triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Fuse/Circuit Breaker (very long, sorry)

To: <triumphs@autox.team.net>
Subject: RE: Fuse/Circuit Breaker (very long, sorry)
From: "Randall" <tr3driver@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 07:13:32 -0800
>  Adding the brown wire fuse will give an overall protection to these although
> adding a fuse for the light switch makes sense.

Perhaps a TR6 is different ... on a TR3 the brown wire is heavier gauge wire
than the others, so a fuse suitable to the brown wire will not protect the other
wires.  Multiple fuses are needed.  The dash lights have smaller wire yet and so
need a separate smaller fuse than the main lighting circuit.  Likewise, the
taillights are a long run of relatively small wire, so a short at the taillights
might not blow a fuse sized to carry the headlight current.  Maybe all later TRs
had a fuse for the taillights, but TR2-early TR3 didn't, nor did the Sports 6.

> But the philosophical discussion comes in beyond that.

Agreed.  I didn't mean to say there wasn't room for "philosophical" decisions
... only that there is a fair amount of work to do just to protect the harness.

> Fusing the Rmain, Lmain, Rdip and Ldip lamps
> is what we would have in a perfect world.

Which strangely enough is just what my Triumph Stag had originally.

> On the other hand, I've had more problems in the TR6 with dodgy fuse clips so
> adding more fuses adds reliabiliity issues, too.  So maybe fewer fuses is
> really better.

There probably is a point of diminishing return ... and yet if a bad fuse clip
is going to take something out, it's likely a lot better to have it take out
only one headlight instead of both of them.  Having both headlights go out while
driving at high speed on a dark road isn't a lot of fun ... BTDT.  That's part
of the rationale for using fusible links ... they're more reliable than fuses.

> If
> there is a ground fault (chafed wire touching ground) then you need a new
> harness anyway and burning it up is a good way to make sure it gets
> done.  Just
> kidding, of course, but adding protection for just such a remote
> possibility adds
> cost and when you are building cars for a very competitive market it is an
> expense you can't afford.

And after the car burns to the ground you'll have a customer for a new car.

> I guess the real answer is: It depends.

Indeed it does.

Randall




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>