The ol' SD1 refused to start one day when out and hot. Wouldn't turn over
- although the battery was ok. Sticking starter solenoid, I'd guess. RAC
man got it started by connecting the car battery and his slave one in
*series*. I'm surprised the car electronics survived this, but they did.
He'd obviously got more balls than me.

-- 
*Wrinkled was not one of the things I wanted to be when I grew up

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


> The ol' SD1 refused to start one day when out and hot. Wouldn't turn over
> - although the battery was ok. Sticking starter solenoid, I'd guess. RAC
> man got it started by connecting the car battery and his slave one in
> *series*. I'm surprised the car electronics survived this, but they did.
> He'd obviously got more balls than me.
> 

This used to be a common trick to start rebuilt engines for the first time.
Not that many electronics on an SD1 to kill, is there?

<nostalgia>

It was also used by the Ford works rally team on the MK2 Escort BDA's. If
you stalled one on a stage they would never crank. If you push-started them
they used to slip the cam belt. They fitted two batteries and extra
starting solenoids  where the rear seats would be. This put the two
batteries in series whilst cranking, but left one battery unconnected at
all other times. Initially the slave battery was left not charging, but the
batteries were swapped over at each service. Later, a caravan split-charge
relay was fitted.

I found this out "unofficially" in order to convert a friend's rally car
that I looked after.

</nostalgia>

Chris

-- 
Remove prejudice to reply

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:18:07 GMT, Chris Whelan wrote:


> Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> 
>> The ol' SD1 refused to start one day when out and hot. Wouldn't turn over
>> - although the battery was ok. Sticking starter solenoid, I'd guess. RAC
>> man got it started by connecting the car battery and his slave one in
>> *series*. I'm surprised the car electronics survived this, but they did.
>> He'd obviously got more balls than me.
>> 
> This used to be a common trick to start rebuilt engines for the first time.
> Not that many electronics on an SD1 to kill, is there?
> 
> <nostalgia>
> 
> It was also used by the Ford works rally team on the MK2 Escort BDA's. If
> you stalled one on a stage they would never crank. If you push-started them
> they used to slip the cam belt.


How? Just because the drive is applied the other way - is that really
sufficeint to make the belt skip or is there another reason.

"Chris Street"  wrote in message
news:1xlrbgkbzi4ws.pd9s5q6oo2tb.dlg@40tude.net...

> On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:18:07 GMT, Chris Whelan wrote:
>
> > Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> >
> >> The ol' SD1 refused to start one day when out and hot. Wouldn't turn
over
> >> - although the battery was ok. Sticking starter solenoid, I'd guess.
RAC
> >> man got it started by connecting the car battery and his slave one in
> >> *series*. I'm surprised the car electronics survived this, but they
did.
> >> He'd obviously got more balls than me.
> >>
> > This used to be a common trick to start rebuilt engines for the first
time.
> > Not that many electronics on an SD1 to kill, is there?
> >
> > <nostalgia>
> >
> > It was also used by the Ford works rally team on the MK2 Escort BDA's.
If
> > you stalled one on a stage they would never crank. If you push-started
them
> > they used to slip the cam belt.
>
> How? Just because the drive is applied the other way - is that really
> sufficeint to make the belt skip or is there another reason.


It's bollocks. We've had all this before. The cambelt can't tell whether the
crankshaft is being turned by the starter or by the wheels.

Steve

>> 
>> It was also used by the Ford works rally team on the MK2 Escort BDA's. If
>> you stalled one on a stage they would never crank. If you push-started
>> them they used to slip the cam belt.
> 
> How? Just because the drive is applied the other way - is that really
> sufficeint to make the belt skip or is there another reason.


I'm not sure, but always assumed that because of the degree of tuning, the
cam profiles would have had steep ramps on them. Also the valve springs
would have been uprated. The cam belt was probably marginal for the job
anyway. When cranking on the starter motor the acceleration of all parts of
the engine up to cranking speed would have taken a finite amount of time.

When push starting, there would have been a much more sudden shock loading
from the crankshaft to the belt. I imagine it was this that often used to
cause the belt to jump a tooth.

I don't think this was a problem with road-going BDA's, only highly tuned
ones. Bear in mind this was the mid '70's, pre ECU/fuel injection times!
Ignition was still by a mechanical distributor with contact breaker points.
The standard power output was only around 120bhp but the works cars were
reputed to put out 260! This made them "interesting" to drive on the road
sections between stages.

Chris

-- 
Remove prejudice to reply

In article <z22Ve.7946$oq4.1336@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>,
   Chris Whelan  wrote:

> > The ol' SD1 refused to start one day when out and hot. Wouldn't turn
> > over - although the battery was ok. Sticking starter solenoid, I'd
> > guess. RAC man got it started by connecting the car battery and his
> > slave one in *series*. I'm surprised the car electronics survived
> > this, but they did. He'd obviously got more balls than me.
> > 
> This used to be a common trick to start rebuilt engines for the first
> time. Not that many electronics on an SD1 to kill, is there?


Quite a bit. Ignition. EFI ECU. OBC. Radio. Central locking. Alarm.

-- 
*I don't work here. I'm a consultant

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

>> > they used to slip the cam belt.
>>
>> How? Just because the drive is applied the other way - is that really
>> sufficeint to make the belt skip or is there another reason.
> 
> It's bollocks. We've had all this before. The cambelt can't tell whether
> the crankshaft is being turned by the starter or by the wheels.


I was involved in Rallying in the mid 70's. One of the things I did was to
work as part of the service crew for a MK2 Escort BDA that was driven by
someone who was a top three finisher at national level. I can assure you
that bump-starting a car with a tuned BDA lump was almost *guaranteed* to
cause the belt to jump a tooth! Why would the Ford works cars of that era
have gone to the trouble of, and carried the weight penalty of, a twin
battery set up? (See my earlier post).

I don't know whether my explanation of the shock loading of the bump start
causing the belt to jump is correct, or whether there is some other
explanation but it is *not* "bollocks"! I know - I've had to refit the belt
after it has happened more than once.

The driver whose Escort I helped look after was in the lucky position of
knowing someone who worked for David Sutton cars. (They prepared the works
Escorts.) Our information about this problem and how to overcome it came
from them...

Chris


-- 
Remove prejudice to reply

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


> In article <z22Ve.7946$oq4.1336@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>,
>    Chris Whelan  wrote:
>> > The ol' SD1 refused to start one day when out and hot. Wouldn't turn
>> > over - although the battery was ok. Sticking starter solenoid, I'd
>> > guess. RAC man got it started by connecting the car battery and his
>> > slave one in *series*. I'm surprised the car electronics survived
>> > this, but they did. He'd obviously got more balls than me.
>> > 
>> This used to be a common trick to start rebuilt engines for the first
>> time. Not that many electronics on an SD1 to kill, is there?
> 
> Quite a bit. Ignition. EFI ECU. OBC. Radio. Central locking. Alarm.
> 

Yes, I agree that was a bit of a risk then. Of course, the radio, central
locking and alarm need not have been powered up at this time.

Whilst actually cranking, the combined battery voltage would only have been
around 14. What I used to do was arrange for someone to hold the key over
to the cranking position whilst making the final jump lead connection. This
was on cars that had an electro-mechanical voltage regulator as the most
sophisticated device on them however :-)

Chris

-- 
Remove prejudice to reply

In article <AtbVe.5585$yF2.4431@newsfe6-win.ntli.net>,
   Chris Whelan  wrote:

> >> This used to be a common trick to start rebuilt engines for the first
> >> time. Not that many electronics on an SD1 to kill, is there?
> > 
> > Quite a bit. Ignition. EFI ECU. OBC. Radio. Central locking. Alarm.
> > 
> Yes, I agree that was a bit of a risk then. Of course, the radio, central
> locking and alarm need not have been powered up at this time.


The radio 'memory', the central locking controller and the alarm are
obviously powered up all the time. Otherwise they wouldn't work when you
needed them. ;-)

-- 
*OK, so what's the speed of dark? *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

WEll bumpstarting a car with a rally clutch is generally a lot more  
violent than cranking it over with the starter.