DeTomaso Mailing List: June 2001, Message #165

Richard,
I installed the same motor for the headlights three years ago or so. 
Everything you said is correct, I made the coupler, enlarged the hole,
and haven't thought about it since.  Works flawlessly.
I also thought about it for the passenger window when it seized, but it
looked to me like it was going to hit the regulator when functioning. 
Stictly from what's left of my memory.  Cleaned and oiled the old motor,
and it's still working.
GPD4
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 16:58:03 -0400 Richard Barkley
<Richard.Barkley@trw.com> writes:
> Adam Goldman brought his Dayton motor to the HB Concours to give to 
> me to
> evaluate. He had been unable to get it to fit in his car. I was 
> also
> interested in it's possible use for the windows. I tinkered with it 
> a bit
> last night. Here's what I found.
> 
> First, I was interested in it's torque: is it stronger than the 
> stock motor
> (especially when stalled)? The short answer is maybe a little. My
> measurement system is a little crude. I clamped a 10" crescent 
> wrench to
> the flat on the shaft and added weight to the end until the motor 
> wouldn't
> turn it over. By that test, the Dayton was maybe 10-20% stronger. 
> Remember
> this is a new motor vs a 30+ year old motor. The Dayton was also 
> smoother.
> The original motor had a coggy feel, perhaps because of worn brushes 
> or
> armature, but maybe not as the permanent magnates give it a coggy 
> feel even
> with no power applied. This is only important when the motor is 
> stalled and
> trying to overcome the initial friction. If your headlights or 
> windows are
> working right this shouldn't matter. Also, the Dayton seemed to use 
> much
> less power. It's rated at 3.75 amps. I didn't measure the original 
> motor,
> but it's considerably more than this. Finally, the Dayton is 
> considerably
> noisier (I didn't think that was possible!) at least when running 
> full
> speed. It had a louder and higher pitched wine. Not a problem for
> headlights, but might be for the windows.
> 
> As previously reported, it's much larger in diameter: 3.25" vs about 
> 2" but
> a little shorter. Also, not reported, the shaft is 1/4" vs about 
> 5/16"
> (probably 8mm), and somewhat longer. Adam had gotten a coupler with 
> it, but
> it's not at all clear how it would be used. The stock coupler is a 
> rubber
> unit that matches the shafts on the motor and gear box. This was 
> solid
> steel with a set screw for the motor and two prongs sticking out the 
> other
> end. I suppose if you had a matching piece for the gear box, they 
> would
> interlock and form a crude universal. If I were to use it. I'd get 
> some
> 5/16" OD thin walled tubing (hobby shops sell this stuff and you 
> can
> probably find it at Home Depot, etc.) and epoxy it to the shaft, cut 
> the
> shaft to length, and file to extend the flat if needed so that it 
> fits the
> stock coupler. Also not previously mentioned is that the motor is 
> not
> sealed. The stock motor has some form of plastic overcoat. I'd 
> think, but
> don't know, that this might be important, at least for the headlight 
> motor.
> 
> Next, I tried to fit it in the headlight motor position. The 
> mounting studs
> are about 1/16" wider, but that's probably not a problem. The 3.25"
> diameter is. There is a hole in the bulkhead between the radiator 
> area and
> the headlight area where the motor is meant to fit. It doesn't stick 
> all
> the way through, but part of it does. I don't have my headlight 
> motor
> assembly bracket installed yet, but when I placed the motor in the
> approximate position, it was clear that it would not fit in my car 
> without
> enlarging the hole by at least 1/2", probably more. This could 
> probably be
> done with ViceGrips fairly easily, but it wouldn't be pretty. An
> alternative might be to have the motor mounted at a slight angle. I 
> can't
> see this working with the standard coupler, but might work with a 
> pair of
> the solid couplers. The solid coupler however had a shaft hole 
> larger than
> the shaft so when attached to the motor would be off center. The 
> gear box
> has a smaller shaft and would be even more off center if the same 
> coupler
> were used on it. I can't see this working well, especially if 
> missaligned.
> Bottom line, I would not recommend mounting the motor in a tilted 
> position.
> 
> I looked briefly to see how the motor would fit for window use. My 
> original
> units are already installed so I just eyeballed it. Again, the
> coupler/shaft would have the same problems and you might want to 
> seal it.
> Other than that, it looked like the needed extra 5/8" clearance 
> around the
> motor is available, so it should fit. My guess is that it would work 
> about
> the same as a 30 year old stock motor. It might go a little faster 
> and
> would probably be noisier.
> 
> Bottom line. This motor can certainly be made to work and the price 
> (about
> $25) is certainly right. I would adapt it to the stock coupler, not 
> use the
> solid coupler. I don't need or plan to use it now, but will keep it 
> in mind
> for the future. It appears not to be made for automotive 
> applications and I
> have questions about it's durability in a car, but it appears to be 
> working
> for Jim Demick, at least for 4 years.
> 
> Richard Barkley
> 
> 
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.