Buy a new battery. Desulphation does not work. Crystals coming off the plates takes material with it, diminishing the capacity of the battery substantially. Thats another story.
As for running your vehicle on a capacitor, it can be done. Maxwell sells a supercapacitor that will work for your application for a couple of thousand dollars. They are sufficient to carry the load.
As for the rest, plain and simple, one of the batterys jobs is to act as a stabilizer for the electrical system. Take that out and as others have said, transient voltage spikes will go to work on your electronics and cost you a lot more than a battery. Bottom line: replace the battery.

AFAIK: any sulphation that remains, will act as seed crystals for new formations. It will resume much easier, and you don't have to discharge the battery so far down for it to get established.

Desulphating often works well enough for a trip to the shop that sells new ones.

 

There really isn't enough residual magnetism to generate substantial power from an alternator. With a generator equipped car you can do it.
So much for popping the clutch with a dead battery and go. Progress.

ASIDE:
I must say that computer controlled cars have been a pleasure to drive. The carb warm-up cycle has always been a pain. A 1982 carb with 120 parts did a better job than one in say 1957, 1962, 1965, 1968, 1974 etc. Primarily the cars are emissions driven now, so you don't get the sheer power that you used to.

 

Depending on the construction of the rotor, there can be enough residual magnetism to turn a voltage regulator on. That is what self excited alternators are based on and we have been doing it for years.

 

Depending on the construction of the rotor, there can be enough residual magnetism to turn a voltage regulator on. That is what self excited alternators are based on and we have been doing it for years.

The electromagnetic regulators for car dynamos were an extremely crude form of PWM, the pulsed field current would find any remanence the coil core had - presumably early linear controllers would cause far less residual magnetism. I've only ever seen linear types as hobby magazine projects.

I've had various motorcycles with field winding generators that could have enough residual magnetisation to get away with push starting on a flat battery. Later types had potted modules that were probably linear - but I was unable to un pot any to confirm it.

The Yamaha RD200 had a "dynastart" combined generator/starter motor. The electromechanical regulator provided residual magnetisation and 2T twins are dead easy to turn over. I could get away with letting the battery get pretty bad.

 

Depending on the construction of the rotor, there can be enough residual magnetism to turn a voltage regulator on. That is what self excited alternators are based on and we have been doing it for years.

Some empirical test I did on a GM alternator did not prove to be successful attempting to use any field residual for initial self excitation,
Max.

 

Some empirical test I did on a GM alternator did not prove to be successful attempting to use any field residual for initial self excitation,
Max.

One way of magnetising ferrous metal is; put a coil round it and pulse current through the coil.

A linear regulator controlling a field coil doesn't do that.

The core material for the field core was selected for minimum remanence - but it was never zero.

 

I tried it sans regulator, just a simple parallel connection the way it is done on a DC shunt field generator.
Just to see if it pulled it self up.!
Max.

 

This is a bad idea on any modern car (post carberator) If it was an old farm tractor with mecanical fuel shut off it is not an issue. At best you will damage your alternator and voltage regulator, at worst you could burn up PCM ECM and other costly hard to get at control boards. Buy a new battery

 

Hi,

Yeah i agree that doing this on a modern car is just a very very bad idea. Too many things to go wrong that would make the situation much much worse than just having to buy a new battery.

Another point is that some alternators/regulators do not charge the battery immediately after starting the engine, but take a few seconds to start charging the battery. During this time, the drain on the battery would be much more critical because there is nothing charging it yet. That means you need some reserve power just to start the car, and a capacitor would have to be too large to be able to handle that time period.

After all is said and done, it's best just to stick with what is known to work most of the time. Experiments can be costly on modern automobiles.

 

But if you do try it...let us know how that worked out for you....

 

But if you do try it...let us know how that worked out for you....

Most vehicles will run on their alternator only. I've seen it a number of times where a battery connector or whole battery went bad while driving and nothing happened until the vehicle was shut off and only then everything went stone dead.

I've even pulled a good battery from a running vehicle to swap it with a too discharged to start one from a tractor I needed charged before because I did not have any jumper cables. No issues.

It's largely overstated what-if worst case scenario hype about the possible damages it will do. More often than not nothing happens.

 

Most vehicles will run on their alternator only. I've seen it a number of times where a battery connector or whole battery went bad while driving and nothing happened until the vehicle was shut off and only then everything went stone dead.

I've even pulled a good battery from a running vehicle to swap it with a too discharged to start one from a tractor I needed charged before because I did not have any jumper cables. No issues.

It's largely overstated what-if worst case scenario hype about the possible damages it will do. More often than not nothing happens.

Not gone that far, but I've push started a car with a battery that could just about make the solenoid click.

In the days of mopeds - many never had a battery of any kind. BSA that I know of produced a scrambler version of their 250cc motorcycle with no battery. A large electrolytic was fitted just in case the alternator poles didn't put enough flux in the IGN coil before the points open. Vaguely remember an aftermarket scrambler conversion kit. They had PM alternators shunted by a dirty great Zener, so the off load voltage can't run amok.

 

Last year my car battery died. Car wouldn't start. Breakdown rescue service jump-started the car and I drove to a garage to get a new battery. Mechanic disconnected the old battery while the car was on tick-over, "so that the radio security code won't need re-setting". Car ran ok with no battery and the new battery was then connected up. Haven't experienced any probs since, so the ECU etc seem to have survived unscathed (at least with no obvious short-term damage).

 

I've done the following on a 1972 Vehicle (No ECU). The car would not jump. I loosened the battery connector
and jumped car without a battery. Other vehicle wasn't running. Reconnected the battery it to get the car home.

 

Most vehicles will run on their alternator only. I've seen it a number of times where a battery connector or whole battery went bad while driving and nothing happened until the vehicle was shut off and only then everything went stone dead.

I've even pulled a good battery from a running vehicle to swap it with a too discharged to start one from a tractor I needed charged before because I did not have any jumper cables. No issues.

It's largely overstated what-if worst case scenario hype about the possible damages it will do. More often than not nothing happens.

Hi,

Well with your advice then since "more often than not nothing happens" is you could offer to pay for the damages if something DOES go wrong and damages some equipment that might be worth 1000 dollars. You'd only have to pay this out a few times because more often than not nothing happens. So if 100 people take your advice and do it and only 3 causes damages of 1000 dollars, you'd only have to pay out 3000 dollars. Nice huh?

Now me, on the other hand, i rather tell them not to do it or risk damaging something. So if 100 people do it and only 3 causes damages, i dont have to pay anything out. In fact, if all 100 blow something up i still dont have to pay anything out. Nice huh?

 

Hi,

Well with your advice then since "more often than not nothing happens" is you could offer to pay for the damages if something DOES go wrong and damages some equipment that might be worth 1000 dollars. You'd only have to pay this out a few times because more often than not nothing happens. So if 100 people take your advice and do it and only 3 causes damages of 1000 dollars, you'd only have to pay out 3000 dollars. Nice huh?

Now me, on the other hand, i rather tell them not to do it or risk damaging something. So if 100 people do it and only 3 causes damages, i dont have to pay anything out. In fact, if all 100 blow something up i still dont have to pay anything out. Nice huh?

That's just stupid and argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.

It's a personal account of what I have seen and done and can be taken any way anyone wants to. Also everyone has the freedom to decide whether or not they do it themselve or not.

I nether imply or hold any liability for whatever anyone else does or doesn't do based on what they read on the internet.

 

That's just stupid and argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.

It's a personal account of what I have seen and done and can be taken any way anyone wants to. Also everyone has the freedom to decide whether or not they do it themselve or not.

I nether imply or hold any liability for whatever anyone else does or doesn't do based on what they read on the internet.

Hi,

Nah. It's stupid to suggest that everyone should feel free to do this. You gave advice but wont take any responsibility for it and quote the internet as being a problem in general as your excuse so your motto seems to be, "Since the internet is untrustworthy, might as well keep it that way". Sure, none of us can be 100 percent correct all the time as we all make mistakes, but when presented with reasonable arguments we might have to rethink. For example, your experience sounds like it is coming from very unique situations that wont apply to many other peoples situations.

Sometimes it takes dollars and cents to make some people realize what they have said. Once they are made even a little responsible, they quickly change their tune like you have.
It's just funny that you say it is "OK" while the rest of the internet says "NOT OK" because there is a risk of expensive damage.

Not trying to argue here, just trying to help prevent poor soles from trying to run their car with no battery when 99 percent of the internet says not to do that. I think that in the end you have helped though by stating that you dont take responsibility because that says a lot about what advice you gave in the first place. We are not really talking about liability in dollars and cents here, but more like personal responsibility to the readers.

If you still feel wronged in some way perhaps you can state some make/models of the cars/trucks/tractors/kiddycars you've tried this on and we can look into it a bit more. It's hard to predict what vehicles this will work on though without written permission from the manufacturer. The general view is the more modern the car, the more risky it is to run without a battery because of the electronics.

 

Nah. It's stupid to suggest that everyone should feel free to do this.

That's how 'Free will' based personal choice and learning works and for you to be against that says you are against others thinking and learning for themselves, which is a far worse mindset than mine that says think, experience, learn and grow from your own personal life actions.

You gave advice but wont take any responsibility for it and quote the internet as being a problem in general as your excuse so your motto seems to be, "Since the internet is untrustworthy, might as well keep it that way". Sure, none of us can be 100 percent correct all the time as we all make mistakes, but when presented with reasonable arguments we might have to rethink. For example, your experience sounds like it is coming from very unique situations that wont apply to many other peoples situations.

My experiences are my own, but have been shared and confirmed by countless others a well, and thusly what anyone else does with said information is up to them even if you don't like it. You think it's unsafe so if they take your advice they wont try it but if they take mine they they will. Either way their choice, not ours.

Personally, I could care less what they do since I believe they have the right to decide for themself since I belive no one else is responsible for my own personal actions or their outcomes I willingly make.

Sometimes it takes dollars and cents to make some people realize what they have said. Once they are made even a little responsible, they quickly change their tune like you have.
It's just funny that you say it is "OK" while the rest of the internet says "NOT OK" because there is a risk of expensive damage.

So what? Are you planning to go around suing people that gave free advice online, that you don't agree with, just because of your views in life while totally discounting the experienced based validity and knowledge that others may have that you clearly dont? Good luck with that life mission.

Not trying to argue here, just trying to help prevent poor soles from trying to run their car with no battery when 99 percent of the internet says not to do that. I think that in the end you have helped though by stating that you dont take responsibility because that says a lot about what advice you gave in the first place. We are not really talking about liability in dollars and cents here, but more like personal responsibility to the readers.

Okay? Of your suposed 99% of the internet (this threads participant count and personal experience accounts already disproves that ratio claim.) how many own a vehicle?

Of those who do own a vehicle, how many are knowledgeable and skilled enough to even change out a battery?

Of those who can do that, how many have any real in depth knowledge of how their vehicle's electrical system actually work and to what protection systems are built into them?

Of those remaining few, how many are the type who think someone else is responsible for their actions( they willingly made themselves) based on the accounts, both for and against their actions, given by random strangers they found online? Methinks none (besides yourself) who are not safety nazi trolling.

If you're claiming 99%of the internet say something you should also have the factual statistics to show that info as well? And, since you're wanting facts and data from me for things that have zero relevance to anything, how about you providing some of your own to back up your 99% claim? I'll put this very threads own participants count, and related personal accounts found within it, up as proof you're trying to base your own 'safety virtue signalling' biased 99% claim BS off as fact.

If you still feel wronged in some way perhaps you can state some make/models of the cars/trucks/tractors/kiddycars you've tried this on and we can look into it a bit more. It's hard to predict what vehicles this will work on though without written permission from the manufacturer. The general view is the more modern the car, the more risky it is to run without a battery because of the electronics.

But I don't feel wronged in any way. (but you apparently do.) The fact you have made such a weakly founded trollish strawman attack fuss over my accounts, and not anyone else, rather vindicates me, not invidiates!

I'm quite content with what I know and say being I have done it countless times and know the outcome well enough to say I would happily demonstrate it with any vehicle or machinery I have or have access to because I know what will most likely happen. Either they stay running or they shut off once the battery is disconnected.

What the rest of the world thinks or cares about based on what-ifs and like concerns is not my problem. If I can demonstrate something that disproves their concerns and shows they are nothing more than a group opinion, while proving that in my situations its a factual reality,even if you/they hate me and everything I say about it, too bad!

In regards to your own 99% claim the cold hard reality of life is even though 99 out of 100 people may think something to be a certain way (an impossibility/statistically low likelihood perhaps) that does not make the 1 person in those 100 wrong for knowing the reality of what can be done that the other 99 say can't or shouldn't.

So unless you have anything factually relevant to the thread to add I am going to conclude your just butthurt trolling me for attention (because I and others gave opinions and backup accounts for that you don't like) and likely not respond to anything further you post.
I know the -butthurt troll read between the lines and try to spin it to be something it's not- game too well to not have suspicions that is what you are really playing towards anyway.

 

That's how 'Free will' based personal choice and learning works and for you to be against that says you are against others thinking and learning for themselves, which is a far worse mindset than mine that says think, experience, learn and grow from your own personal life actions.



My experiences are my own, but have been shared and confirmed by countless others a well, and thusly what anyone else does with said information is up to them even if you don't like it. You think it's unsafe so if they take your advice they wont try it but if they take mine they they will. Either way their choice, not ours.

Personally, I could care less what they do since I believe they have the right to decide for themself since I belive no one else is responsible for my own personal actions or their outcomes I willingly make.



So what? Are you planning to go around suing people that gave free advice online, that you don't agree with, just because of your views in life while totally discounting the experienced based validity and knowledge that others may have that you clearly dont? Good luck with that life mission.



Okay? Of your suposed 99% of the internet (this threads participant count and personal experience accounts already disproves that ratio claim.) how many own a vehicle?

Of those who do own a vehicle, how many are knowledgeable and skilled enough to even change out a battery?

Of those who can do that, how many have any real in depth knowledge of how their vehicle's electrical system actually work and to what protection systems are built into them?

Of those remaining few, how many are the type who think someone else is responsible for their actions( they willingly made themselves) based on the accounts, both for and against their actions, given by random strangers they found online? Methinks none (besides yourself) who are not safety nazi trolling.

If you're claiming 99%of the internet say something you should also have the factual statistics to show that info as well? And, since you're wanting facts and data from me for things that have zero relevance to anything, how about you providing some of your own to back up your 99% claim? I'll put this very threads own participants count, and related personal accounts found within it, up as proof you're trying to base your own 'safety virtue signalling' biased 99% claim BS off as fact.




But I don't feel wronged in any way. (but you apparently do.) The fact you have made such a weakly founded trollish strawman attack fuss over my accounts, and not anyone else, rather vindicates me, not invidiates!

I'm quite content with what I know and say being I have done it countless times and know the outcome well enough to say I would happily demonstrate it with any vehicle or machinery I have or have access to because I know what will most likely happen. Either they stay running or they shut off once the battery is disconnected.

What the rest of the world thinks or cares about based on what-ifs and like concerns is not my problem. If I can demonstrate something that disproves their concerns and shows they are nothing more than a group opinion, while proving that in my situations its a factual reality,even if you/they hate me and everything I say about it, too bad!

In regards to your own 99% claim the cold hard reality of life is even though 99 out of 100 people may think something to be a certain way (an impossibility/statistically low likelihood perhaps) that does not make the 1 person in those 100 wrong for knowing the reality of what can be done that the other 99 say can't or shouldn't.

So unless you have anything factually relevant to the thread to add I am going to conclude your just butthurt trolling me for attention (because I and others gave opinions and backup accounts for that you don't like) and likely not respond to anything further you post.
I know the -butthurt troll read between the lines and try to spin it to be something it's not- game too well to not have suspicions that is what you are really playing towards anyway.

Hi,

Ha ha, thanks for the laugh. The most funny part is you claim i have no proof but you never answered the question that would prove your claim. I actually burnt YOUR straw man to the ground as the next paragraph points out.

I went on another site and asked this same question. So far i got 6 replies and all six said not to do it. One reply though said it might not damage older vehicles so that reply was more or less conditioned by the age of the vehicle. That site was dedicated to automobiles and i know of several expert mechanics on that site. One expert said that the people who claim that it will work should be tied in with those that think the Moon landing was a hoax.

But i am sure you dont want to hear that either because you dont know how to properly handle opinions that do not coincide with yours, so i invite you to go to a site that you think is reputable and ask the same question, but then dont come crying back here when you hear the same thing.

To the other readers:
Before you decide to try this ask on some other sites around the web if you must and assess the risks. My main point here is that the risk is too high to warrant trying this at all, instead just get another battery.

 

But i am sure you dont want to hear that either because you dont know how to properly handle opinions that do not coincide with yours,

Welcome to TCM land.