From: me@here.edu   
      
   "Rick"  wrote in message   
   news:j9rs4a$pqj$1@dont-email.me...   
   >   
   > "vaughn"  wrote in message   
   > news:j9rnub$rmu$1@dont-email.me...   
   >>   
   >> "Rick"  wrote in message   
   >> news:j9rmki$imr$1@dont-email.me...   
   >>>   
   >>>  I'm guessing that a version made now, 60 years on, would be   
   >>> considerably more efficient?   
   >>   
   >> How so?   
   >   
   > I was thinking along the lines off comparing the efficiency of a 60 year   
   > old cars generator to a modern alternator.   
      
   The generator was actually likely more efficient than an alternator, they   
   were phased out because they didn't charge at idle unless a pulley ratio was   
   used that would make them self destruct at engine redline.   
      
   12v alternators are only 50-60% efficient, heck they lose 10% just in the   
   diodes because they put out roughly 14 volts and there is a .7 volt drop   
   across each diode, so 1.4 volts for the positive and negative diodes   
   combined.  A 6v alternator would lose 20% in the diodes, a 24v just 5%, etc.   
      
   The rest is lost from powering the field coil, along with eddy current,   
   hysteresis, and the I2R losses of the stator windings.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)