Factory original Chrysler ammeter-based Charging System and additional loading. Load placement matters!

[72RoadrunnerGTX]

I have added a short demonstration video to the original post for those who may remain skeptical that the load placement matters for the all stock original Chrysler charging system.

 

[RJRENTON]

I have added a short demonstration video to the original post for those who may remain skeptical that the load placement matters for the all stock original Chrysler charging system.

Excellent addition to your first expose....detailed yet concise with explanations....great learning tool for the uneducated and the self proclaimed "experts" who have no clue as to what actually happens. Thanks for the update AND effort....!!!!
BOB RENTON

 

[pnora]

I have added a short demonstration video to the original post for those who may remain skeptical that the load placement matters for the all stock original Chrysler charging system.

Nice explanation. Many will not grasp.

 

[Nacho-RT74]

And there is why I allways say no accs must be added on batt side on stock systems. Load is real going throught the amm but charge reading is not actually real(*). Plus the added stress on the system, specially at bulkhead If not upgraded. After that, stress on ammeter with loads which doesn’t need to take care. At least not with engine running.

-(*) based on the scale design, meaning that side is understood a a Charge status but on this case will be not for batt charge but acc feed. Then ppl which doesn’t understand the system think everything is good like that as far “the alt is charging”.

 

[70Dart]

There have been some recent threads here where the subject of connecting loads at the battery on unmodified stock factory charging systems has come up. As an old-time Chrysler dealer/factory trained master tech, with that specific dealer experience back then and the many years spent designing and installing aftermarket 12-volt DC power/charging systems professionally for high-end automotive and marine applications, leaves me perplexed frankly about some of the responses from some otherwise seasoned appearing members here. Its clear some just can’t separate this stock factory charging system, in its original form, from every other 12-volt automotive charging system in general. The attempts at written descriptions and diagraming to differentiate this system appears to have fallen on some deaf ears, or blind eyes in this case.

For those that are interested in a fact-based video presentation on this subject, specific to the original Chrysler factory charging system design and touching a bit on ammeters/melted bulkhead connectors, I submit this video, forgive the amateur production quality. Feel free to critique the info presented but stay on subject of the as original Chrysler charging systems from this time period please.

For those who can’t separate this charging system from every other vehicle on the road, are convinced an ammeter-based charging system is a "ticking time bomb" while placing loads where ever, or already understand the negative impact of adding loads to the battery on the as original Chrysler ammeter-based charging system, don’t waste your time (about 28 minutes start to finish) watching this video, you'll never get the time back.

Disclaimer, once more, this information does not apply to any modified, ammeter by-passed, volt-meter converted, engine compartment main charge circuit by-passed Chrysler charging system, or every other charging system configuration on the planet not running a battery ammeter. Load placement does not matter for most other systems.





Adding in links to the slides used in the video.
Slide 1
Slide 2
Slide 3
Slide 4
Slide 5
Slide 6

Great presentation! Caught me in time to do mine right the first time.

 

[Charlie71rt]

Winner Winner!! Best video ever explaining how the ammeter works, and not a single person disputing it, (SO FAR)

 

[Canadian1968]

Great video.

For all those that have disputed this in the past , pretty hard to argue with a " in front of your own eyes " demonstration .

Many have tried in the past to explain in words or examples . Sometimes a real life , real time video is what is needed to settle the argument!

Cheers

 

[70chall440]

From what I have seen in the past the argument is not which side to put a load or how to connect a load (accessories), it has been whether retaining the ammeter and stock wiring was worth the potential risk. This explanation and associated video pretty much reinforce the stance of not having this arrangement or at a minimum altering the stock arrangement.

If you are to connect all of your desired accessories on the alternator side then you need to make concessions for that, namely some type of terminal. Why even mess with this situation for the sake of having an ammeter. I understand that an ammeter can provide information that an volt meter cannot but I would contend that the risk as well as the associated requirements to make it work well are not worth it; in other words "the juice is not worth the squeeze" unless you have a bone stock car and you want that gauge to work.

I really appreciate the information contained in the thread, however it only serves to confirm to me that I have no need for a ammeter.

 

[72RoadrunnerGTX]

From what I have seen in the past the argument is not which side to put a load or how to connect a load (accessories), it has been whether retaining the ammeter and stock wiring was worth the potential risk. This explanation and associated video pretty much reinforce the stance of not having this arrangement or at a minimum altering the stock arrangement.

If you are to connect all of your desired accessories on the alternator side then you need to make concessions for that, namely some type of terminal. Why even mess with this situation for the sake of having an ammeter. I understand that an ammeter can provide information that an volt meter cannot but I would contend that the risk as well as the associated requirements to make it work well are not worth it; in other words "the juice is not worth the squeeze" unless you have a bone stock car and you want that gauge to work.

I really appreciate the information contained in the thread, however it only serves to confirm to me that I have no need for a ammeter.

In previous discussions (or arguments) about all thing’s ammeters, I have always attempted to bring up load misplacement as the leading cause of most ammeter connection related issues a lot of folks like to blame on the factory ammeter, always has been. As I said, this post was intended only address the notion that you can load this system any way you want without any consequences, that the original charging system components will not be impacted and to say otherwise is “nonsense”. That if this overloading results in heat damage to the ammeter and related connections/circuits, then it was a poor design and should be removed from every remaining Chrysler product from the time. That if you don’t “get rid of” that factory ammeter it will eventually burn down your car for no other reason whatsoever.

Potential risk? There is potential risk created to any electrical system or components when being operated outside of its original current design limits or is poorly serviced/maintained. I’ve seen burned wires/connections on every kind of vehicle over the years, as a direct result of overloading beyond given circuit design limits and/or terminal/connection abuse. Fact remains, even today, any serious real time monitoring of batteries or DC circuits involves ammeters of some kind. If a voltmeter or an idiot light works for some to monitor the charge/no-charge status of your original charging system, great. If this info only reinforces your perception of risk, that’s fine too. I take issue with those who promote their anti-ammeter views without the full understanding of how this system was designed to function in the first place, or just because they read it in an article somewhere. Or an article that must make up some premise about an ammeter leaving some car on the side of the road, then pictures a pristine ammeter with no heat or connection damage whatsoever to back-up their claim.

Said it before, a great many Chrysler products were built with this system, the vast majority of them lived and went to their wrecking yard gave without sulfuring the dreaded “ammeter meltdown syndrome”, many survive today, all without anyone screwing around with loading at the battery or connection abuse and operated fully within its original design limits.

Your signature references several modified vehicles, I assume electrical modifications as well, once more the subject of this thread was about as originally designed. There are some modifications where the original ammeter is not suited or supported, the Dakota Digital cluster as an example. If all someone takes away from this is that this charging system as originally designed will not support their modification plans or reinforces some perceived risk factor, I’m ok with that too.

 

[70chall440]

In previous discussions (or arguments) about all thing’s ammeters, I have always attempted to bring up load misplacement as the leading cause of most ammeter connection related issues a lot of folks like to blame on the factory ammeter, always has been. As I said, this post was intended only address the notion that you can load this system any way you want without any consequences, that the original charging system components will not be impacted and to say otherwise is “nonsense”. That if this overloading results in heat damage to the ammeter and related connections/circuits, then it was a poor design and should be removed from every remaining Chrysler product from the time. That if you don’t “get rid of” that factory ammeter it will eventually burn down your car for no other reason whatsoever.

Potential risk? There is potential risk created to any electrical system or components when being operated outside of its original current design limits or is poorly serviced/maintained. I’ve seen burned wires/connections on every kind of vehicle over the years, as a direct result of overloading beyond given circuit design limits and/or terminal/connection abuse. Fact remains, even today, any serious real time monitoring of batteries or DC circuits involves ammeters of some kind. If a voltmeter or an idiot light works for some to monitor the charge/no-charge status of your original charging system, great. If this info only reinforces your perception of risk, that’s fine too. I take issue with those who promote their anti-ammeter views without the full understanding of how this system was designed to function in the first place, or just because they read it in an article somewhere. Or an article that must make up some premise about an ammeter leaving some car on the side of the road, then pictures a pristine ammeter with no heat or connection damage whatsoever to back-up their claim.

Said it before, a great many Chrysler products were built with this system, the vast majority of them lived and went to their wrecking yard gave without sulfuring the dreaded “ammeter meltdown syndrome”, many survive today, all without anyone screwing around with loading at the battery or connection abuse and operated fully within its original design limits.

Your signature references several modified vehicles, I assume electrical modifications as well, once more the subject of this thread was about as originally designed. There are some modifications where the original ammeter is not suited or supported, the Dakota Digital cluster as an example. If all someone takes away from this is that this charging system as originally designed will not support their modification plans or reinforces some perceived risk factor, I’m ok that too.

Your information and intent were not lost, I was merely point out that the main typical argument is concerning whether to keep the ammeter or not and/or what risk it may or may not present. I completely agree that in original or near original configuration a vintage Mopar has really no more risk of electrical failure than other types of systems.

That said, I would assume that there are a lot more modified Mopars represented in these forums than not and without knowing the information you (and others) presented here, modifying a Mopar electrical system by adding various types of loads incorrectly represents a potential risk. I know that there is always a risk when modifying any vehicle however IMO the core of this issue is that not understanding the issue of "alternator vs battery" side of the charging system can and has led to significant issues.

I will admit right now that until I read this thread I did not fully understand the issue but I did understand that there was a potential for serious electrical problems while the ammeter was in place and functioning. For this aspect alone I thank you for taking the time to create this thread.

You are correct, most of my vehicles have some level of electrical modifications which is exactly why I am interested and thankful for this thread and others like it as well as the variety of experienced and knowledgeable individuals who are members here. I learned early on that if you are going to own a Mopar you need to understand at least the basics of electrical work. In my early days I smoked up a harness or 2 trying to add things or connect things incorrectly. I can still smell the burned wire insulation as I type this... lol .

I am not at all saying that having an ammeter is dangerous or something that must be removed immediately, rather I am saying that it is important to understand what system you are dealing with and operate within its parameters. I personally do not see that having an ammeter provides any benefit in a modified vehicle but I readily concede that if you do have one it is not a ticking time bomb either.

 

[Nacho-RT74]

As I tipically said, making the stuff correctly and understanding how it works and what its reading actually means, the ammeter can still live with most of the added accesories and actual/newer upgrades. But making stuff wrong, of course will kill not the amm but the entire system.

if you upgrade the alt correctly for the added accesories and connect them on the correct side, the ammeter won’t suffer. The batt is at the end one more device what still on a full death status can’t suck more load than the chemicals inside is able to process to be recharged. You can’t SPEED UP the charging process with a higher ouput recharging source, just give all the meat it wants. The ammeter will hold a regular recharge process.

of course is not good to get a batt recharged from death on car. I have made it thought but just because I handle the situation knowing how it works the system. I have applied Two tricks for that:

- A temporal jumper wire between alt and batt, but if no jumper wire then:

-at iddle, recharge the batt with lights on. This reduces the load running to batt and the alt shares its load between batt and lights. The amm just gets the load running to batt.

of course after the batt got charged partially you can despite these two tricks and get it back to normal.

Get a bigger capacity batt could also be the wrong way to upgrade your car electricals if you make things incorrectly. I explain about that on the thread I made.

 

[Axemaster24]

My 12ga fusible link came in a 4ft roll, how long should I cut the link to? I saw someone on our sister site (A Bodies) mentioned 6” long but this is way too important for the survival of my car to guess.

 

[pnora]

My 12ga fusible link came in a 4ft roll, how long should I cut the link to? I saw someone on our sister site (A Bodies) mentioned 6” long but this is way too important for the survival of my car to guess.




View attachment 1583252

Length is unimportant as that fuse-able wire is going to burn at the same load to matter the length. 6 inches should be fine.

 

[Axemaster24]

Thanks Pnora!

 

[RJRENTON]

Length is unimportant as that fuse-able wire is going to burn at the same load to matter the length. 6 inches should be fine.

FYI.....Fusable wire information.....
JT&T Products; Fusible link wire is designed to "open" a circuit when electrical current overload occurs. This "opening" of the circuit stops the current and prevents damage to electrical instruments or to accessories, and is most often used when the placement of a fuse is not possible. Meets or exceeds S.A.E. J-156 specifications. A fusible link is not intended to be used in place of a fuse, only where a fuse cannot be used. When replacing fusible link, the wire gauge used should be 4 gauges smaller than the existing wiring circuit.
Just thought you might like to know......
BOB RENTON

 

[72RoadrunnerGTX]

My 12ga fusible link came in a 4ft roll, how long should I cut the link to? I saw someone on our sister site (A Bodies) mentioned 6” long but this is way too important for the survival of my car to guess.

I agree for this application, 5-6” is sufficient. I would consider 6” as a maximum however, excess fusible link length will contribute to unnecessary voltage drop across the link in this circuit.

 

[RT SE 440]

There have been some recent threads here where the subject of connecting loads at the battery on unmodified stock factory charging systems has come up. As an old-time Chrysler dealer/factory trained master tech, with that specific dealer experience back then and the many years spent designing and installing aftermarket 12-volt DC power/charging systems professionally for high-end automotive and marine applications, leaves me perplexed frankly about some of the responses from some otherwise seasoned appearing members here. Its clear some just can’t separate this stock factory charging system, in its original form, from every other 12-volt automotive charging system in general. The attempts at written descriptions and diagraming to differentiate this system appears to have fallen on some deaf ears, or blind eyes in this case.

For those that are interested in a fact-based video presentation on this subject, specific to the original Chrysler factory charging system design and touching a bit on ammeters/melted bulkhead connectors, I submit this video, forgive the amateur production quality. Feel free to critique the info presented but stay on subject of the as original Chrysler charging systems from this time period please.

For those who can’t separate this charging system from every other vehicle on the road, are convinced an ammeter-based charging system is a "ticking time bomb" while placing loads where ever, or already understand the negative impact of adding loads to the battery on the as original Chrysler ammeter-based charging system, don’t waste your time (about 28 minutes start to finish) watching this video, you'll never get the time back.

Disclaimer, once more, this information does not apply to any modified, ammeter by-passed, volt-meter converted, engine compartment main charge circuit by-passed Chrysler charging system, or every other charging system configuration on the planet not running a battery ammeter. Load placement does not matter for most other systems.





Adding in links to the slides used in the video.
Slide 1
Slide 2
Slide 3
Slide 4
Slide 5H
Slide 6

 

[RT SE 440]

Hello all just wondering I'm running a dead stock car no extra acc but it's a factory r/t se so its got a/c and power windows & rear demist do you think the car be fine with the standard ammeter set up or would it pay for me to run a direct wire through the bulkhead at minimum as I'm doing the full wiring at the moment with all new m&h harnesses.

 

[72RoadrunnerGTX]

Hello all just wondering I'm running a dead stock car no extra acc but it's a factory r/t se so its got a/c and power windows & rear demist do you think the car be fine with the standard ammeter set up or would it pay for me to run a direct wire through the bulkhead at minimum as I'm doing the full wiring at the moment with all new m&h harnesses.

By far the weakest link in the original all stock charging system is the routing of charging/load current through Packard terminals in the bulkhead connector. They were/are under current rated for the real-world stock current loads on that circuit. Mis-placed added loads at the battery only increased the current load on the terminals. These terminals have been heating up and failing at high rates since these cars were new, especially with high optioned cars. For as you describe all stock loads, at a minimum, I would by-pass the bulkhead charge system Packard terminals, number 18 & 16. There is no electrical need for those disconnects at all. The M&H reproduction harnesses are nice accurate reproductions of the original wiring, the problem is this weakness is also reproduced accurately.

 

[RT SE 440]

By far the weakest link in the original all stock charging system is the routing of charging/load current through Packard terminals in the bulkhead connector. They were/are under current rated for the real-world stock current loads on that circuit. Mis-placed added loads at the battery only increased the current load on the terminals. These terminals have been heating up and failing at high rates since these cars were new, especially with high optioned cars. For as you describe all stock loads, at a minimum, I would by-pass the bulkhead charge system Packard terminals, number 18 & 16. There is no electrical need for those disconnects at all. The M&H reproduction harnesses are nice accurate reproductions of the original wiring, the problem is this weakness is also reproduced accurately.

So once i by pass the bulkhead terminals would i need a bigger amp alternator with the factory A/C,lights ,radio all running at once or would the standard alternator be sufficient.As those options would be on the correct side of the charging system.Also I'm wanting the car to look factory correct could i pass the straight run wires through the bulkhead plug so it looks standard i was thinking drilling the hole larger on the bulk head plug so the wire passes through cleanly ? also do i need a fusable wire going through the bulkhead or better to have a 50amp circuit breaker under the dash would that be okay ? sorry for the million questions