View Single Post
Old 10-03-2010, 04:00 AM   #13 (permalink)
ShadeTreeMech
Basjoos Wannabe
 
ShadeTreeMech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 870

The Van - '97 Mercury Villager gs
90 day: 19.8 mpg (US)

Lyle the Kindly Viking - '99 Volvo V70
90 day: 25.82 mpg (US)
Thanks: 174
Thanked 49 Times in 32 Posts
I have to disagree with many people here about this.

The common philosophy is to go alternatorless will save buckets of energy. My question is, if an alternator is drawing no power, how much gas does it consume? The answer is very little in comparison to the gas usage of the vehicle needing to move down the road. If a 100 amp alternator is drawing full power, how much gas does it consume?

@100 amps output, we could assume 50% efficiency, which make 200 amps effective draw from the crank.
750 watts=55.6 amps @13.5 volts
13.5 volts (roughly the voltage of a running alternator) times 200 amps = 2700 watts
2700 watts divided by 750 watts (or 746 for those who are particular) = 3.6 hp.

At cruise the Scanguage calculates I am creating 50 hp from the gas I burn. So 7.2 percent of gas burned at cruise goes to the alternator ASSUMING the battery is dead and requires a recharge, which would require all the alternator has to give. However, generally speaking, with a topped off battery and a healthy alternator, it would be a fraction of that draw. Lets say half that, I'm sure it's less, but half makes easy math.

7.2 hp required divided in half = 3.6% required from my 50 hp output at cruise. At cruise I can easily exceed 30 mpg, so we'll stick with 30 mpg. So if I delete the alternator and ignore any possible side effects from a lower voltage requiring more amperage to components (higher amps = more heat) I'll save 3.6% of 30 mpg which equals 1.08 mpg and a nearly dead battery after a healthy drive.

Where's the benefit when I can allow the alternator to efficiently create electricity on the fly and hardly if ever open the hood to recharge a nearly flat battery?
__________________
RIP Maxima 1997-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
I think you missed the point I was trying to make, which is that it's not rational to do either speed or fuel economy mods for economic reasons. You do it as a form of recreation, for the fun and for the challenge.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ShadeTreeMech For This Useful Post:
67-ls1 (12-15-2014), busypaws (10-05-2010), KamperBob (10-03-2010), MrMiata (10-04-2010)