[Greg Reid]

Ouch....sorry to see that. Don't know the final answer on the bracket but I have to agree that it's probably cheap insurance.

[Bruce Meyer]

Originally Posted by mysons69

Yeah, reviving an old one...

I'm a brand new member here, but I've been on gtoforum for about a year (bought a '69 last March to work on with my son; his money) and I've been reading up here, been meaning to join, finally found a need to do so.

Regarding this starter bracket issue, I have to respond. Just this weekend we put in a new clutch kit. Car came with a Saginaw, swapped to Muncie M20. That part went fairly well...

Long story short, see the attached pics. In case it's not clear, it is the outboard starter mount boss, snapped completely off from the block. The bolt you see is there just to hold it in place.

FYI, there was no bracket on the starter when we got the car; didn't even suspect there should be one. Either way, we have swapped the original starter out for the RobbMC starter, so no bracket there anyway.
Is the lack of the starter bracket the cause of this catastrophic failure?
Did years of starter torque and twisting weaken the boss until it finally quit?

I don't know, and I never will. But I've got to say, for the cost and relatively minor hassle involved, is it worth not using the bracket? Look at those pictures again, and tell me it's a chance you're willing to take. Whether we can repair this or not, when it's better, you can bet there'll be a starter bracket attached, one way or another.

There's a really good chance this engine is trashed at this point.

I just wanted to share this to hopefully save someone else from this hassle.

The starter did NOT cause that failure. It cracked around that bolt boss. It looks like someone drilled out a stripped bell housing bolt hole and put a larger and longer bolt in with a nut on the backside. That is what caused this failure.

[mysons69]

Ok, I'm not getting into the middle of this argument, but I am agreeing that using the starter bracket is a good idea. Why not? It's very cheap insurance.

As I said, "for the cost and relatively minor hassle involved, is it worth not using the bracket?".

You're right, the starter did NOT cause the failure, at least not directly.
And no, it's not the bolt in the picture that caused the failure either. That is a longer, proper thread bolt and nut that I put in to hold the boss in place to take pictures, AFTER the break occurred.

[Bruce Meyer]

I have no argument about the bracket. With a stock heavy starter its probably a good idea.
The RobbMc starter is very light and probably does not need the bracket. There is no way to bolt one on a RobbMc starter anyway.
There looks like the paint is scrapped away around that broken bolt boss like there was a nut on it. That's what I was looking at.

[mysons69]

Yeah, I put the nut on post-catastrophe. That's why I used the longer bolt.

[JLHarper]

Originally Posted by Sirrotica

Yes there should be a nut on the stud, 1/4 inch. A split lock washer should be between the nut and the brace.

35 Ft lbs. 3/8 inch starter to block bolts.

Brads correct...a few of us learned this the hard way in our teens/20s.... many brackets never got replaced in frustration/ hurry to get back cruising....shims too....like he said.

He nailed it.

[GPMESQ]

You guys are preaching to the choir!

To be forewarned is to be forearmed...my bracket went back on secured with the stud and nut up front...one less thing to worry about...

[U47]

Originally Posted by U47

First, I like using the bracket. It is not bolted to the front of the starter-there is no bolt. The starter has a long stud sticking out the front and you use a flat washer locking washer and nut to attach to the bracket. The way I look at it is some engineer who knows more that me about the stress levels on that heavy thing out there put the bracket out there for a reason. Or maybe he put it there for ease of installation.
The long stud sticking out and the slot in the bracket are also used for installing the starter. Instead of balancing that starter in your hand installing it and the wires, you can push the starter up there and rest the stud in the slot of the bracket, you still have to hold it, but only to keep it temporarily in place and this makes it easy to push and put the harness back into it's place while the starter is slightly down in the back. Now while it's resting in the bracket it much easier to locate the holes for the bolts for the starter. Absolutely no problem doing it this fast and easy way if your mechanically inclined and understand the reasoning for the brackets existence. If you've got a mini starter you don't need it because they are light weight and small.

Was watching a old clip of the 61 Daytona 500. A sure win for Fireball Roberts/ Yunick 61 Catalina. I believe with 13 laps to go the starter falls off and bounces off the ground back up and destroys to oil pan and loses the race. Teammate Marvin Panch takes over the lead and wins the race with Roberts last years 60 Catalina. Maybe that's why a bracket was finally put there?

[Sirrotica]

Originally Posted by U47

Was watching a old clip of the 61 Daytona 500. A sure win for Fireball Roberts/ Yunick 61 Catalina. I believe with 13 laps to go the starter falls off and bounces off the ground back up and destroys to oil pan and loses the race. Teammate Marvin Panch takes over the lead and wins the race with Roberts last years 60 Catalina. Maybe that's why a bracket was finally put there?

That was the corporate explanation of what happened, from what I've heard is the engine blew up. The starter was not the reason, it was a casualty of the mass destruction caused by the internal parts exiting the block.

This was the first outing of the new 4 inch stroke 421. SY disliked the 3.25 main bearing size because it had a tendency to heat the oil more than the 3 inch mains.

Smokey then started the stroker trend we use commonly now by turning 4 inch stroke 3.25 mains down to 3 inches so they could be used in a 389 block. He felt the 3.25 mains were excessive and lobbied the engineers to reduce the size. He wasn't successful in getting the engineers to reduce the main bearing size, and then built the successive engines to his own specs, 4 inch stroke crank with 3 inch main journals used in a 389 block.

From my recollection, the starter brace wasn't used until 1964 when Pontiac started using the block to mount the starters. Without the brace the starter bolts have a tendency over time to break the block casting where the starter bolts are tapped into it.

The earlier starter mounted either on the bellhousing or the transmission with 7/16 x1" bolts and used lock washers. The block mounted starters used 3/8 x 4 inch bolts. There is much more leverage when the starter engages on a block mounted application, than the early transmission mounted applications, having the tendency to shear things at the weakest link.

Below is an example of what can happen to the block without the starter brace on later blocks.

[U47]

Thought 61 Pontiac's were still running 389 because 421 was not offered in a production car ( NASCAR Rules ) I know Cotton Owens 61 Pontiac was a 389 for sure.

[Sirrotica]

61 was the first year for a 421, dealer installed option. NHRA also recognized it.

421
Introduced in 1961 as a dealer-installed Super Duty option that had dual four-barrels, the 389 was bored to 4 3⁄32 inches (103.98 mm) and stroked to 4 in (101.6 mm) for a displacement of 421.19 cuin, and also featured larger 3.25 in (82.55 mm) main journals. Unlike previous enlargements of this engine, it did not replace the 389. The 421 SD became factory installed in 1962 and in 1963 a street version became available from the factory with a four-barrel or tri-power carburetion. The Super Duty versions of this engine were extensively used in NASCAR stock car racing and drag racing competition. The 421 also marked the end of the option for a forged-steel crankshaft. The Armasteel cast crankshaft was the standard crankshaft of the entire Pontiac V-8 line until 1967. While "Armasteel" was no more than a fancy name for a hardened cast-iron unit, it did refer to the "locking ball" as opposed to the "flaking" type cast-iron found in other engines. In 1967, Pontiac out of concerns the public misunderstood the engineering terms, went to a Nodular cast-iron name crankshaft, which they used until 1975.

You could be right about NASCAR not allowing it until 62, I was only 9 years old at the time.

The real version I did hear was that the starter was not the start of the event, just a casualty of the event. I believe years later SY recanted the story saying the starter was the cause because of the corporation did not want to admit that the engine actually failed.

[north]

Originally Posted by gtohurstjudge

There's going to be a huge market for those bolts......better stock up
now while you can still get them! The first time I had to pull the starter off my GTO was in 1973. It took all day, and honestly if I hadn't been able to come up with a better way
of installing the starter and routing the wires to it, I probably would have gotten rid of the
car over that problem it was such a pain in the ass. With the factory setup you can pull
a starter off a 69 SS396 Chevelle in about 15 seconds. The money Pontiac spent on that bolt and bracket and heat tube would have been a lot better spent putting a real metal
hinge on the glovebox door or putting a place on the console to stow the seat belts. I
love my GTO but honestly it has the most engineering deficiencies of any car I have ever owned, and I've owned a lot of cars.The
worst offenders that a three year old could have designed better:
Endura bumper with endless paint cracks
console door
glove box door
hood release
hood that buckles in the middle
dash cluster that requires removing the whole dash to service
Judge wing that bolts only to the outer skin of the decklid, pulling the skin away from the lower framework
tail light bezels that corrode horribly in three years of daily use
horrible panel gaps from the factory
6 inch wide wheels on a muscle car......really?
a muscle car with standard manual drum brakes.....really?
Endless rear main seal leaks
Ridiculous rear end that requires pressing the rear wheel bearings on the axles
No place to stow the seat belt buckles when not being used
starter mounting and wire routing
studs on the A/C box with nuts you can't get to when they could have been eliminated with no issue whatsoever.
Foam caulk in the body panels that caused rust outs when three years old even in Texas where they don't salt the roads
An aluminum timing gear with plastic teeth.....really?
A fan shroud that requires removing the whole radiator to remove

I can add to the list:

a power steering pulley that is 1/4" too large diameter so you cant change the alternator without disassembling the power steering hardware

have you ever removed a fan without shredding your fingers against the rad

Rube Goldberg clutch linkage

an oil pan that can only be properly reinstalled by just about removing the engine so the only way to properly replace above mentioned plastic timing chain is to remove engine! (so you can properly remove shredded plastic from oil pick up

using plastic studs behind the dash to ground all the gauges and lighting

[U47]

Originally Posted by Sirrotica

61 was the first year for a 421, dealer installed option. NHRA also recognized it.



You could be right about NASCAR not allowing it until 62, I was only 9 years old at the time.

The real version I did hear was that the starter was not the start of the event, just a casualty of the event. I believe years later SY recanted the story saying the starter was the cause because of the corporation did not want to admit that the engine actually failed.

Wouldn't be the first time a mechanic was blamed!

[U47]

Originally Posted by north

I can add to the list:

a power steering pulley that is 1/4" too large diameter so you cant change the alternator without disassembling the power steering hardware

have you ever removed a fan without shredding your fingers against the rad

Rube Goldberg clutch linkage

an oil pan that can only be properly reinstalled by just about removing the engine so the only way to properly replace above mentioned plastic timing chain is to remove engine! (so you can properly remove shredded plastic from oil pick up

using plastic studs behind the dash to ground all the gauges and lighting

Sounds like you are a good candidate for some other make of car.
Perhaps a car that's " Engineered to move the human spirit", or a car that you can "Drive your dreams" ? ?

Seriously though, try a clutch job on a C7 Vette. Want to change a starter on some new cars? It's under the intake manifold in the valley. The GTO is a piece of cake. How about a wiring harness for the average new car? the wiring loom looks like it came out of a 767.

[north]

Don't get me wrong, I (obviously) love these cars and enjoy so many aspects of them but I can simultaneously point out areas they dropped the ball!

Plastic timing gears, no heat-cutoff switch on the AC compressor, insufficient rust proofing, leaky hoodtachs etc were clearly the products of substandard engineering and GM was slow to address many issues.

In fairness GM cars in general were the best of the bunch compared to the local competition in those days but these type of problems and the rational behind them would soon lead to the Japanese and European competitors taking huge market share from the big 3!

[U47]

Originally Posted by north

Don't get me wrong, I (obviously) love these cars and enjoy so many aspects of them but I can simultaneously point out areas they dropped the ball!

Plastic timing gears, no heat-cutoff switch on the AC compressor, insufficient rust proofing, leaky hoodtachs etc were clearly the products of substandard engineering and GM was slow to address many issues.

In fairness GM cars in general were the best of the bunch compared to the local competition in those days but these type of problems and the rational behind them would soon lead to the Japanese and European competitors taking huge market share from the big 3!

No, I haven't taken you wrong. I know what you mean, heck I worked for a manufacturer in the engineering dept. for 34 years. I think most of the domestic cars lost it over the fit and finish issues. Mostly the powertrains were good except for a few bombs like Ed Coles Vega engine, and his TurboGlide.
It is interesting that some very good V-8's came with plastic coated aluminum camshaft gears like all FE including 425 h.p. 427 Fords, and 429, 472, 500, 425, 368 Cadillac's especially the later Cadillac's when the problem had surfaced decades before! They always said it was a noise issue, but with a double roller in my 389 Catalina and 455 LeMans I could never hear any difference. In My Olds which is super quiet and smooth, it's 250 with seven main bearings has a gear to gear drive!

[charles bledsoe]

Good thread over all. I did learn not to ever remove that starter bracket. Ah the joys of a 20 min job turning into a 3 hr job while lying on your back cussing, gouging your hands, and getting greasy! But you can't replicate the feeling and pride of accomplishment I don't think in any other hobby. Being able to wrench on and keep these old beauties on the road is priceless.....try doing it with these new cars. You gotta love it!