Delco Starter Identification (OOPS)

[John348]

I am pretty sure this is for a Chevy 50-54, but the Delco number is not coming up anywhere  1107102 I am looking to rebuild a core for my 54 I just want to make sure. 

Thanks

 

 

Edited May 21, 2021 by John348 (see edit history)

[rocketraider]

John, that sure does look like a starter to me...

[The 55er]

Starter 1107102 fits 1949-1954 Chevy passenger cars among others. 

[TerryB]

John, better check your glasses or it’s time for an eye exam.

[padgett]

Also 1107xxx is like 60-62, probably a superseding replacement.

[60FlatTop]

"Here's my generator core"

 

Counter person "Awesome, man"

[John348]

 

 

My mistake on the title I do not know why I listed generator in my original title... anyway now it has been revised.

 

 

2 hours ago, padgett said:

Also 1107xxx is like 60-62, probably a superseding replacement.

 

Thanks for the input, 

Where did you find that information? 

Edited May 21, 2021 by John348 (see edit history)

[AE generator]

My old books say that 1107102 original number goes on a 1951 GMC p150-22 delivery truck

This starter does also fit on many chevys of the early 50s just has different numbers stamped on the tag

If you could tell me the exact vehicle it is intended for i could confirm if it is the correct one. And tell you the correct tag number for your application.

LaVerl

https://snap-usa.com/

 

[John348]

19 hours ago, AE generator said:

My old books say that 1107102 original number goes on a 1951 GMC p150-22 delivery truck

This starter does also fit on many chevys of the early 50s just has different numbers stamped on the tag

If you could tell me the exact vehicle it is intended for i could confirm if it is the correct one. And tell you the correct tag number for your application.

LaVerl

https://snap-usa.com/

 

 

Thanks, I have a 1954 Chevrolet passenger with a powerglide.

 

 I found my books yesterday. My book printed in 1964 has 110702 listed for a 1951 Chevrolet Passenger, but also list's 1107109 for 1951-1953 All and 1954 w/ST, and 1108035 for 1954 w/AT. The only difference I come up with on the 1108035 is the the end frame and the field coils. That is the starter I should have in my car, I removed it yesterday and there was a 1107109 being used. The starter cranks real slow, and it not the battery. This was my friends car and he always complained about it cranking slow for the past 25 years. Meanwhile the '109' starter was used on all of the Powerglide cars from 1950-1953. Any idea why they made the change in the last year of production? The date on the tag on the starter matched the car, not saying that in the past 68 years it could not have been replaced. My friend who owned it had it since the late 60's until his passing last year, and was the type of guy who would never do an exchange.

I saw the disc on the solenoid on the starter in the car was pretty pitted up when I took it apart. I do have a NOS Delco solenoid as well as an armature and brushes. I am going to try to put it together today if I find some time in between my painting projects on the house.

[AE generator]

the 109 and the 102 are the same starter but with different tag numbers

The 1108035 is the higher torque version of those starters (2 extra field coils). That could explain your slow crank problem. I might have a core for that I can check on that for you tomorrow.

Pitted solenoid discs means the solenoid signal wire isnt getting enough voltage. Usually caused by bad ground, bad battery, or bad starter switch. In your case I think it is pitted because the low torque starter was working too hard.

LaVerl

https://snap-usa.com/

[John348]

Please do, thanks a lot

[Frank DuVal]

9 hours ago, AE generator said:

Pitted solenoid discs means the solenoid signal wire isnt getting enough voltage.

All GM solenoids I ever took apart to clean had pitted discs. Nothing excessive. I thought it was just from switching 100 amps plus. I have replaced the terminal contacts from wear but the first repair is to turn them 180° and wear in a fresh terminal area.

[John348]

I took the starter apart that was in the car yesterday afternoon. I had an NOS Delco solenoid and armature both in the original orange, black and white pull string cans, as well as a set of brushes. The commutator bars on the armature that was in the car had NO real detectible undercut between them. With all the new parts it cranked way better and sounded normal the way it should.

Nobody asked but I do have the correct gauge battery cables on the car.

[AE generator]

I took a look this morning and i do have an original 1108035 core in stock that i could rebuild for you. Give me a call 801-467-2902 if youre interested. Open 9-6 MST

Those armatures were never undercut originally nothing to worry about

LaVerl 

https://snap-usa.com/

 

[AE generator]

11 hours ago, Frank DuVal said:

All GM solenoids I ever took apart to clean had pitted discs. Nothing excessive. I thought it was just from switching 100 amps plus. I have replaced the terminal contacts from wear but the first repair is to turn them 180° and wear in a fresh terminal area.

Yes sorry i wasnt clear. Light pitting is normal. Heavy rough pitting is a problem

LaVerl

https://snap-usa.com/

[Bloo]

And unlike a generator the armature shouldn't be undercut in a starter. The grooves will fill with copper from the brushes if you do that.

[John348]

The one out of the box had definitive cuts, I could catch with my fingernail, That was unopened in the pull string Delco can

[John348]

On 5/24/2021 at 7:22 PM, Bloo said:

And unlike a generator the armature shouldn't be undercut in a starter. The grooves will fill with copper from the brushes if you do that.

 

I hear ya' Bloo, photos are of a NOS armature for a 39-48 Chevrolet, you can notice the undercuts along the commutator bars. I have noticed on the newer replacement armatures have no undercut, just a silica material even with the top of the bars. 

I have heard what you said for years as well...... I don't know.....

[Bloo]

If I remember correctly the 1937 Buick shop manual says to undercut. I can't explain that. I have always assumed it was a mistake, but with your armature as confirmation, GM must have condoned it at one time.

 

I have owned a couple of starters over the years with undercut armatures. You have to take them apart and scrape the copper out now and then because the starter is cranking slow and drawing 400 amps. Not desirable IMHO.