It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by the2010apprentice
I have done this and realy was not as much of a savings as I thought, I even hooked the alt to my brake pedal to charge the large deep cycle battery when i Braked.It was not bad on sunny days but cloudy weeks and night driving sucked.I had much better results by cutting off the fuel pump and running the intake through a tank that used only gas fumes.
Hello , been a while since ive been on here so thought its time to create a new post, as lame as the topic may seem.
So anyway folks... my wonderance is -
Is it possibly more economical to run a car with no alternator to charge the battery, and rather, have either a single large capacity deep cycle leisure battery, or a bank of 2 or more leisure batteries, being charged by solar panels, say on the roof etc.
It has been on my mind today and ive not found a whole lot of info on the topic, so thought.. hey lets kick it around the ATS community.
I understand that power is needed to run the electrics etc.. hence the battery(s) provide this.
The battery needs to stay charged.. hence the solar panel / array.
The batteries wont charge at night time.. hence the long duration battery / bank of deep cycle leisure battery(s)
Alternator gives out similar voltage to the solar, even more so, using a regulator of some sort.
So there we have it, anyone care to discuss or point the thread in the right direction.
Thanks for looking !!
Night time driving would not be practical with this system over long distances without the use of batteries that are so heavy any savings would disappear in inertia ....
Imagine using an old-school bicycle generator mounted so that it rolls along the drive shaft as it rotates...
DC motors make free energy more possible.