Timmayy
Member
Ok, another future project. I will end up doing it to my other Mopars as well.
Underhood Ammeter Bypass
- Thread starter cbarge
- Start date
Gerald Morris
Senior Member
That you should! There's still an ammeter in my '83 D150.
Blackrifle
New Member
Such a simple mod, I need to get this done on my 66 Newport soon.
Timmayy
Member
What did you all do to connect the ammeter wires together? I would think that just using a nut and bolt on the loop terminals and electrical tape is a little bit of a hack. The tape would eventually come undone.
cbarge
World Famous Barge in a Budget
This thread focuses a mod under the hood where the ammeter and its conections in the dash are left alone.
Yes I had seen in the past ammeter connections bolted together and taped up.
Typically I dive into the dash when its too late after a nuclear meltdown.
If one wants to bypass the gauge completely, just bolt both wires to one stud of the gauge.
Doing this eliminates the gauge, and makes the connection at a sturdy protected stud terminal.
Doing this eliminates the gauge, and makes the connection at a sturdy protected stud terminal.
3175375
Senior Member
I believe that what you have suggested doesn’t scratch the itch of getting current out of the feed through at the bulkhead connectors.
Agreed - sorry if I wasn't clear - the assumption I made is that this step is in addition to correcting issue that exists at the bulkhead, which is that the hot feed to the ammeter (red wire), which connects to the black wire side of the gauge comes through the firewall in a way that bypasses the bulkhead, as recommended in this whole thread. As well, it was assumed that the black wire that goes to the main power distribution splice (factory wire weld) under the dash, and subsequently goes back out to the alternator (with the attendent fusible link to protect things), passes through the firewall safely, bypassing the bulkhead as recommended.
What I did was run new 10 AWG wires, unbroken, to and from through the speedo cable grommet, and added a terminal block on the inner fender, to which I added a mini-circuit with a new fusible link on bith the red AND black wires, to add and enhance the level of protection as was there originally.
What I did was run new 10 AWG wires, unbroken, to and from through the speedo cable grommet, and added a terminal block on the inner fender, to which I added a mini-circuit with a new fusible link on bith the red AND black wires, to add and enhance the level of protection as was there originally.
Gerald Morris
Senior Member
This is close to my approach. I run one #8 AWG feed in from the starter relay to both ammeter leads, using a brass #10-32 screw w lock washer and flats to insure secure contact. The #8 also being lugged distributes current to the old "battery" and "alt" circuits at the same voltage, with all the other feeds cut. I run the charging lead straight from the alternator stud to the battery, where it makes one "super-node" with the starter relay, and an extra fuse box, which protects the headlight relays, the recently complete stereo amp and player, the pusher fan and my auxiliary charging socket in the passenger compartment. The bus for these is protected by a #12 AWG fusible link, as is the #8 lead going through the firewall from the starter relay. Thus, the alternator goes to exactly ONE node, the + battery post, which then feeds all other circuiits via two fusible links, with one more protecting the alternator feed.
The old #14 bulkhead feed is disconnected on both sides of the firewall. The new splice to the two lugged leads formerly on the ammeter gets taped over with 3M rubber tape, which then gets wrapped in 3M Super 33 vinyl tape, exactly as the high voltage airport runway joints I taped at Ft. Worth Mecham Field decades ago. The new #8 lugs are crimped, soldered, and shrink wrapped for electrical and mechanical security. This approach also allows one to leave the famous brazed connection in place in it's original configuration. I've left the absurd little #12 charge lead in the old bundle on top of the intake on the passenger side, though I folded it back, taped it down onto the bundle, and leave the battery feed to the ammeter lead, which makes a junction with that charging cable under the dash. Another lead comes off that joint to the "E" circuit on the old fuse block, feeding all the battery circuits there. HOW Mopar rationalized calling those battery circuits is lost in old martinis and cigars, long ago guzzled and burned to butts.
It all works well enough though, and is nicely balanced too.
Gerald Morris
Senior Member
Use some shrink wrap instead. You should be able to slide some onto one of the leads, nut them together, then slide the wrap over the joint, and there smoke it, so to speak. DO get GOOD shrink wrap though. Not all of those come of equal quality material.
Just stumbled across this older thread about this “under-hood” or “shunt wire” by-pass. Read through it pretty thoroughly, not one mention that I could find about how this bypass alters the factory designed circuit protection for the stock unfused wiring, with all these parallel fusible links, exposing the stock unfused wiring to very high current levels in the event of a short. Complete and accurate circuit protection is essential for safe operation of any electrical circuit. Too much focus on charge path current issues IMHO, there are much better ways.
One nagging thought I have about this whole thing is, we NEVER know if a current or prior owner had even added something into the factory wiring or had made some "mods" to the factory wiring before their particular melt-down happened?
I had previously heard of how "bad" the wiring was on the 1972-generation Dodge pickup trucks. Seemed that the bulk of them had had some sort of re-wiring for whatever reasons, by observation. In one case, a friend noted "The wiring on those trucks is junk", BTAIM
At the same time, as we have had Chrysler products since late 1966, we never knew of any wiring issues at all. Which kind of made me suspect that the owner demographic of those older Dodge pickups required them to "home-fix" their issues rather than paying somebody to replace the offending items on their vehicles.
So, what did Chrysler change in the circuitry for the 1972 and later cars to make them more robust in the future which included the use of the 100a alternator for the electric back glass option? Can this change be easily incorporated in the circuitry of the pre-1972 vehicles?
Ultimately, is there an easy way to add fused protection into all of the circuits? Getting a harness built with heavier-gauge wiring or where to incorporate inline fuses of particular values? With the end result of being a very robust harness situation.
Might it also be advisable, when getting a new harness, to put some solder at the junction of the exposed harness wires and the Packard connectors, or use a better connection connector? OR possibly re-terminiate existing connectors with better connectors and/or silver solder enhanced Packard connector terminals?
Just curious,
CBODY67
I had previously heard of how "bad" the wiring was on the 1972-generation Dodge pickup trucks. Seemed that the bulk of them had had some sort of re-wiring for whatever reasons, by observation. In one case, a friend noted "The wiring on those trucks is junk", BTAIM
At the same time, as we have had Chrysler products since late 1966, we never knew of any wiring issues at all. Which kind of made me suspect that the owner demographic of those older Dodge pickups required them to "home-fix" their issues rather than paying somebody to replace the offending items on their vehicles.
So, what did Chrysler change in the circuitry for the 1972 and later cars to make them more robust in the future which included the use of the 100a alternator for the electric back glass option? Can this change be easily incorporated in the circuitry of the pre-1972 vehicles?
Ultimately, is there an easy way to add fused protection into all of the circuits? Getting a harness built with heavier-gauge wiring or where to incorporate inline fuses of particular values? With the end result of being a very robust harness situation.
Might it also be advisable, when getting a new harness, to put some solder at the junction of the exposed harness wires and the Packard connectors, or use a better connection connector? OR possibly re-terminiate existing connectors with better connectors and/or silver solder enhanced Packard connector terminals?
Just curious,
CBODY67
One way to run added loads with this system. Leaves the ammeter function intact and retains the factory dash harness and circuit protection.
As for the truck issues, one of the dealers I worked at in the seventies had a contract with the Forest Service. Fleets of light and medium duty pickups to maintain and perform warranty repairs on. They all had wenches, radios, and aux lighting installed at delivery, all directly connected to the battery. They had constant bulkhead issues, later trucks with plastic dash frames, saw melting ammeter mountings. They would run the wenches with the engine running and throttled up believing it would take the current stress off the battery, it partially does. Places that current stress across the charge path to the limit of the alternator capacity. The truck system is no different from the basic car systems of the time, the added loading caused more problems, however. That’s where the fleet by-pass comes in.
