Tegger wrote:
>
> Larry W > wrote in
> :
>
> > KC wrote:
> >> Was able to replace it. Thanks for the suggestions everyone.
> >>
> >> I'd like to know the answer to Tegger's question, too. I've heard
> >> opinions about side terminals ranging from it was purely a money grab
> >> by GM to side mount connections seal the battery-to-cable connection
> >> better than top post connections.
> >
> > With over 30 years in the car repair business, I've probably had less
> > than 5 cars that wouldn't start because of a problem with a side
> > terminal.
> >
> > In contrast, conventional top terminals have made me a good chunk of
> > money over the years.
> >
> > Top Side terminals can be a pain to jump but they are much more
> > reliable.
> >
>
> Now, why would this be so? What would be the specific technical reason side
> terminals would be more reliable than top terminals?
>
> I'm not being snarky here, I'm genuinely curious. I cannot think of a
> reason one would be a better electrical connection than the other.

He didn't say one made a better electrical connection. He said one is more
reliable. I don't know for sure why but I would agree the observation is
correct. Assuming a battery lives long enough eventually the connection will
fail on any battery due to corrosion. The side mount probably are better at
keeping out the moisture and battery fumes that cause corrosion.

-jim


>
> --
> Tegger


----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---