spot lights

Post by **dennis** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 10:54 pm

hi
can someone tell me ( and i am sure you can ) how is the best way to wire up spotlights, i have negative earth.
1970 pick up
thanks

Post by **Kevin** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:53 am

Nice new pickup then Dennis a recent purchase

Post by **57traveller** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 10:00 am

Dennis - there are rules regarding how extra lights like spotlights, foglights, driving lights etc. are switched. You'll need to check first. The two driving lights on my Traveller have to be wired to operate only when the headlights are on - that was the rule enclosed with the fitting kit I purchased. However I have been a bit naughty and they work when sidelights are on.
You will need a suitable relay, a motor factor should advise on this plus the size of cable required for the desired loads. Fitting kits are also available which include everything needed plus instructions. I supplied the auxiliary side of the relay from sidelight feed at inner wing, Scotchlok type or existing bullet connector, to illuminated switch in car, from switch to relay, from relay to earth.
The main feed for the lamps is taken from the fuse box to the main side of the relay from that to the lamps and then to earth. Remember these lamps take a fair bit of power so the existing electrics need to be up to the job.

Post by **Alec** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 6:45 pm

Hello Dennis,
the best initial upgrade is to fit Halogen lamps in place of the sealed beam units. If you have done that and still want spotlights they should only be on when on main beam and automatically extinguish on dip. The use of a relay is very strongly recommend, and the use of Scotchlocks is very very strongly not recommended. Whether your car is negative or positive earth is irrelevant.

Alec

Post by **dennis** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 10:56 pm

THANKS GUYS AND YES KEVIN IT IS MY NEW AUSTIN 8CWT ADDITION

Post by **57traveller** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 8:24 am

Alec wrote: the use of Scotchlocks is very very strongly not recommended.
Alec

Why Alec?
Maybe not for a higher current load but surely tapping off for the aux. side of a relay shouldn't pose a problem.
I didn't use one in my installation for this but connected into an existing bullet connector block.
My towbar electrics are connected using Scotchloks as supplied with the fitting kit and are perfectly safe and acceptable.

Post by **rayofleamington** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 8:48 am

Scotchlocks are fine for the first year - in fact probaby for a few years, but sooner or late (normally sooner) they get corroded and stop working. They are probably ok when used to fit a radio to wires in the dash but I also don't think they are much good when used on external wiring (engine bay, inner wings etc..)

Post by **lowedb** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 9:10 am

I wouldn't use scotchlocks on anything but a car I knew I was never going to see again, or as a quick bodge that I could redo later. There are a few reasons:
Current capacity. They don't like heavy current as the contact area is quite small. This makes them prone to overheating.
Corrosion. Never ever use in a wet (or even remotely damp) area. Sealing is zero, and the cut in the insulation promotes moisture wicking up the cable causing more problems. Where BT use these IDC connectors, they usually fill them with grease which makeds them gas tight.
Weak points on the cable. IDC connectors are OK where there is no stress on the cable but I've seen a lot of times where the cut in the insulation leads to a weak point, and the cable fails. In a normal terminal, the insulation is gripped too, and helps prevent this.

Post by **57traveller** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 11:49 am

lowedb wrote: or as a quick bodge that I could redo later.

I've NEVER considered my use of Scotchloks or any other job I do to be this and I'm sorry but find that remark to be quite offensive.

We'll have to agree to differ on this one.

Post by **Kevin** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 12:24 pm

Where BT use these IDC connectors, they usually fill them with grease which makeds them gas tight.

Ahh another BT man
And of course they are just used for temporary tees anyway(or should be)
But I dont think have a problem with under dash use anyway

Post by **lowedb** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 5:41 pm

I've NEVER considered my use of Scotchloks or any other job I do to be this and I'm sorry but find that remark to be quite offensive

Sorry, didn't mean to offend, but I do hate the things with a passion, for the reasons I explained. I also know many other people involved in automotive electrics who agree, in fact there known widely as bodgelocks. I'm sure I won't change opinions already formed, but likewise I will never be convinced that they are suitable for use on cars, given my innumerable bad experiences with them.

Ahh another BT man

Actually, my brother is, not myself. For my sins, I work with cars all day!

Post by **Alec** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 5:42 pm

Hello all,
my dislike of Scotchlocks is that they use a sharp blade to cut the insulation and contact the main cable. I have seen so many Scotchlock joints that have partially severed the main conductors so damaging and reducing the current capacity of the original cable. I know they are made by a very large company that has in the main a very good group of products. How they could sell such a product surprises me greatly. The fact that some trailer socket kit manufactiurers include them is not a recommendation of the Scotchlock, probably it helps sell the kit that the electrical side is easy to do.
I am not a BT man by the way but an industrial electrical technician.

Alec

Post by **Cam** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 6:07 pm

About 8-10 years ago I used to repair mobile 'phones and install mobile 'phones in trucks (I am an engineering academic now). I have seen quite a few electrical messes where Scotchlocks have been used. I would not recommend their use for the very good reasons stated above. In my experience they were nothing but trouble, especially if used on large current applications (lights, inverters, droppers, etc.). Usually intermittant connections due to corrosion. (Twist the wire one way and it works sort of faults). I suppose they can be quite dangerious too as they can get quite hot when they are acting as a resistive link!

I suppose they have their place and if you are stranded somewhere and you don't really have an alternative then I suppose they are better than nothing.

Post by **Kevin** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 1:04 pm

The BT ones actually come in different sizes for the relevant conductor size being used, all conductors being of the solid core type so the application use is different to the braided wire used in cars.

Post by **57traveller** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 3:14 pm

Sorry to continue this but I really don't see any problem with this connector when fitted and crimped correctly. Apologies for poor scan.

No sharp blades, cut conductors etc. and no worse than existing Lucar or bullet connectors.

Post by **Cam** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 5:34 pm

No sharp blades, cut conductors etc.

But that's how it connects the conductors together?? like an E shaped metal piece that fits in a slot in the plastic bit and cuts through the insulators and presses onto the conductors to form the electrical connection.

That is the only type I have seen. Is this the same? as there seems to be a bullet type connection in the 3rd diagram?? can't see really. Do you have a higher resolution picture of the data sheet?

Post by **Cam** » Fri Jun 11, 2004 5:38 pm

Found the data sheet:

http://multimedia.mmm.com/mws/mediawebs ... 7YDPssssr-

(needs Adobe Acrobat).

Looks similar, but not the same as the types I have come across. Has anyone used these ones? and are they better?

Post by **lowedb** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 7:28 am

The only difference with this type is the extra wire is connected using a bullet connector. The main wire is still connected the same way, and hence suffers all of the problems discussed. There is a blade in it: there must be or how would it connect to the main wire?

Post by **Cam** » Sat Jun 12, 2004 3:51 pm

Yes, that's what I suspected but I thought I'd give it the benifit of the doubt.......... Seems to be the same then.........

Post by **57traveller** » Sun Jun 13, 2004 10:31 am