> I reprinted an article that ISOA printed in their
> newsletter in the DTSC Triumph Review. It's at:
> <http://detroittriumph.org/Review/Reviews-Archive/Oct2002.pdf>. Good
> information.
Thanks, Blake, for the article and the link.
However, as I've pointed out before to the author, there are some minor
factual errors in it. The main message is certainly correct, that the fuse
ratings given by Standard-Triumph/BL/Lucas/etc. for our cars are
substantially different than those used on the fuses commonly available in
the US.
But the original fuses were not IEC specification either, and the difference
between original fuse rating and an American fuse is larger than the
difference between IEC and American (UL). The difference in carrying
capacity between a IEC fuse and a UL fuse is roughly 1.4, not the nearly 2:1
difference between a BS/Lucas fuse and a UL fuse.
Also, the article says that the original fuses were 5mm by 20mm (which is a
common IEC size), but that is not correct, IEC fuses are not long enough to
fit properly in Triumph fuse holders. The 'correct' fuses are more like
28mm long (while UL fuses are almost 32mm).
"Back in the day", Britain had it's own standards body (which still exists),
and the original fuses were described as a British Standard. Sorry I don't
have the correct BS number handy, but that's where they came from.
Randall
=== This list supported in part by The Vintage Triumph Register
=== http://www.vtr.org
|