In a message dated 97-08-27 10:11:01 EDT, CREICHLE@nsc.msmail.miami.edu
writes:
> *I don't know about you but I think it's kinda funny that noone has jumped
> in to correct any of our hypothetical guesswork in deriving which is more
> efficient etc. I'm basing my arguement on what I do know about it and my
> experience with the systems. I don't know for a fact which is more
efficent
> but it seems to me, for the reasons I've stated, that the electric ac is
at
> least as efficient if not more than the belt driven. It's been fun tossing
> it back and forth though.
Chris:
Yes, I agree, I thought the members of this list would jump on this with both
feet. Anyway, the bottom line is, you have a Honda with an electric A/C unit,
it works, and it works well. Regardless of which one is the most efficient,
they are both very efficient, especially when compared to some of the older
units. Given that the electric motor on the electric units couldn't draw much
over about 30 amps, the horse power requirements are approximately 1/2 HP!
Even if the mechanical units were to be less efficient, they couldn't draw
much more than that.
When I finish my TR6 V8 conversion, I'm going to start on the MGBGT V8
conversion. I will use A/C for that car. Maybe the electric compressor will
be small enough to put under the dash with the evaporator, in a combined
heat/AC unit, and reduce the under-hood clutter. I will definitely look into
it.
I've enjoyed our exchange, let's do it again!
Dan Masters,
Alcoa, TN
'71 TR6---------3000mile/year driver, fully restored
'71 TR6---------undergoing full restoration and Ford 5.0 V8 insertion - see:
http://www.sky.net/~boballen/mg/Masters/
'74 MGBGT---3000mile/year driver, original condition
'68 MGBGT---organ donor for the '74
|