datsunmike wrote:
>
> On Sunday I heard an interesting item re: positive ground. It seems that the
> Brits converted to negative ground because they found that w/pos ground the
> body would rot faster.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> '66 Mike
----
That's a good one!! Knowing what little I do about Brit cars, and
assuming it did make any difference, I think they would hook up the
battery in such a way as to promote body rot ;-)
Seriously, for anybody who is interested, the issue of pos vs neg ground
has to do with Ben Franklin's famous screwup. He assumed that charge
carriers (electrons) were positive, when in fact they are negative. The
accepted convention is that current flow direction is from positve to
negative. In fact, though, electrons come out of the negative terminal
of your car battery, do their thing in the circuit, and return to the
positive terminal. If you analyze a circuit with electron flow in mind,
it's much more natural to lay it out with positive ground and I think
that's why the Brits and the Japanese did it that way. If you use the
accepted current flow convention or fiction, then it's easier to think
about it as a negative ground setup, with "current" coming out of the
positive terminal, etc. Because American cars use negative ground and
they dominate the market, others eventually switched to negative ground
too. At least that's what I think. It's true that electrolytic effects
occur when there is a current flow through a junction of dissimilar
metals, and the direction of current flow makes a difference as to what
happens at the junction, but I don't think this has much to do with body
rot in general.
BTW, I just got back from the E-type list where ugly flame wars and rude
behavior are the rule, and I have to say the folks on the Roadster list
are a LOT nicer. We have differences of opinion, but at least
Roadsterites show a bit of respect for each other and refrain from
name-calling. I think this is interesting.
Barrie
'66 2000 (no rust)
'67 E-type Jag (don't want to talk about it)
San Diego
---
|