89 Audi 100 - No Start, Battery OK, What next?
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
PeterD wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 18:23:01 -0500, "Stephen Clark"
> <noone@nothing.not> wrote:
>
>> I have let the car sit for three days without using it, in order to monitor
>> the battery's state of charge.
>>
>> Started out three days ago with a full charge of 12.63 volts. It is now down
>> to 12.38 volts after three days of sitting. That's about a 0.25V drop over
>> three days.
>>
>> Measured the residual current draw at the battery cable connection to be
>> 81.5 ma. This is with everything off, including interior lights. The only
>> draws should be clock, radio memory, and alarm. Is this a reasonable draw?
>> Might I still have a battery that is not holding charge sufficiently? The
>> auto parts store won't warranty it, because their equipment shows the
>> battery to be good, and it is only six months old.
>>
>> Also, the radiator fan has not come on in three days, so I am ruling that
>> out as a possible cause of a sudden discharge. I am puzzled as to what
>> could have brought the battery to it's knees in the brief 10 minutes I was
>> in the grocery store three days ago. Nothing was left on that would have
>> drained the battery that fast. I can only assume that there is a fault in
>> the battery, but I can't prove it to the auto parts store folks.
>
> 82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
> Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
> loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I remember hearing that batteries can develop internal shorts due to
residue below the cells but that is only likely in the case of old or
re-cycled batteries so probably not what you experienced.
A problem that the T44 series had that caused battery drain and the
occasion fire was due to the battery being under the rear seat and close
to the steel seat springs. The battery included a nylon cover that
snapped over the positive battery terminal to insulate from the springs
when people sat in the seat. If the part was not replaced when changing
batteries there was the potential for problems. I am not sure if this is
possible on your car but might be something to consider.
Let us know what you find.
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
PeterD wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 18:23:01 -0500, "Stephen Clark"
> <noone@nothing.not> wrote:
>
>> I have let the car sit for three days without using it, in order to monitor
>> the battery's state of charge.
>>
>> Started out three days ago with a full charge of 12.63 volts. It is now down
>> to 12.38 volts after three days of sitting. That's about a 0.25V drop over
>> three days.
>>
>> Measured the residual current draw at the battery cable connection to be
>> 81.5 ma. This is with everything off, including interior lights. The only
>> draws should be clock, radio memory, and alarm. Is this a reasonable draw?
>> Might I still have a battery that is not holding charge sufficiently? The
>> auto parts store won't warranty it, because their equipment shows the
>> battery to be good, and it is only six months old.
>>
>> Also, the radiator fan has not come on in three days, so I am ruling that
>> out as a possible cause of a sudden discharge. I am puzzled as to what
>> could have brought the battery to it's knees in the brief 10 minutes I was
>> in the grocery store three days ago. Nothing was left on that would have
>> drained the battery that fast. I can only assume that there is a fault in
>> the battery, but I can't prove it to the auto parts store folks.
>
> 82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
> Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
> loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I remember hearing that batteries can develop internal shorts due to
residue below the cells but that is only likely in the case of old or
re-cycled batteries so probably not what you experienced.
A problem that the T44 series had that caused battery drain and the
occasion fire was due to the battery being under the rear seat and close
to the steel seat springs. The battery included a nylon cover that
snapped over the positive battery terminal to insulate from the springs
when people sat in the seat. If the part was not replaced when changing
batteries there was the potential for problems. I am not sure if this is
possible on your car but might be something to consider.
Let us know what you find.
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
PeterD wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 18:23:01 -0500, "Stephen Clark"
> <noone@nothing.not> wrote:
>
>> I have let the car sit for three days without using it, in order to monitor
>> the battery's state of charge.
>>
>> Started out three days ago with a full charge of 12.63 volts. It is now down
>> to 12.38 volts after three days of sitting. That's about a 0.25V drop over
>> three days.
>>
>> Measured the residual current draw at the battery cable connection to be
>> 81.5 ma. This is with everything off, including interior lights. The only
>> draws should be clock, radio memory, and alarm. Is this a reasonable draw?
>> Might I still have a battery that is not holding charge sufficiently? The
>> auto parts store won't warranty it, because their equipment shows the
>> battery to be good, and it is only six months old.
>>
>> Also, the radiator fan has not come on in three days, so I am ruling that
>> out as a possible cause of a sudden discharge. I am puzzled as to what
>> could have brought the battery to it's knees in the brief 10 minutes I was
>> in the grocery store three days ago. Nothing was left on that would have
>> drained the battery that fast. I can only assume that there is a fault in
>> the battery, but I can't prove it to the auto parts store folks.
>
> 82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
> Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
> loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I remember hearing that batteries can develop internal shorts due to
residue below the cells but that is only likely in the case of old or
re-cycled batteries so probably not what you experienced.
A problem that the T44 series had that caused battery drain and the
occasion fire was due to the battery being under the rear seat and close
to the steel seat springs. The battery included a nylon cover that
snapped over the positive battery terminal to insulate from the springs
when people sat in the seat. If the part was not replaced when changing
batteries there was the potential for problems. I am not sure if this is
possible on your car but might be something to consider.
Let us know what you find.
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
"*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
isn't the end of the world.
>
>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
"*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
isn't the end of the world.
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
"*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
isn't the end of the world.
>
>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
"*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
isn't the end of the world.
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
"*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
isn't the end of the world.
>
>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
"*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
isn't the end of the world.
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
"*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
isn't the end of the world.
>
>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
"*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
isn't the end of the world.
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
Yes, I understood your meaning, thanks.
I am looking at the charging voltage of 13.88 volts, and thinking that's a
bit low. Should be closer to 14.4 V. The alternator is a re-built Bosch that
is about 14 mos. old. But, then I haven't started the car since Thursday,
and today the battery voltage at the jumper post is 12.35. The original
charge was 12.63 after a quick charge at the auto parts store on Thursday.
Is that too much of a drop? I'm trying to determine if maybe there is a
fault in the battery, like an intermittent shorted cell.
Other sources say that 75 ma is the max parasitic draw, so 82 isn't extreme.
It wouldn't have pulled the battery completely down during the 10 minutes I
was in the grocery store.
Is a puzzlement....
"PeterD" <peter2@hipson.net> wrote in message
news:0m5j53d0ul66270mjuu6glo2vkm1kq0hl7@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
>
>
> I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
>
> "*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
>
> IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
> isn't the end of the world.
>
I am looking at the charging voltage of 13.88 volts, and thinking that's a
bit low. Should be closer to 14.4 V. The alternator is a re-built Bosch that
is about 14 mos. old. But, then I haven't started the car since Thursday,
and today the battery voltage at the jumper post is 12.35. The original
charge was 12.63 after a quick charge at the auto parts store on Thursday.
Is that too much of a drop? I'm trying to determine if maybe there is a
fault in the battery, like an intermittent shorted cell.
Other sources say that 75 ma is the max parasitic draw, so 82 isn't extreme.
It wouldn't have pulled the battery completely down during the 10 minutes I
was in the grocery store.
Is a puzzlement....
"PeterD" <peter2@hipson.net> wrote in message
news:0m5j53d0ul66270mjuu6glo2vkm1kq0hl7@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
>
>
> I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
>
> "*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
>
> IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
> isn't the end of the world.
>
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
Yes, I understood your meaning, thanks.
I am looking at the charging voltage of 13.88 volts, and thinking that's a
bit low. Should be closer to 14.4 V. The alternator is a re-built Bosch that
is about 14 mos. old. But, then I haven't started the car since Thursday,
and today the battery voltage at the jumper post is 12.35. The original
charge was 12.63 after a quick charge at the auto parts store on Thursday.
Is that too much of a drop? I'm trying to determine if maybe there is a
fault in the battery, like an intermittent shorted cell.
Other sources say that 75 ma is the max parasitic draw, so 82 isn't extreme.
It wouldn't have pulled the battery completely down during the 10 minutes I
was in the grocery store.
Is a puzzlement....
"PeterD" <peter2@hipson.net> wrote in message
news:0m5j53d0ul66270mjuu6glo2vkm1kq0hl7@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
>
>
> I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
>
> "*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
>
> IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
> isn't the end of the world.
>
I am looking at the charging voltage of 13.88 volts, and thinking that's a
bit low. Should be closer to 14.4 V. The alternator is a re-built Bosch that
is about 14 mos. old. But, then I haven't started the car since Thursday,
and today the battery voltage at the jumper post is 12.35. The original
charge was 12.63 after a quick charge at the auto parts store on Thursday.
Is that too much of a drop? I'm trying to determine if maybe there is a
fault in the battery, like an intermittent shorted cell.
Other sources say that 75 ma is the max parasitic draw, so 82 isn't extreme.
It wouldn't have pulled the battery completely down during the 10 minutes I
was in the grocery store.
Is a puzzlement....
"PeterD" <peter2@hipson.net> wrote in message
news:0m5j53d0ul66270mjuu6glo2vkm1kq0hl7@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
>
>
> I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
>
> "*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
>
> IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
> isn't the end of the world.
>
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: New information after 3 days...
Yes, I understood your meaning, thanks.
I am looking at the charging voltage of 13.88 volts, and thinking that's a
bit low. Should be closer to 14.4 V. The alternator is a re-built Bosch that
is about 14 mos. old. But, then I haven't started the car since Thursday,
and today the battery voltage at the jumper post is 12.35. The original
charge was 12.63 after a quick charge at the auto parts store on Thursday.
Is that too much of a drop? I'm trying to determine if maybe there is a
fault in the battery, like an intermittent shorted cell.
Other sources say that 75 ma is the max parasitic draw, so 82 isn't extreme.
It wouldn't have pulled the battery completely down during the 10 minutes I
was in the grocery store.
Is a puzzlement....
"PeterD" <peter2@hipson.net> wrote in message
news:0m5j53d0ul66270mjuu6glo2vkm1kq0hl7@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
>
>
> I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
>
> "*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
>
> IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
> isn't the end of the world.
>
I am looking at the charging voltage of 13.88 volts, and thinking that's a
bit low. Should be closer to 14.4 V. The alternator is a re-built Bosch that
is about 14 mos. old. But, then I haven't started the car since Thursday,
and today the battery voltage at the jumper post is 12.35. The original
charge was 12.63 after a quick charge at the auto parts store on Thursday.
Is that too much of a drop? I'm trying to determine if maybe there is a
fault in the battery, like an intermittent shorted cell.
Other sources say that 75 ma is the max parasitic draw, so 82 isn't extreme.
It wouldn't have pulled the battery completely down during the 10 minutes I
was in the grocery store.
Is a puzzlement....
"PeterD" <peter2@hipson.net> wrote in message
news:0m5j53d0ul66270mjuu6glo2vkm1kq0hl7@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:35:50 -0400, PeterD <peter2@hipson.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>82 MA (I rounded up) is a *bit* high, but totally out of line.
>>Generally you want it below 50 MA if possible. Consider also that some
>>loads may come and go, so a current logging setup may be needed.
>
>
> I should slow down when I type, I meant to say:
>
> "*bit* high, but NOT totally out of line."
>
> IOW, it would be nice to be below 50 (or even better below 30), 80
> isn't the end of the world.
>