21-07-16, 01:30 PM
(21-07-16, 08:08 AM)Fazerider link Wrote: [quote author=darrsi link=topic=20471.msg237680#msg237680 date=1469078816]A bit late now since you've spent yer money, but a few seconds work with a voltmeter might have been informative.
[quote author=Fazerider link=topic=20471.msg237672#msg237672 date=1469052674]
[quote author=darrsi link=topic=20471.msg237643#msg237643 date=1469035624]
We deal with lots of batteries at work so the engineers have a good knowledge of their behaviour, and one of them is totally convinced i have a dud cell.
I have no reason to not believe him.
Should be delivered tomorrow and hopefully he'll be proven right.
[/quote]
Did that yesterday.
Battery was on charge all night beforehand.
Went out to check at lunch time, off was 12.4v, engine on bounced around 12.58v, then after about 3mins of engine running i switched it off and it was then 12.6+ volts.
So it is getting a charge to it because it was higher volts at the end of the 3mins, but obviously not holding it too well, or as suggested i've got a dud cell and it's just not behaving normally.
I ride with both headlights on so they will be pulling down a bit of power as well.
If the battery gets there before lunch i'll fit it and test again, apparently new batteries come 75% dry charged and are basically ready to go from new once assembled, although i have access to untold chargers at work so may put it on a very low amp booster charge if it arrives early enough.
[/quote]
Ah. Fair enough.
A measurement after it failed to start would have been more definitive, but 12.4v just a few hours after a run does sound poor.
My money had been on the starter motor.

[/quote]
Battery arrived this morning, and on charge on my work bench now, i'll put it in later and do a voltage check again.
More people are born because of alcohol than will ever die from it.