Got to watch the small stuff!

[Bigdog]

My opinion is like Rick's - tooling marks from the machining process.

[Gary Boutwell]

Donnie,

Those marks are around the entire ring. And they are very evenly dispersed.

Ok, I am going to put that ring back on its original flywheel and give it a go.
If it don't work, back to plan B at some later date.

These very old Cubs have some things different that the later ones didn't have.
Strange stuff! (but fun)

[billb61460]

this was a great thread. Very informative for this flywheel neophyte

[Lurker Carl]

Donnie,

Those marks are around the entire ring. And they are very evenly dispersed.

Ok, I am going to put that ring back on its original flywheel and give it a go.
If it don't work, back to plan B at some later date.

These very old Cubs have some things different that the later ones didn't have.
Strange stuff! (but fun)

Those grooves could be the difference that changed the R1 to the R2 ring gear.

[Rick Prentice]

I'd be willing to bet that cost had a major role in the change. It definetely took extra steps and time to machine the extra angled cut on the ring for the starter teeth. Indexing the gear 84 times, plus it took 2 cutters, one for the straight cross cut and another for the angled cut. If I had a choice between the two rings, my opinion is the R1 is the better choice. The R2 is just a cheaper made(time wise) part.

My .02,
Rick

[Clark Thompson]

That groove is supposed to be there. There was some problems with the starter not inguaging in the eary years of production. The groove aids in the meshing of the bendix gear. If you turn the ring gear around you probabley will have some meshing problems like mentioned earlier in the post.

[Ralph]

Gary
i have a couple flywheels cut the sme way.
it is supposed to be that way