How many of us are there? Owners of Dodge based RV's?

[whiteknight001]

I'm new here, and curious.

How many of us in Class C own Dodge B300 incomplete
cab/chassis based RV's? I know two others- Steve aka
Ripsaw, with a 1977 Brougham, and Leroy aka 1978_Dodge
_Delta who owns a 440V8 powered sharp looking 1978
Delta RV. I would like to ask, and offer, help, idea
swapping and comparing notes on our particular RV's
which are based on the Dodge B300 van chassis.

Yeah, I know. These are low tech, podgy old RV's that
would be considered "entry level" for folks like me,
but I have a deep and abiding respect for the quality
of these old "monsters of the open road". And anyone
wanting to pick brains, joke about, share notes or just
brag about our old A- Dodge-io's are certainly welcome
to PM or email me. Between all of us we can form a real
good support group, and help each other with problems
we know we'll encounter with an older vehicle.

Sure. I'd love a new RV. But I'd rather have an older
one already paid for, and a lotta great memories. Call
me frugal, an old hippie, or whatever you will. I'm proud
of my old land yacht.

Mopar Madness Manifest in the flesh,

Mark aka White Knight

P.S. Mine's a '72. Is there an older one out there someone's
motorvating in? Maybe even a Travco? W/K

[Griff_in_Fairba]

eyeteeth wrote:
So Griff...

When you rewired... say... your MH. Did you try and pull a new wire through the old path? (Say... using the current wire) Or, did you reroute a new wire? I know what end result needs to be, but don't have the experience to know the best path to take. (Thanks)

That's a tough question, so I'll start with the short answer -- whatever gets the job done and works for you.

Not very helpful, I realize, but I use both approaches depending on the vehicle, whether there's a better path or the original path is best, how close to OEM I'm trying to keep the vehicle, how difficult it would be to follow the original path versus a new path, and so forth. It boils down to a judgement call with each situation.

One important note: What works best for me might not be what's best for you in otherwise identical situations.

Some of my criteria when I tackle a job, both large and small:

1. I try to make my results look as professional as possible. Something that looks professional is more likely to be durable and reliable.

2. I try to make what I'm doing equal to or better than OEM. Manufacturers often have to use less than ideal (i.e., just "good enough") to keep costs down. I don't have the same limitation but, on the other hand, what they did obviously worked.

3. Even if the fix is intended to only be temporary, I use the same approach I'd use with a permanent fix. ("Temporary has an amazing tendency to become permanent.")

4. In every possible case, I try to remove old wires so they don't add to the confusion when someone's working on it later. (On one computer networking job, I ran across a rat's nest of cables above a suspended ceiling. Figuring which cables belonged to the current system and which were cables disconnected and left over from the four previous networks took days.)

5. I try to keep the wires concealed from everyday view, unless I'm going for an "industrial" appearance. On the other hand, I like to keep the wiring accessible to make future troubleshooting easier. (Junctions, connectors, splices, fuses, and terminals are the most likely trouble spots so I focus on making them easier to get to.)

6. I allow 1/4" to 1/2" extra length per foot to allow for wire expansion and contraction. (A friend ran new wires to his taillights one summer and the next winter one wire contracted enough to pull a connector apart.)

7. I keep wires away from heat sources (e.g., the exhaust system), protect them from abrasions, and keep them away from moving parts.

Multiple wires bundled together into a single cable run causes me the most difficulty in how I want to proceed. Do I want to unwrap and re-wrap the bundles to replace as single wire? Did what went wrong affect other wires in the bundle, in which case it might be better in the long run to make a new bundle with all new wires? Do I want to (as much as I dislike it) trim the ends of the old wire back to where they "disappear" into the bundle and string a new wire, probably taping it to the outside of the bundle?

(I used each of these approaches at various times on different vehicles, all with equally good results.)

To really advise you, I need to know more about your situation. Roughly how long is the bad wire? (A few feet or all the way from the dash to the back?) Where does it go from and to? Where does it "disappear" and "re-appear" again? What does it seem to run through? (Wall, ceiling, chassis frame, behind cabinets, etc.?)

[eyeteeth]

So Griff...

When you rewired... say... your MH. Did you try and pull a new wire through the old path? (Say... using the current wire) Or, did you reroute a new wire? I know what end result needs to be, but don't have the experience to know the best path to take. (Thanks)

[Griff_in_Fairba]

Before going on, I'm going to recap what I've said about batteries so far.

Almost all motor vehicle batteries currently on the market are lead-acid batteries, with only relatively minor differences between the various types. All brands are effectively the same, with differences mostly limited to price and quality control.

Although based on old technology, with minor improvements over time, lead-acid batteries still provide the best available balance of availability, functionality, performance, and price. Less common batteries with different types of chemistry likely provide a less than favorable price/performance balance. (We are, after all, just trying to get to and from places that are, at most, a few hundred miles away. In particular, we're not trying to get to the moon and back.)

Gel batteries are best in certain specific circumstances but are general not suitable for motor vehicle use. (I will get to discussing where gel batteries might be best in a motor vehicle … and what you need to use them there.)

AGM batteries cost more but are arguably your best choice.

Flooded batteries are just fine, with a caveat related to VRLA and non-VRLA versions.

Non-VRLA batteries, which are basically limited to flooded batteries, are fine if you're willing to faithfully perform the routine periodic maintenance they require. (Non-VRLA batteries are usually called open-cell batteries.)

If you're the type of person who only checks their tire pressure once a year or less, you're better off with a VRLA batteries. (VRLA batteries are usually called maintenance-free or sealed batteries.)

Size (i.e., BCI Group designation), price, and ego are important considerations when choosing the battery that's best for you.

There is one difference that's very important when choosing batteries for our motorhomes: Starting versus deep-cycle batteries.

Side note: In the process of writing my electrical system ramblings, I've been researching the subject to make sure the information I provide is reasonably accurate and up-to-date, instead of relying solely on experience and memory. (Actually, this research is directed towards designing an electrical system for the boat I'm building that is reliable and does what I need … this research provides a sideways benefit to my ramblings.)

In this research, I've been relying heavily on marine electrical systems information, recommendations, and standards. Motorhomes and boats have similar electrical system features (such as dual battery banks) and share many common needs and issues. The reason I'm relying on marine information is boats operate in a somewhat more dangerous environment than motorhomes, which presumably results in more precise and reliable recommendations and standards. As a result, we can take "lessons learned" from the marine industry to improve our motorhomes' reliability and operation. This is especially important for our older motorhomes because they were produced close to the dawn of the motorhome industry, when there was very little experience and even less standards. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travco)

One very interesting bit of information I ran across was issues with the current standards for rating batteries, such as cold cranking amps (CCA). CCA, for example, is a measure of the number of amps a battery can deliver at 0°F for 30 seconds without dropping below 7.2 VDC. Average people cannot be faulted if they think this measurement would show up as a flat, horizontal line on a graph. (And, unfortunately, this may very well represent the test less than reputable battery manufacturers use to arrive at their CCA ratings.)

People with a good understanding of engine starting systems know an actual chart of starting system demand is a curve, starting with high amps and dropping down as the engine begin rotating. As it turns out, this view of the curve is also somewhat erroneous. (This included my prior understanding of starting system demand.)

Blue Sea Systems used refined test equipment, capable of very rapid time-slice sampling, to measure actual starting demand on a variety of marine engines under real world conditions. In spite of my understanding of variables in scientific measurement, I was very surprised by the results.

This demonstrates an ongoing problem with all fields of engineering and standardization. To avoid a lengthy (lengthier?) explanation, I'll use gas consumption as a metaphor. My 1990 Ford E150 van, with an inline 300 cu. in. engine, uses an average of less than five gallons of gasoline per week. Before you get jealous, I should point out the van only gets used once or twice a week for trips totaling less than ten miles and trips once or twice a month around 70 miles each. (This is why motor vehicle ads say, "Your mileage may vary.")

While Blue Sea used a variety of engines, it's my impression they used a large diesel marine engine as the most extreme example. (Makes sense, large diesel engines are notoriously difficult to start.) Blue Sea's tests indicate the greatest demand occurs almost immediately, when the starter has to overcome the engine's inertia. Their tests show this initial spike in peak starting current can reach as much as 1500 amps. This huge spike is part of what they call the Inrush Period, lasting approximately 1/4 second.

The graph they provide on their website shows an immediate spike of 1250-1300 amps, dropping quickly to 800 amps in a few hundredths of a second. The curve then slows, dropping to 600 amps in roughly 0.16 seconds, before showing a secondary spike reaching almost 800 amps that may represent engine resistance due to a cylinder compression stroke.

After the secondary spike is a relatively smooth curve representing a rapid decline in demand changing into a slower decline. Blue Sea calls the period following the secondary spike the Cranking Period, comprising the time from when the engine starts rotating freely and is finally running on its own, which averages 9-3/4 seconds.

WOW!!!

(And, "Whew!" Sorry, my scientific background got the better of me, leading to a description that might be a bit more detailed than necessary.)

At this point, you're probably wondering how a battery rated, for example, at 800 CCA can produce that much current. Remember, CCA rating is a measure spanning 30 seconds, which is roughly 750 times as long as the initial spike described above. The arithmetic mean (average to non-mathematical folks) for the first 10 seconds of Blue Sea's graph is roughly 800 amps, with the graph dropping to 200 amps a little before the 11 second mark. Also, the alternator has probably taken over and started recharging the battery well before the end of the CCA rating's 30 second period.

Simply put, motor vehicle batteries, as well as most electrical wiring and components, can handle short duration surges in excess of their rating. (Blue Sea's largest battery switch, designed for diesel engines, is rated at 600A continuous and 900A intermittent, using the current UL standard for these switches.)

Blue Sea calls the combination of the Inrush and Cranking periods the Engine Cranking Cycle. Based on their research, they established an Engine Starting Standard, which is being consider for incorporation into American Boat and Yacht Council (ABYC) standards and is already being referenced by a significant portion of the marine industry.

Okay, what started out as a side note turned into a description of what happens in a engine starting system and became longer than expected. So, I think I'll have to put off starting vs deep-cycle batteries for my next post. (At least, this post laid the groundwork for that discussion.)

BTW - I'm writing these using on-the-fly, stream-of-consciousness. I try to do some proofreading and editing before posting but typos and confusing sentence syntax does slip through. (It doesn't help I grew up in northern Minnesota, where "throw the cow over the fence some hay" syntax was common … uff-da!)

[Griff_in_Fairba]

Leeann wrote:
All true but doesn't stop them from doing it.

That, along with the weird and wonderful things previous owners have done, is why I prefer to rewire part or all of old vehicles I'm rehabilitating. (In one case I ran across, I swear one circuit had electrons running around in a perpetual loop ... somewhat like the plumbing "fixes" my father did.)

[Leeann]

All true but doesn't stop them from doing it.

[Griff_in_Fairba]

Leeann wrote:
Try to figure out a different routing of the wire that's both safe and easier to maintain.

Sometimes you can securely attach a new piece to the old and pull it through, but if it's stapled along the way you can't do that.

Stapling usually should only be done on the solid, single-strand wires used on 120/240VAC systems, just like in houses. (These wires need to be fastened at regular intervals to keep them from flexing, which could lead to stress-induced breaks.)

12VDC circuits in motor vehicles should use stranded wire, which can stand up to vibration and flexing better than solid wire. Securing these loosely at periodic interval is a good idea to limit movement. However, surrounding structure is often enough to limit excess movement so many manufacturer forgo staples.

In some cases, the wrong type of staples (i.e., cheap staples) actually cause more problems than they prevent. In these cases, vehicle vibration causes the staple to cut through the insulation, resulting in a bare wire that could lead to a short circuit.

[Griff_in_Fairba]

eyeteeth wrote:
I have been printing the information off to reference later... Good info.

I finally had a chance to do a little testing on my DC problem, and have narrowed it down to one wire. Unfortunately, the 'hot' seems to have shorted out somewhere.... Dang it. There is maybe a foot of it visible before it disappears into the wall and routing to the opposite corner of the RV. Taking suggestions as to what might be the best way to get a new wire to the destination. Anyone with experience with this?

It's more likely a break in the wire if you're not blowing fuses/circuit breakers. (It could be a unprotected circuit, in which case the wire will be getting very hot and may act as a fuse by burning up.)

Leeann's suggest is probably best. However, what I do if I want to still use the same routing is use the old, suspect wire as a "fish" tape. Firmly tape the new wire to one end of the old wire and CAREFULLY use the old wire to pull the new wire through the confined spaces.

I emphasis carefully because, if the wire is indeed broken, the insulation is the only thing holding the length together. Also, you're probably going to run into considerable resistance as you pull the wire around corners and through tight spaces.

If the old wire comes out without pulling the new along with it, you pulled too hard or the wire was completely broken, insulation and all. If the wire was on an unprotected circuit, an actually short may have caused the wire to burn through.

Melted metal and charred, blackened insulation is evidence of a short-induced melting. Discolored insulation by itself might indicate current was kicking off heat trying to jump across a small break in the wire, especially if the insulation is otherwise intact.

If the new wire doesn't follow the old wire, you'll have to use an actual electrician's fish tape or, more likely, follow Leeann's advice.

When you get the old wire out, examine it for abrasions on the insulation that indicate it was rubbing against a sharp edge, eventually leading to a short. (2004 Chevy 2500HD Silverados is one case i know of where this is a known manufacturing problem/defect.) In this case, you'll want to reroute the wire if you can't get at and fix whatever is causing the abrasion.

In any case, it'd be a good ideas to make sure the circuit is protected by a fuse or circuit breaker. With the exception of some parts of the starting system, every circuit should be protected. Best practice, as codified in current marine wiring standards, mandated a fuse or circuit breaker within seven inches of the circuit's power source.

I'll explain why parts of the starting system are exempt from circuit protection in my next post.

[Leeann]

Try to figure out a different routing of the wire that's both safe and easier to maintain.

Sometimes you can securely attach a new piece to the old and pull it through, but if it's stapled along the way you can't do that.

[eyeteeth]

I have been printing the information off to reference later... Good info.

I finally had a chance to do a little testing on my DC problem, and have narrowed it down to one wire. Unfortunately, the 'hot' seems to have shorted out somewhere.... Dang it. There is maybe a foot of it visible before it disappears into the wall and routing to the opposite corner of the RV. Taking suggestions as to what might be the best way to get a new wire to the destination. Anyone with experience with this?

[Ballenxj]

Griff in Fairbanks wrote:

I was starting to think I was spitting in the wind and wondering if I should continue.


<--- snip ---->

I'll get to chargers soon, in a future post. Until then, yes, you DO want a smart charger, as long as it comes from a reliable manufacturer. You want a multistage charger, with at least three stages, and some knowledge as to how to best use it.

<--- snip ---->

For now, I'll let the cat (part way) out of the bag. Motor vehicle charging systems are merely okay for maintaining a battery. To keep your battery in top condition and extend it's life, you also need to use a good quality multistage smart charger and use it properly.

Definitely not spitting into the wind. I appreciate the info, and will try to read your post on chargers.

[Leeann]

You're not spitting into the wind 🙂

[Griff_in_Fairba]

Ballenxj wrote:
Very informative, and more than I knew before.

Thank you. I was starting to think I was spitting in the wind and wondering if I should continue.

Ballenxj wrote:
I take it according to what I read here, those smart chargers that you push a button on to denote the type of battery being charged are just gimmicks and shorten the battery life?

Actually, no. What I was talking about in my last post was batteries. My ranting in that post was limited to the hype, confusion, and misinformation spread by battery marketers and salespeople.

Some battery distributors are good. They have their own plants and make an honest effort to put out good information. Two of these are Optima and East Penn.

I've researched East Penn, which manufactures and distributes batteries under several brands. East Penn has their own plant, located in the U.S. They use what is very close to completely closed-loop manufacturing. Almost all the material they use for making new batteries comes from old battery cores people turn in when they buy new batteries. The lead, plastic, and acid from the old batteries is purified and recycled, with very little going to waste.

(When I worked at CarQuest, which is one of the brands made by East Penn, I was able to gain access to information on East Penn that wasn't readily available to the general public.)

On the other hand, some distributors don't manufacture their batteries. Instead, they buy their batteries from anywhere in the world that offers the cheapest price. As a result, two batteries with the same brand, sitting side by side on a shelf, could have come from two completely separate places with wildly varying manufacturing practices and quality control. In addition to questionable quality, these batteries could have been made by what amounts to slave labor.

(In those cases, I won't name names because I, as well as this forum, would probably become the targets of angry lawyers.)

I'll get to chargers soon, in a future post. Until then, yes, you DO want a smart charger, as long as it comes from a reliable manufacturer. You want a multistage charger, with at least three stages, and some knowledge as to how to best use it.

There's not much price difference between good and questionable batteries. However, in the case of chargers, you tend to get what you pay for.

For now, I'll let the cat (part way) out of the bag. Motor vehicle charging systems are merely okay for maintaining a battery. To keep your battery in top condition and extend it's life, you also need to use a good quality multistage smart charger and use it properly. (In my case, I currently have two of these chargers and am looking at buying two more.)

[Ballenxj]

Griff in Fairbanks wrote:
Whoever took over my soapbox, I gotta have it back. I need to rant about people without technical backgrounds misusing and abusing language by taking specific terminology out of context and misapplying it while acting as if they actually know what they're talking about, both in general and as it applies to motor vehicle batteries. In the process, they manage to create meaningless buzzwords that only create confusion.

Everything you always wanted to know about automotive batteries, but were afraid to ask?
Very informative, and more than I knew before.
I take it according to what I read here, those smart chargers that you push a button on to denote the type of battery being charged are just gimmicks and shorten the battery life?
I'll be back to reread this as my retention is not that good until I've had at least a couple cups of java.
Thanks for taking the time to write this.

[Griff_in_Fairba]

Whoever took over my soapbox, I gotta have it back. I need to rant about people without technical backgrounds misusing and abusing language by taking specific terminology out of context and misapplying it while acting as if they actually know what they're talking about, both in general and as it applies to motor vehicle batteries. In the process, they manage to create meaningless buzzwords that only create confusion.

Let's begin by applying an appropriately descriptive phrase to the batteries that existed 50 years ago: Open-Cell Flooded Wet-Cell Lead-Acid Motor Vehicle Batteries. This is a concise phrase that precisely describes a type of battery that was developed in the 1800s and is still available and in common use today. If you can open the caps on your battery and add water, you have an open-cell battery. Flooded refers to a type of construction and wet-cell refers to the type of electrolyte used. Lead-acid encompasses a very, very large range of batteries, of which motor vehicle batteries are just a small segment.

Marketers and salespeople apparently decide this phrase was too long and cumbersome so they tried to shorten it. Take any one of the adjectives, combine it with battery, and you're automatically referring to much more than just one type of battery. (**** it, I had to add "motor vehicle" to the phrase because, without it, I'd be including the same type of battery with uses other than motor vehicles.)

Those people would be just as well off just calling them "cheap" or "old-fashioned" batteries and arguably would do a better job of identifying exactly what they're talking about.

The adjective "gel" is another buzzword that's been so misused and misapplied it's been rendered virtually meaningless. (Whenever you run across "gel," just substitute "blah-blah-blah" -- you'll get just as much out of the discussion.)

A few years back, marketers ballyhoo'ed "gel" as the latest and greatest innovation in battery technology. This was just more dross because gel-cell batteries were manufactured as far back as the 1930s, primarily for use in military field radios and similar equipment.

To paraphrase an old military cliche, if you can't inform them, bury them in bull****. (Personally, I prefer "if you can't convince them, bury them in paperwork," although I have used the first one when dealing with especially obnoxious, ignorant individuals.)

Currently, you rarely hear any mention of "gel" in the motor vehicle field, with the possible exception of salespeople who neglected to update their buzzword vocabulary. The relative rarity of the adjective may be due to marketers realizing people tended to "turn off their ears" whenever they heard it. Alternatively, they may have dropped it when they realized, based on negative customer feedback, that gel batteries were just a more expensive yet less suitable alternative to standard "old-fashioned" batteries.

It's worth noting that Optima, on their website, recommends avoiding any battery chargers that mention "gel," including those that have gel/ACM settings. This is because these chargers tend to shorten battery life through inappropriate charging profiles.

Most gel batteries are the same as old-fashioned flooded batteries in terms of construction and operation. The only significant difference is the electrolyte is gelified by adding fumed silica, turning the electrolyte into a thick gelatin-like material. This thickened electrolyte impedes the flow of ions, making them less than ideal as starting batteries because they can't provide the quick, high amp surge needed by the starter to crank the engine. They also have less capacity than the same size flooded batteries.

Most importantly, from an expense perspective, gel batteries require a special well-regulated, stabilized charging system. Without significant changes, standard automobile charging systems are likely to damage gel batteries and drastically shorten their life span.

These shortcomings forced most gel battery manufacturers to withdraw from the automobile market and focus on electronic applications for which gel batteries are better suited and that can provide the kind of charging system they need.

Oh,yeah, I forgot to mention … flooded and gel batteries are both lead-acid batteries. The electrochemical processes that allow them to collect, store, and release electricity are identical for both types.

A third type, absorbed glass mat (AGM) batteries, are also lead-acid batteries, with same internal electrochemical processes as the first two types. The AGM batteries differ from flooded and, to a lesser extent, gel batteries primarily in their design and construction.

Internally, flooded and most gel batteries have lead plates suspended in liquid or gelified electrolyte, consisting mostly of diluted sulfuric acid. AGM batteries use a fiberglass mat, saturated with electrolyte, to keep the lead plates separated. Because to the large openings in the glass mats, AGM batteries allow a greater, more rapid flow of ions than gel batteries, approaching that of flooded batteries.

Both gelified and absorbed glass mat electrolyte inhibits the formation of lead sulfate that leads to battery death. One major drawback of flooded batteries is the formation, shedding, and accumulation of lead sulfate, called shredding. These also do a much better job of keeping the plates from coming into physical contact, which causes cell(s) to be shorted out, rendering the battery useless.

The internal construction of some AGM battery use flat lead plates kept separate from each other by the absorbed glass mat. Some AGM batteries (e.g., Optima) use alternating layers of lead plate and fiberglass mat wound into a cylinder, which arguably seems to result in a more efficient battery.

While they are distinctly different, "gel" and "AGM" is sometimes (often?) incorrectly used interchangeably to describe particular batteries. For example, one amazon.com offering describes an Optima battery as being a "Sealed Gel Battery," with no mention of AGM. After looking up that particular battery on Optima's web site, I discovered it's really an AGM battery.

We've already established gel batteries are, in general, not suitable for our needs. I'd avoid any battery that's described as being a gel battery, regardless of whether the label is incorrect or not. If a company loses potential sales due to incorrect description, it their loss. If it really is an AGM and I want that particular battery, I'd find somewhere else, with a correct description, to buy it.

Another batch of terms that often cause confusion is "maintenance free," "sealed," and similar descriptions. (In this area, applying "dry" to automobile batteries really, really irritates me because it's totally bogus. "Dry" is only appropriate for the batteries that you use in flashlights, portable electronics, and children's toys.)

First of all, NO lead acid battery is truly sealed. Under certain conditions, ALL lead acid batteries will release flammable hydrogen and acidic gasses. For this reason, manufacturers are legally required to provide a means of venting these gases into the atmosphere and preventing, in particular, hydrogen gas from building up into an explosive concentration.

The correct term for "maintenance free" batteries is valve-regulated lead acid (VRLA) batteries. These batteries have valves that prevent the gases from being released unless pressure exceeds a certain limit. This actually extends the battery's life by keeping the gases inside the battery when they can be recombined into the chemicals the battery needs to work.

To the best of my knowledge, all gel and AGM batteries are also VRLA batteries. There is no technical or economic reasons for producing non-VRLA version of these types of battery. In particular, there is very little, if any, market demand for non-VRLA versions.

Likewise, almost all flooded batteries are produced in VRLA form nowadays. A few manufacturers still produce and sell some non-VRLA flooded batteries, primarily for old farts that insist on being able to perform old-fashioned maintenance. (I am an old fart but not part of this group … some innovations make life less complicated, especially when a relatively small added expense results in significant improvements over tradition.)

Actually, non-VRLA batteries are marketed to large operations with robust maintenance procedures that seek extend the life of their investment beyond that offered by VRLA technology. (I'm just one old fart who doesn't want to spend the time on the regular routine maintenance required by non-VRLA batteries … guaranteed I'd get busy, forget, and murder the battery.)

Some manufacturers claim their VRLA batteries can be mounted in orientations other than upright. Reliable manufacturers that offer this capability install multiple VRLA vents so that at least one valve can release excess pressure. Other manufacturers have a ****ty legal department, have a marketing department that doesn't listen to their technologists, or don't care about possible civil suits.

Easiest is to simply mount the battery in an upright orientation. If you have to use another orientation, make sure yourself that the battery has a viable vent for that orientation. (As far as I know, there are no batteries that are suitable for upside-down orientation.)

I think I've cut through all the mysterious jargon and provided what you need to know to choose the battery that suits you best. If not, please post questions and I'll try to answer them.

To summarize, flooded and AGM batteries both do well in our applications and your choice boils down to your financial resources.

In my next post on this subject, I'll look at differences that have an actual bearing on which battery is best for you. I'll also look at what causes premature battery death and what you can do to keep from murdering your battery before its time. (As a teaser, every battery should last at least as long as its warranty period and it's reasonably possible to extend its life span to as much as two or three times the length of the warranty.)

[Leeann]

Welcome!

Real nice rig...post pics on photobucket, flickr or the like and link 'em here....