weren't covered? Well, certain years of 426 Hemi
4-speed only cars, a few 413/3-speed manual cars (yes, there were such
beasts), and certain slant-6 manual transmission cars utilized a very
conventional direct-drive starter instead of the gear-reduction starter.
I don't know who made it, but I *think* it too was an in-house Chrysler
design.
ALL Chrysler v8s use the same starter mounting pad bolt pattern, so you
can put a Nipponding-dong from a 2001 Ram 5.9 on a '66 383 (I've done
so) and you can put a starter from a 1966 Polara on a 2001 Dodge Ram,
provided it clears the exhaust and other obstructions since it is bigger
than the Nippondenso starter.
Daniel J. Stern
> All Chrysler gear-reduction starters made between 1962 and 1999 when the
> v8s were moved to the Nipponding-dong starter
Typo: You meant "1989".
DS
Mike Romain
failed, not the one on the starter body itself.
Those fender mount units are really prone to failure. I kill one every
couple years on my Jeep CJ7 mostly because they take objection when I
take my Jeep swimming, especially in winter.... I do have to clean the
cable contacts once a year on mine.
Our local parts store sell that fender mounted relay/solenoid thing for
the 74 Dart for $13.49 plus tax.
If the power was getting to your 'starter relay' on the starter, the top
one would click and the lights would dim.
You can just take a booster cable and jump the fender relay from big
post to big post to see if it is the problem. If the engine turns over,
you have found it.
Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Steve
That is correct. And I shoulda read your compendium before I shot off a
reply.... where DO you get that amount of detail, anyway? :-p
pawn
>Hemmings. Pick up a copy of Hemmings Motor News at a well-stocked
>newsstand or go to www.hemmings.com . You will find lots of ads in the
>"Multi-makes literature FS" section. Half a dozen phone calls at most will
>locate your manual, and $50 or less will have it in your hands.
>
>
>
>>have the same opinion about Chilton?
>>
>>
>
>Yes. The factory book is the only one worth having. The others are good
>for campfire fuel.
>
>
>
Thanks again.
Daniel J. Stern
> where DO you get that amount of detail, anyway? :-p
That would be telling.
But the 2095150 is now mounted to the 318 in my '89 D100, with the result
being the truck makes starting sounds in accordance with scripture and I
have a spare Nippondenso Chrysler RWD starter.
DS
Steve
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Steve wrote:
>
>
>>where DO you get that amount of detail, anyway? :-p
>
>
> That would be telling.
>
> But the 2095150
Isn't that an old Van Halen album? :-p
> is now mounted to the 318 in my '89 D100, with the result
> being the truck makes starting sounds in accordance with scripture and I
> have a spare Nippondenso Chrysler RWD starter.
>
> DS
>
Its kinda wierd that I wound up with Nippos in *all* my old Mopars. I
have a perfectly good starter that was the original in the '66 (worked
fine until ~1993) which I had locally rebuilt. You probably remember the
story about what the parts-store rebuilt that I put in while getting the
original rebuilt did....:=p but I digress. I put in a junkyard nippo at
after that "event" and never installed the rebuilt original. The O/R
clutch on the nippo in the '73 is getting persnickety, though, so that
may be where the '66 ends up next.
Nathan Nagel
Wouldn't be one of those newsgroups that you can't tell most of your
friends about now would it <G>
nate
Nathan Nagel
LOL!
I miss that chattery whine... Studebaker used Autolite (or Delco, in
later years) starters with a much less distinctive aural signature :/
nate
(but it's still got the fender mounted relay!)
Neil Nelson
Nathan Nagel <njn...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > I believe I recall reading that story (umm) elsewhere....
>
> Wouldn't be one of those newsgroups that you can't tell most of your
> friends about now would it <G>
>
> nate
Hell, most of my friends are as whacked as I am.
pawn
I started looking into trying to access the ignition switch.
Unfortunately, I'm a little lost on this. All I have to work with right
now is the Haynes manual. This manual states that the actual switch is
on the side of the steering column and is actuated by a rod extending up
to the lock cylinder.
I'm pretty sure this isn't the case for me, there's nothing on the side
of the column at all, and there's absolutely no actuating rod, or
anything else running down the column, besides wires in a conduit housing.
So, umm, where's the switch? Is it contained in the housing, behind the
turn signal and hazard signal switches? If so, how does one remove that
housing (I already have the steering wheel removed))? And you're right,
the Haynes manual is pretty useless to me for this entire operation.
Actually, all I would really need is the colour of wire coming out of
the column conduit that is the ignition switch start lead.
BTW, I looked up what the OSAC valve is. Is this specifically just to
limit quick acceleration? Pretty cheesy way to control emissions and
sounds like a quick and dirty way to add performance. In all honesty,
that's not really what I'm into. I'm mainly looking for something that
doesn't burn too much gas but with a little class.
TIA.
Slant-6 Daniel
> I started looking into trying to access the ignition switch.
You did? Why? All you really need access to is the right wire that comes
from the ignition switch. Find the connector near the forward end
("bottom") of the steering column and there you are.
> Unfortunately, I'm a little lost on this. All I have to work with right
> now is the Haynes manual. This manual states that the actual switch is
> on the side of the steering column and is actuated by a rod extending up
> to the lock cylinder.
That's how it is done on my '89 D100 pickup, which uses a column similar
to that on your '74 Dart. However, I do not remember what years used this
setup and which years had the switch mounted within the column.
(Tilt-wheel columns were GM-Saginaw built and used a different setup.) On
my '89, as you stare at the steering wheel from the driver's seat, the
pushrod for the ignition/starting switch is at about the 11:00
position...that is on the *other side of the column* from the keyswitch,
so if you're looking at the keyswitch side of the column, you may not see
it. But it's all academic; all you need to access is the wire.
If you *do* need to remove the switch and your column does NOT have a link
rod to a remote switch, the ignition switch is removed as follows:
Remove steering wheel
Remove snap ring from upper end of steering shaft
Remove three screws holding bearing housing to lock housing
Remove bearing housing from shaft
Remove coil spring
Remove lockwheel plate from shaft
Remove two retaining screws and lock lever guideplate to expose lock
cylinder release hole
Place cylinder in "Lock" position and remove key
Insert small screwdriver or stiff wire in release hole and push in to
release spring-loaded lock retainer, while pulling lock cylinder out of
steering column housing.
Remove three retaining screws and ignition switch assembly
Assembly is the reverse of removal.
Now: Shall we find those wires at the base of the column instead? ;^{)}
> Actually, all I would really need is the colour of wire coming out of
> the column conduit that is the ignition switch start lead.
I also don't know what color that wire is, and most of my service manuals
are in storage many miles away from here. Chrysler is pretty good about
keeping wire colors the same for the same function over the years, though
-- looking through the diagrams for my '89, I see plenty of wires that
have the same color and function as in my '62. So if that logic holds,
you're looking for a yellow wire. If you find a yellow wire, confirm that
it is indeed the start power wire by using a test light or voltmeter with
one probe grounded. If the light lights or the meter shows you battery
voltage when you backprobe this wire (probe the connector with it still
connected) and turn the key to "Start", that's your wire. If not,
backprobe all of the wires in the connector until you find the right one.
> BTW, I looked up what the OSAC valve is. Is this specifically just to
> limit quick acceleration?
The stated purpose was to limit NOx emissions, but yes, you've got its
actual function nailed pretty well. They are infamous for causing
hesitation and poor acceleration.
> Pretty cheesy way to control emissions
The very concept of emission control was very, very new at the time, and
the science was in its infancy. The controls of the day were extremely
primitive and were largely desperation measures to attain compliance with
equally-primitive regulations and test protocols using engines never
designed to do so.
THat's the long way of saying "Run the vacuum hose directly from the
carburetor port to the distributor vacuum advance." The engine will run
quite a bit better, fuel economy will improve, and emissions will *not*
really be dirtier. The OSAC was a "design-to-pass-the-test" device.
DS
pawn
>On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, pawn wrote:
>
>
>
>>I started looking into trying to access the ignition switch.
>>
>>
>
>You did? Why? All you really need access to is the right wire that comes
>from the ignition switch. Find the connector near the forward end
>("bottom") of the steering column and there you are.
>
I should have asked about the wire first ;^).
>That's how it is done on my '89 D100 pickup, which uses a column similar
>to that on your '74 Dart. However, I do not remember what years used this
>setup and which years had the switch mounted within the column.
>(Tilt-wheel columns were GM-Saginaw built and used a different setup.) On
>my '89, as you stare at the steering wheel from the driver's seat, the
>pushrod for the ignition/starting switch is at about the 11:00
>position...that is on the *other side of the column* from the keyswitch,
>so if you're looking at the keyswitch side of the column, you may not see
>it. But it's all academic; all you need to access is the wire.
>
You might be right, But I'm pretty sure I don't have that assembly.
It's moot anyway, you're right about just finding the wire. I thought
it would be easier to locate which wire by looking at the switch. I
could have figured out which wire with a multimeter in 10% of the time I
screwed around with the steering column (it was fun though).
>I also don't know what color that wire is, and most of my service manuals
>are in storage many miles away from here. Chrysler is pretty good about
>keeping wire colors the same for the same function over the years, though
>-- looking through the diagrams for my '89, I see plenty of wires that
>have the same color and function as in my '62. So if that logic holds,
>you're looking for a yellow wire.
>
I'm pretty sure it's yellow too (at least, it seems to be on a '74
Valiant web page I found). The wire heading to the ignition relay is
also yellow. Evidence is building.
>If you find a yellow wire, confirm that
>it is indeed the start power wire by using a test light or voltmeter with
>one probe grounded. If the light lights or the meter shows you battery
>voltage when you backprobe this wire (probe the connector with it still
>connected) and turn the key to "Start", that's your wire. If not,
>backprobe all of the wires in the connector until you find the right one.
>
Actually, I can probably be a lot more sure by reading the voltage,
since the voltage at the ignition relay is about 9.5V when starting.
That's a pretty specific number that I doubt other electrical systems
would just just happen to adhere to.
>>BTW, I looked up what the OSAC valve is. Is this specifically just to
>>limit quick acceleration?
>>
>>
>
>The stated purpose was to limit NOx emissions, but yes, you've got its
>actual function nailed pretty well. They are infamous for causing
>hesitation and poor acceleration.
>
>
>
>>Pretty cheesy way to control emissions
>>
>>
>
>The very concept of emission control was very, very new at the time, and
>the science was in its infancy. The controls of the day were extremely
>primitive and were largely desperation measures to attain compliance with
>equally-primitive regulations and test protocols using engines never
>designed to do so.
>
>THat's the long way of saying "Run the vacuum hose directly from the
>carburetor port to the distributor vacuum advance." The engine will run
>quite a bit better, fuel economy will improve, and emissions will *not*
>really be dirtier. The OSAC was a "design-to-pass-the-test" device.
>
For all I know, this has already been done, but I'll look into it.
BTW, what's your opinion on washing the engine compartment at a coin-op
car wash?
Also, what kind of trouble am I going to run into finding someone to
replace the vinyl top on my car?
Thanks. You're a patient man.
Daniel J. Stern
> >are in storage many miles away from here. Chrysler is pretty good about
> >keeping wire colors the same for the same function over the years, though
> >-- looking through the diagrams for my '89, I see plenty of wires that
> >have the same color and function as in my '62. So if that logic holds,
> >you're looking for a yellow wire.
> >
>
> I'm pretty sure it's yellow too (at least, it seems to be on a '74
> Valiant web page I found). The wire heading to the ignition relay is
> also yellow. Evidence is building.
Yep.
> Actually, I can probably be a lot more sure by reading the voltage,
> since the voltage at the ignition relay is about 9.5V when starting.
> That's a pretty specific number that I doubt other electrical systems
> would just just happen to adhere to.
Well...no. 9.5 is what line voltage can drop to when the starter motor is
engaged. If you put your voltmeter across the battery while cranking
under such a case, it would show 9.5, too. If you removed the wires from
the two large terminals on the starter relay and probed the yellow wire,
you *SHOULD* see full battery voltage. If you do not, there is a whole
hell of a lot of voltage drop in the starter relay trigger circuit, which
could well be a key chunk of your problem. Suggest you go ahead and try it
-- pull the wires from the two large starter relay terminals and tape 'em
off, then probe that yellow wire with the ignition switch in "Start". You
should see battery voltage.
> BTW, what's your opinion on washing the engine compartment at a coin-op
> car wash?
I've done it before, using a can of Gunk engine degreaser beforehand. It
can make working in the engine bay a lot less messy. As long as you avoid
the air cleaner inlet and take it easy around the distributor and ignition
control box, you'll be fine.
> Also, what kind of trouble am I going to run into finding someone to
> replace the vinyl top on my car?
Very little. Auto trim and upholstery shops and body shops will be able to
point you in the right direction.
> Thanks. You're a patient man.
I haven't seen you ask a dumb question yet...!
DS
pawn
>I haven't seen you ask a dumb question yet...!
>
Not even that one about removing the steering wheel housing? ;^)
pawn
Starting problem fixed. Time to bleed the brake lines.
Mike Romain
What was it?
Mike
pawn
>Ok, I'll bite....
>
>What was it?
>
As suspected, the seatbelt interlock sensors. Bypassed it, no problems.
JazzMan
JazzMan
--
***************************************
Please reply to jsavage"at"airmail.net.
Curse those darned bulk e-mailers!
***************************************
jinxdo...@gmail.com
> Hi:
>
> I have a 1974 Dodge Dart Swinger, straight 6, with a strange starting
> problem:
>
> After driving the car for a random amount of time, then stopping, the
> car won't start. If I leave it sit for a small amount of time (10
> minutes) then play around trying to start it for anywhere between 10 and
> 30 minutes, it will finally start. If I leave it overnight, it will
> start every time. I know this much:
>
> - It's definitely electrically related: the battery is good, there is
> no sound, click, etc., when starting. The headlights are bright white
> and do not flicker even the tiniest amount when trying to start.
> - It's not the neutral safety switch, I replaced that. That is, it's
> not the switch on the transmission itself , but for all I know, there
> are other parts involved that might be faulty.
>
> I'm hesitant to mention, because I really have no idea, but it's
> possible that the starting problem occurs after the car gets wet.
> Certainly the above symptoms are consistent with something drying out
> after getting wet. They also seem consistent with something heating up
> or perhaps a static charge building up, then dissipating.
>
> I'm looking for any starting point here, I don't want to go down blind
> alleys.
>
> How likely are the following?
>
> - That the ignition switch in the steering column itself has stopped
> working properly?
> - That the wiring between the ignition switch and the neutral safety
> switch has gone bad?
> - There is some sort of relay or solenoid that the ignition switch
> wiring goes to, then combines with the battery lead and the ignition
> safety switch, then to the starter and starter solenoid. What can I do
> to check that each lead is getting it's required current/voltage? This
> seems to me to be a good spot to check all wiring.
> - A friend (who used to have a Dart) pointed out a ceramic piece just
> under the hood, near the drivers side passenger area, that he said once
> upon a time had to be replaced a couple of times. This isn't even
> shown on my Haynes manual. What could this be and could it be related?
>
> Sorry for the long story, I just wanted to give all the facts.
>
> Thanks for your time.
its called a ballast resister and it will cause a no start
Paul in Houston TX
Scott Dorsey
ignition from firing but it sounds like the original poster had a starter
that wasn't turning. It being a Dodge of That Era, likely the starter
commutator or brushes are bad although a bad ignition switch is very common
too. No doubt the car is long gone, though.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
dsi1
He also had a hot rod Pinto. That was okay with me. I liked driving his tiny Ford Fiesta the most.
Mark Olson
[snip]
> Just replace the starter.
Do you really think he's still got that car sitting there waiting
for a starter after 17 years have gone by?
dsi1
The Real Bev
information on a variety of subjects. Or at least it used to be.
When I discovered it in 1994 I was amazed that you could ask a question
and get a GOOD answer from someone on the other side of the world within
MINUTES sometimes.
--
Cheers, Bev
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice,
but in practice there is.
dsi1
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.autos.tech/pTwmj-0GiXI/fD3k2Z7MjgIJ
The Real Bev
> On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 6:36:37 AM UTC-10, The Real Bev
> wrote:
>> On 01/20/2020 01:29 AM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 5:28:12 PM UTC-10, Mark Olson
>>> wrote:
>>>> dsi1 <dsi> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, March 17, 2003 at 10:42:31 AM UTC-10, pawn wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for your time.
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>> Just replace the starter.
>>>>
>>>> Do you really think he's still got that car sitting there
>>>> waiting for a starter after 17 years have gone by?
>>>
>>> You know that's not the case, I know that's not the case, even
>>> God knows that's not the case. Why even ask that silly question?
>>> What I really think is that it doesn't matter how much time has
>>> passed. Good advice is always good advice. Bad advice and silly
>>> notions will always be useless.
>>
>> Usenet, the world's biggest and longest-lasting source of useful
>> free information on a variety of subjects. Or at least it used to
>> be.
>>
>> When I discovered it in 1994 I was amazed that you could ask a
>> question and get a GOOD answer from someone on the other side of
>> the world within MINUTES sometimes.
>
> days when the posters were mostly from educational institutions,
> government agencies, and science labs. There used to be more decorum
> and civility, less gossip and name calling. That's the breaks.
The tech groups seem to be alive and well, although sadly diminished.
Hobby groups are nearly invisible. My motorcycle and skiing 'friends'
(some of whom I've 'known' since 1995) have moved to facebook, so I did
too, but it's no substitute. You just don't meet new people unless
they're friends of friends. And you never get ALL the posts; you get
different ones depending on which browser and/or device you're using. I
wish I knew why Zuckerberg thinks that's a good idea.
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.autos.tech/pTwmj-0GiXI/fD3k2Z7MjgIJ
But using Thunderbird is SOOOOO much better than the website. There
were real advantages to using tin as a newsreader, though...
And I really wish I knew what happened to Scott en Aztlan and his yellow
Corvette.
--
Cheers, Bev
"Once you've provoked a few people into publicly swearing they are
going to hunt you down and kill you, the thrill wears off."
-Elric of Imrryr
AMuzi
Young people don't know about it at all.
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Arlen Holder
> But using Thunderbird is SOOOOO much better than the website. There
> were real advantages to using tin as a newsreader, though...
I had a 1970 Dodge Dart in 1980 just after I left grad school but I don't
remember anything about the electrical system so I can't help the OP.
At about 100K, the front shook so much at speed that I replaced the pitman
arm, idler arm, ball joints, and tie rod ends.
I didn't know about alignment in those days, so I just marked the mating
parts and bolts (which I had to do anyway since I did the toe myself, with
a helper).
Took it to Sears.
Learned a lesson that mechanics are crooks.
Sears charged me but I never saw the guy do anything to the car, but I
didn't know then to watch every second of what they do.
Back home, not a single marked bolt was moved.
Took it back, and they found nothing was even close except the toe (which I
had done).
The mechanic's charts only went back 10 years so he simply didn't do
anything.
That's not even my first experience with mechanics who are crooks (don't
even ask me about AAMCO on that same Dodge Dart).
Basically, what I learned was mechanics are crooks.
That's why I do all my own work today.
I feel sorry I can't help the OP though.
dsi1
Arlen Holder
> Being able to read posts and do a search on the same
> page is a wonderful ability. Google Groups' retention
> policy of forever is a wonderful thing.
Just in case folks are unaware of the links for the dejanew's Google Groups
"permanent" searchable web archives of this newsgroup, here is an easily
remembered link:
o <http://tinyurl.com/rec-autos-tech>
See also:
o <http://rec.autos.tech.narkive.com>
If you know of other "permanent" free web-searchable public archives for
this Usenet newsgroup, please let us all know so that we all benefit from
what you know.
--
Usenet is a wonderful way for purposefully helpful people to share value.
The Real Bev
That's just wrong. Usenet is our history.
> And death has taken her toll of usenet as well. Young people don't
> know about it at all.
lifts with about it. Never found anyone who knew. Charter (our ISP)
used to provide a usenet (maybe still does, I haven't checked for a long
time) feed. Once it was down for over a day so I called Charter
customer service. Elevated twice. NOBODY knew what usenet was. The
top level (he claimed there was no higher) guy thought it was that
satellite thing and they didn't support that.
Ultimately I uncovered the fact that usenet was provided by Highwinds,
so I emailed them. They said I had to contact my ISP. I explained. No
response. Eventually the problem cleared up.
Eternal September is SOOOO much better.
--
Cheers, Bev
"I don't think they could put him in a mental hospital.
On the other hand, if he were already in, I don't think
they'd let him out." -- Greek Geek
Scott Dorsey
>On 01/23/2020 05:23 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> And I really wish I knew what happened to Scott en Aztlan and his
>>> yellow Corvette.
>
>He must have been using x-no-archive; I can't find any of his posts.
>That's just wrong. Usenet is our history.
messages that are in their database which cannot be found by subject
or author searches. It has been like this for many years and nobody at
Google cares.
dsi1
My guess is that Google will also delete all posts from posters that have violated their policies or have used x-no-archive way too much. Again, you can probably find their posts from other posts that have quoted them.