Hi David;
>From the year of your TR3A, I'm guessing it might have the later starter,
i.e., not the 'bomb' starter. In my experience (only), the later starter is
much more reliable than the 'bomb' starter. So, with a gear reduction unit
I would say you get some more reliability, though not necessarily like
going from a major headache, to total reliability. More like going from the
propensity for the occasional problem, to total reliability.
The biggest advantage might be that the gear reduction motor draws a lot
less power and might also crank over the engine faster, aiding starting and
less hard on the battery, etc.
One big advantage for me (my TR3A is early enough to have the 'bomb'
starter originally, and it was a nightmare) was that I felt the gear reduction
unit was so reliable that I no longer needed the crank hole in the radiator.
This allowed me to get the radiator re-cored without the hole, giving me (I
think) 20-25% more cooling capacity. Obviously, there are other advantages
to having the crank hole, such as turning the engine over when adjusting
points, valves, etc., but there easy are ways around that.
I've owned TR3A's with the later starter and did have the occasional
starter reliability issue, but nothing too bad. If it were me, I'd still stump
up the money for a gear-reduction unit. Mine's been on my car for several
years now with no problems, and I love the low power draw and how it cranks
over the engine. I ordered mine directly from Moss, I think.
Sorry that's such a lengthy reply.
Tim
TS22930LO
_______________________________________________
Triumphs@autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation $11.47
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
|