Quote:
Originally Posted by Miyata To avoid any unpleasant consequences is why we place the negative far enough away from any readily combustible gases (like hydrogen that might emerge from battery chemistry).
What is the electrical spark - just local gas/air ionization as a consequence of high enough electric field causing the breakdown. |
Thanks.
But then why don't they simply give an unpainted terminal (like mercedes does) in the car. It wouldn't even cost them an additional 50 rupees. Just attach a metal tab to an unpainted portion. How hard is it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sutripta Safety trumps cranking! Hazards - safety item. Cranking - On the ground huge safety item - in a courtroom - no. Product liability lawyers will rule in this case.
(In a similar vein, what do you think of the fact that in many cars actuation of an airbag also immobilises the car). |
The comparison is not valid. Your principle is valid but you can't stretch airbag activation logic all that far. Sorry.
Yes safety trumps cranking - but let's get into the detail.
I am simply saying that the car battery has enough juice for switching on the hazards, cabin light, dashboard, ICE and the headlight when the door is opened. You assume I had the hazards on while cranking. But I was NOT running the hazards and the headlight when I was trying to crank the car.

Thats why your comparison is incorrect.
When I need to start the car, I need to press the brakes - at that time, if the ECU detects low voltage, how hard is it to switch off the dashboard, ICE and brake lights for the 5 seconds it takes for the car to crank up?
Switching off the tail/brake lights or operating them at the lower wattage isn't that much of a safety issue. Restarting a broken down car is just as important for safety as it is operating the brake light for 5 additional seconds.
I might be stretching my memory, but I think the Swift VDi used to do that. When my battery was weak, I distinctly recall the cabin light and dashboard going off while the car started.
Ford has to take thoughtful and consistent engineering decisions. On one side, every single electrical in the car remains on for hours, even when the key is taken out and the car is locked. Therefore, you must be generous with battery sizes. But no, my car has a much smaller battery than the diesel. And if you cannot do that, you must reduce starter motor wattage so that cranking is unaffected due to inadvertent power drawdown (say by a hard wired dash camera). I don't recall the specifics but I recall from a decade back that different bikes had different starter motor current requirements.
Either ways, I don't care two hoots. For me, this is shoddy engineering. Ford makes inconsistent decisions AND saves cost while pushing the liability onto me.
Yesterday, my car was rear ended. As a result the boot light stayed on for an hour plus everytime. I couldn't sleep because I went down and switched the car every couple of hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sutripta d) Don't use hazards for extended periods of time! |
Disagree. What if you have a puncture and the spare is punctured as well? What is the point of a 5kg battery if it can't support hazard lights for that long. I would much rather buy cheap no name 200gm cycling flashers and put them in my car instead if that's all Ford engineering is capable of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioholic In the case of your Ford DCT, have you looked at this angle? I am not sure if the DCT is hydraulic or completely electric, but hazard lights alone might not drain the battery so much is my feeling. I can be wrong too. |
The scenario you described happened with me on 30th December 2017. This case was much simpler. The car was locked and parked with no electrical item connected. Frankly I have put my phone to charge in the parked car for similar duration in the past. I will now desist from doing that.