Date:         Tue, 3 Feb 2004 09:27:31 -0800
Reply-To:     mark drillock <drillock@EARTHLINK.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         mark drillock <drillock@EARTHLINK.NET>
Subject:      Re: Why do JC Whitney Battery isolators have this VW caveat?
Comments: To: David Brodbeck <gull@gull.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I've owned a few BMWs with these same alternators and the batteries were
in the trunks in the opposite corner, about as far from the alternator
as they could get. The batteries lasted a very long time in the
protected environment and charged fine. It is not the alternator design
or the remoteness of the battery that should be faulted in Vanagons. The
1.9 waterboxers used a much smaller gauge cable for much of the long run
to the battery. VW "corrected" this with the 2.1 models which use a
truly massive cable instead. The rest of the long run probably should be
larger too, though VW did improve that section a couple times starting
with the 2.1s.

Mark

David Brodbeck wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, mark drillock wrote:
>
> > MANY premium brand manufacturers use the same basic alternator with
> > integrated regulator as the Vanagon. Mercedes, BMW, Volvo, Audi, Saab,
> > etc..... Hard to accept that these all would use something "truly
> > pathetic" to only save a buck
>
> I think these alternators are fine in cars with short battery cable runs
> and relatively small battery capacities.  My Volvo's charging voltage
> stays nicely at 14V no matter how many accessories I turn on.  But in the
> Vanagon it's just not a good design.
>
> David Brodbeck, N8SRE
> '82 Volkswagen Diesel Westfalia
> '86 Volvo 240DL wagon