Kyle, thanks for confirming the idle caveat again which at least complies with the Clymer. It just makes me wonder whether the Nighthawk was far ahead that time with CDI, hydraulic valves and final drive for highway trips only while it sucks the battery in city traffic. However, it all doesn't explain yet why the load voltage won't get above 12.8V even on 5000 rpm even if all resistance, diode, voltage loss measurements are within specs when following professional tips from several sources. I replicated the results with a fresh battery and different multimeter devices and there is no visible damages to any leads or coils either. On the other hand, the battery acid level decreases slowly and I have to re-fill some destilled water after 8-12 weeks. Maybe the regulator goes mad depending on the runtime temperature coincidently so I will try an aftermarket rectifier/regulator as first playoff criteria.
[email protected] schrieb am Freitag, 17. Juni 2022 um 18:33:16 UTC+2: > One thing I learned back when I had my 650 was that Mr Clymer will > absolutely lie to you and won't feel bad about it. I can't say if he's > right or not about the charging system, it's been too many years, I think > the biggest lie I found was with wiring diagram had some wire colors mixed > up. > > That said, yes the 83-85 650 does not charge below 2500 RPM. There are > tons and tons of threads in the archives here regarding the charging > systems, several disagreements, lots of high level discussions about the > comings and doings of electrons and amps and ohms, but the one thing agreed > on is it doesn't charge at idle. > > -Kyle > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 8:48 AM Frank Hawkwarts <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Dear Hawkies, >> >> proudly owning an US 83‘ Nighthawk 650 for many years now, I much >> appreciate Paul's valuable site leading me to this group. >> Currently I‘m also fighting the famous charging issues and struggle with >> a misleading information in the Clymer CB550 & 650 Nighthawk 1983-1985 >> chapters 4 and 7 about the permanent magnetic rotor which states the >> following. >> >> Chapter 4 Engine - page 101: >> "Rotor Testing - the rotors are permanently magnetized and cannot be >> tested except by replacement with rotors known to be good. Rotors can lose >> magnetism from old age or a sharp blow. If defektive, the rotors must be >> replaced; they cannot be remagnetized. The inner and outer rotors are >> available only as a set." >> >> Chapter 7 Electrical System - page 186 (older Clymer print only, not >> found in my print): >> "Rotor Testing - The alternator has 2 rotors that are permanently >> magnetized and cannot be tested except by replacement with a rotor known to >> be good. A rotor can lose magnetism from old age or a sharp blow. If >> defektive, the rotors must be replaced; they cannot be remagnetized." >> >> But in fact, the US CB 650 SC Nighthawk (aka CBX 650 E in Europe) has a >> brushless excited field alternator which receives 12V DC input from the >> Voltage regulator through the black and white leads into a separate field >> coil to return adjusted AC through its 3 yellow leads on demand. >> Unlike a permantent magnet giving full capacity all time, it prevents the >> RR from smashing all the overhead by cooling the transformed heat. >> >> So it looks like the Clymer information was false copied from the >> preceding 82 CB650SC or similar model. There used to be a link to ‚Revised >> '83-85 Clymer Chapter 7 for '83-'85 CB650SC Charging System‘ which is >> broken and obsolete. Is there any other source to confirm my assumption? >> >> Another controversy discussion is often seen to when and what the >> charging starts ("it doesn't charge below 2500 vs. it they all charge at >> IDLE already"). >> Well, the Table 1 at the end of chapter 7 states an negative amperage >> output up to 1500 rpm, approximately 0 amp at 2000-2100 rpm (83) resp. >> 1700-1800 rpm (84-on) and +2 amperage output beginning at 2500 rpm. >> This seems to match my experience when wasting a lot of time on traffic >> jams and lights before surprising me with an empty sucked battery on next >> engine start in the mid of nowhere *slurp*. >> >> Any comments to confirm or deny my throughts and assumptions are welcome >> :-) >> >> Thank you and take care, >> Frank >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Nighthawk Motorcycle Lovers!" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/nighthawk_lovers/1ab83824-878d-4863-95bf-d16dd2075371n%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/nighthawk_lovers/1ab83824-878d-4863-95bf-d16dd2075371n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Nighthawk Motorcycle Lovers!" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/nighthawk_lovers/318febd4-76b6-4fda-a044-c05fa340f3d6n%40googlegroups.com.
