Hi everyone,

As done on my Grand Marquis, I'd like to upgrade the starter from direct drive to permanent magnet with gear reduction (PMGR) on my Ranger (1985, 2.0). I searched and can't seem to find references to other people doing the same...but I'm sure some people have.

I've done some part number cross-referencing and have a couple questions that I need your help with, since my local parts places do not have both the old style and new style in stock together for me to compare side by side.

The 2.0 and 2.3 use the same starters for 1985, and those same starters are used for the 2.3 up to 1990, according to RockAuto.

1991, RockAuto lists the PMGR starters for the 2.3.

My questions are:

• The PMGR starter has 10 teeth. The direct drive starter has 9. Is there a difference in the flywheel teeth or is this difference not going to matter?
  I SUSPECT it will work.
• Is the mounting bolt pattern the same?
  I SUSPECT that it's the same.

(this thread on another site suggests I'll have no issues, but it's referring to an aftermarket kit which I suppose could have differently shaped teeth or something)

I am familiar with the wiring adjustments necessary so it's really just down to if it will physically mount up and if the gear will mesh up with the flywheel correctly.

Cheers

__________________
'85 2.0>2.3 5-speed

Almost forgot I posted this. Bump?

If the best way to figure this out is going to be to just try it and see, well, so be it. I do like a better degree of certainty though.

__________________
'85 2.0>2.3 5-speed

Well...alright.

Found a sympathetic person at the part store who ordered the starters for comparison's sake...

Physical mounting is definitely a go. The problem is the drive gear that engages the flywheel. The teeth are approximately the same size but the gear itself is bigger on the newer starter (larger diameter), by a small amount, but was difficult to measure. The larger diameter is where the extra tooth comes from.

This is where I'm hoping someone has done this and can chime in, because bigger gear sounds to me like an excellent opportunity to screw up a flywheel. Maybe the gears can be removed and exchanged between starters in a straightforward way?

__________________
'85 2.0>2.3 5-speed

Poke around here or elsewhere and find out which parts are used for the flywheel in the respective years. If the same part numbers are used, 99.9% sure that the perm magnet will fit without problems. There was a post here or elsewhere comparing the flywheels for the 2.3, 3.0 and 4.0, and there was little difference in dimensions, but I do not know exactly where.
You might also do some measurements to see if the centerline of the armature is moved to offset the larger gear diameter, thus retaining proper mesh. It would involve measuring the mounting hole positions, and the dimension to centerline of the armature for both styles.
tom

That would have been the smart thing to do, wouldn't it? Thanks for the pointer.

The same flywheel is spec'd for all 4-banger Rangers 1983-1994, according to RockAuto. So, I guess that answers that (parts catalogs aren't always 100%, but it seems like a safe bet here). You're probably right on about the centerline being moved so the larger gear fits.

Looks like this is a go...

__________________
'85 2.0>2.3 5-speed

To come full circle with this:

My truck now has a 2.3 (final swap work in progress currently) with details at TRS: https://therangerstation.com/forums/...d.php?t=178276

I am still using the TK5 trans, and still using the same metal spacer plate between the bellhousing and engine, and still using the same flywheel from the 2.0. I upgraded to a gear reduction starter for a 90s Ranger, purchased from here: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004CSZXTE

So, yes, the older Limas can receive the newer starter. Just need to move the high amp cable to the constant hot post on the starter relay, and add a second low amp wire from the switched post on the starter relay (same as any PMGR starter upgrade). The newer starter aligns and meshes properly with the older flywheel.

__________________
'85 2.0>2.3 5-speed

It takes a rare breed to make a major deal out of a simple starter replacement.

__________________

or

__________________
_______________________

My Build Pg. Threads
+ 93' Ranger Overlanding Build
+ 94' Ranger Bed Overlanding Trailer Build
+ 12° North Industries ~ I Support

A high torque starter is absolutely needed for the massive horsepower 2.3. It's hard to keep score on your truck.

__________________

I think if your starter has more torque than your vehicles engine to start with.. you might be fighting the wrong battle here.. lol

__________________
_______________________

My Build Pg. Threads
+ 93' Ranger Overlanding Build
+ 94' Ranger Bed Overlanding Trailer Build
+ 12° North Industries ~ I Support

Originally he had a 73 hp 2.0. I could see a high torque starter if the truck had a 426 race hemi at 13.5-1 compression.

__________________

Wow, nice guys. Someone proposes an actual upgrade that improves reliability (by like 100-fold), asks the important questions that people need to know before attempting it, and you shit on it.

Where were you guys to answer the questions earlier?

As my OP states, nobody has confirmed that they did this starter swap before. It's a lot of money to drop on a starter without knowing if you'll be able to use it at all, considering the Lima uses a different starter than the SBF so I couldn't check against my other 4 vehicles that I've done the same to.

But OTOH, replacing the 2.0 entirely with a PMGR starter probably would have been an upgrade

__________________
'85 2.0>2.3 5-speed

My trucks 25 years old, the original Engine and trans still in the truck fairly early in its 352,000 mileage. The original starter lasted 21+ years, probably turns on my engine more than the top 100 posters on this sites women combined in the last 5 years of time. I know this because if the opposite were true they wouldnt be posting on a forum they'd be getting some nookie. There on a forum because they aint getting any nookie!! lol

I unfortunately made the mistake of replacing it with a popular BIG-BOX store replacement.. I want say the name but sounds like Autism Zone.. (spoiler, sorry)... it last 4 years, I had to replace that one earlier in the new year but before summer.

MOST people dont keep a car long.. In fact currently the reason why GM, Ford are ditching their cars is because they're making 100,000's of them and no ones buying due to this misconception of sharing shit and no one understanding what Property does for you. ALL RIGHTS are derived from property, Property adds to wealth, Wealth contributes to status and dare i say it but -- freedom/liberty

The new rationale is to NOT own anything but "share" in the benefit of having access to it.. - News flash, your still making a payment, insurances, and that nasty excise taxation called registration and licensing... brrrrrrrrr

Anyway my point is 21 years is a LONGER than expected you bet your ass you got you monies worth out of that fucking part's experience.

To wanna argue and or hold the mental notion that a starter with a 100-fold "durability" ratio somehow flukes you into thinking that you have somehow cut the failure rate of that truck down far below the 3% possibility is somehow....

so odd, that words even escape me.

And you can ask anyone on here, I have a comment for everything !

__________________
_______________________

My Build Pg. Threads
+ 93' Ranger Overlanding Build
+ 94' Ranger Bed Overlanding Trailer Build
+ 12° North Industries ~ I Support