Hahaha. Just with a weird eyebrow twitch!

 

I managed to be the jump lead between 2 phases of a 440V 3-phase system once - came to at the other end of the lighting rig gantry I was working on. It gave me temporary Tourettes - i.e., I couldn't stop swearing at the b'stard that had wired the bloody thing wrong...

 

Going to purchase a cteck mxs 5.0 charger today, and extension lead, should be a good buy, the 5.0 is only £8 dearer than the 3.8, so am going for it.

 

The JF modified vbulletin software will not let me quote messages beyond
the first page of a thread. So, no quoting, but some things to consider.

There is at least one reported case of a runaway malfunction in a CTEK. In that case,
the owner found a very hot battery and CTEK. Examination showed that the CTEK was
jumping to 16.5 volts after a short float stage and remaining there for as long as
it was left plugged in.

A dealership burned to the ground because a battery maintainer malfunctioned in
the showroom overnight. Total loss of $4 million.

The CTEK seems to be a bandaid. There are factors affecting the ability of the
vehicle to charge the battery as expected. Especially if the vehicle is a daily driver.

There are two main culprits.

The battery is probably calcium-calcium construction even if it is also AGM. It may even
be calcium-silver which further exacerbates the charge problem.

calcium-calcium chemistry has a fully charged voltage of 12.8 volts and not 12.65 volts
as found in lead-antimony chemistry. The chemistry is also known to require a higher
charging voltage. The numbers range from 15.25 to 16.2 volts depending on source.
AC Delco who popularised calcium chemistry in the Freedom Maintenance Free batteries
sold a specific charger that spikes to 16.1 volts.

couple the above with a alternator regulation set point of 14.2 volts, and you have
problem number one. Toyota for example uses Denso alternators, but uses set points
of 14.5 to 14.7 volts depending on the vehicle.

problem number two is closely related. in the most recent crop of designs, the voltage
regulation is a function of the ECM. some of the goals of the charge algorithm include
fuel economy and performance. this is accomplished by reducing charge voltage to the
ragged edge, pulling back after-start charging and stopping charging altogether on
acceleration. there are some algorithms that only account for monitored devices and
only makes adjustments for their usage. if you install an aftermarket device, it is not
included in the charge algorithm.

thus, battery charge maintenance has been downloaded to the owner who uses much
more energy to charge the battery than any that was saved by the above scrimping.

all of the above is verifiable for any one who cares to fact check.

Now, some opinion ...

The base problem is that many vehicles are running around with a battery charge
deficit. They're starving. The battery is never fully charged, but is instead "satisfactorily"
charged under most circumstances.

It's like a bank account. Start with $100. Take out 2 put back 1.75 over and over
again. Pretty soon, you can't buy a coffee.

But, if you let it get down to $75 and dump in $25 in one shot, you can start the
exercise all over again without a problem.

The only way to have a fully charged battery with a vehicle, even one that is
driven on the highway regularly is to do a full charge that might take two days
in the charge absorbtion stage. A manual charger is better at this than a "smart"
charger because the "smart" charger cuts out absorbtion too early and goes into
float mode too soon.

A *full* charge every three months ought to cure most problems.

The way to know if a calcium-calcium sealed battery is fully charged is
to apply a load such as the headlights for 5 minutes, disconnect the
battery, wait 3 hours, measure the voltage. 12.8 volts is full charge.
Anything less needs further charging, or further investigation.

BTW, the standard standby design target remains starting after 30 days
parking at the airport without use. The problem is that the designers of the
charging system might have shaved it too close. Other manufacturers
have sometimes issued new ECM flashes to improve battery charging.

ps. charger manufacturers usually stipulate that the charger be connected
to the vehicle before plugging in. this is how they avoid sparking. this completely
avoids the question of whether positive or negative must be connected first.
they also require unplugging the charger before removing the connections to
the vehicle. again, no sparks possible.

 

Are you sure it was a CTEK brand charger that caused the $4,000,000 in damage at a dealership?

I don't concur that the CTEK smart maintainers are bandaids. The major and I mean "major" premium car constructors have endosed the CTEK brand by selling the CTEK brand chargers with their own logos on them. If these were bandaids, I seriously doubt that such names as Rolls Royce, Lamborghini, Porsche, BMW, Jaguar and so many others would sell this brand to its customers.

I have provided a link to the CTEK brand website in a post above, and they clearly state that the CTEK brand of smartchargers will NOT create a spark, even when plugged in. Perhaps you may want to view the website and get to know the CTEK brand.

 

Did I say it was a CTEK that started the dealership fire? No, I did not. I said "battery
maintainer" as the news story did not name the brand. If I don't know, I don't guess.
The case of the individual with the CTEK jamming on at 16.5 volts was definitely a
CTEK, and the end resolution was CTEK replacing the unit. No explanations from CTEK
as to why. Of course, this is after the gentleman decided for some reason to wander
out to his garage at the six hour mark and opening his trunk to find a thick cloud of
sulphurous smoke, a loudly bubbling battery and a red hot CTEK. He normally just
plugged it in and left it alone until the next drive. He figures he got lucky.

It is the *use* of a CTEK, or any other battery maintainer being necessary on a
daily basis that I point out as being a bandaid.

If a vehicle is designed to be capable of being parked at the airport for thirty days
in the winter and then started upon return, then clearly a vehicle that can't survive
a couple of weeks without a battery maintainer has something wrong particular to
that vehicle, or a fault in the execution of the design.

I just happened to take the time to point out some of the very aggressive techniques
with regard to battery charge control used in current vintage vehicles to eek out the
final tiniest bits of claimed fuel economy.

Having to plug in a battery maintainer, even if it were solid gold and given to me by
the dealer for free would drive me nuts. Especially since I am in an apartment garage.

As for CTEK supplying OEM's, it doesn't mean anything more than them being
astute marketers or being willing to drop their pants to get the deal. GM happens
to rebrand the Battery Tender brand. Does that make one better than the other? No.
But at least Battery Tender has a long history in the switching power supply business.

Further on the subject of CTEK in particular, their low and midrange offerings do not
have the program settings to truly fully charge a calcium/calcium or silver/calcium
battery. At least not according to the published specs. There is the workaround of
using the snowflake and reconditioning modes. But it is not in the automatic programs.

Furthermore, the CTEK units and their bretheren are *way* overpriced.

Consider the price of a new laptop, and consider that it comes with a power brick.
All for the price of a mid-range CTEK.

Those power bricks need to supply very clean and stable power. I have a junk one
here from a retired Toshiba. 2 amps at 15.2 vdc, no ac ripple and completely
stable. It's worth maybe $10. But it is completely capable of adding that final touchup
boost charge.

Somewhere in there, CTEK has a lot of margin.

There is nothing particularly special about the CTEK. All of those algorithms can be had
on a charge controller chip straight out of a standard catalog.

Finally, my remark about sparking has nothing to do with CTEK. What I said was that
when a unit is connected to the battery first and to the power outlet second, as
laid out in the instructions for every charger I have ever seen, there is no possibility
of sparking at the battery posts. This was meant to reassure worried users in various
posts up above, and has nothing to do with CTEK in particular. It applies to all charging
devices.

 

Just returned from the jag dealer. Nothing wrong with the car. He recommends, and the dealer hooks up, the CTEK to both both battery terminals in the 5.0 models with ECM's not the neg terminal to a remote ground which has been suggested in this forum.

 

Got my ctek mxs 5.0 charger today, so about connecting the wires. Mine is 2007 model so do i connect to each terminal, negative lead to negative, positive to positive of the battery, or just the positive to the positive of the battery and connect the negative to body earth. Seems to be different answers to this question will be leaving connected as i got the extension lead as well.
My leads have the bolt attachment which i can put the eye hole on and attach with a nut.

 

Pretty interesting considering my 2012 OM says to hook the positive to the "jumper" position in the left rear trunk grill and the neg. to a stud located in the spare tire compartment. Makes one wonder if the OM or the dealer is correct. Then again maybe it doesn't matter. Did they explain their reason why they deviate from the OM. Just curious

 

Powerhouse, it's only the 5.0 models that have the battery monitor, so you can connect the CTEK wherever you find most convenient.

 

plums, I agree that the battery maintainer is a band-aid. However, a band-aid beats a puss-filled festering wound that never heals and leads to death.

I'm not sure I could buy a laptop for the $55 or so I paid for my CTEK.

 

The tech , who really seemed to know what he was talking about, said the you want the charging to go directly thru the battery and not be "diluted" thru other connections. Said connection had nothing to do with ECM. He also stated that they have found in all the 2010+ models that if the car is not in lock down mode they may periodically fire up the touch screen and subsequently open up a lot of other battery draining functions. He also said they have NO IDEA why this happens and that they are STILL learning about these advanced electronics. He said that if car was in a secure place for more than a day you would be better off not locking it down as to not run the security system but because of this random touch screen thing,which does not seem to happen when locked, he suggests locking all the time.

 

Unfortunately it sounds like he doesn't. Why would Jaguar go to the bother of publishing technical documents stating that the charger negative lead should not be attached to battery if it actually doesn't matter? He needs to read up about the BMS, not EMS .

I think that says it all! Tell him to check the TSB's. There are a number to do with the entertainment system causing a drain.

 

Right u102768, what do you think i should do to connect my new ctek to my 07 xkr, negative to negative terminal, or to a ground point on the body.

 

Note: I stand by all my posts made on this thread about the CTEK smart battery maintainers and installation procedures, despite what others from dealers to dealer techs, or other posters etc. have stated.


Powerhouse:

2007 Jaguar XK/XKR.....CTEK hookup.......Red CTEK lead to "positive terminal".....Black CTEK lead to "negative terminal.

Remove the 10mm nut and place eyelet on the bolt threads and re-tighten the 10mm nut.

It's that simple. Same installation as in Post #1.

 

As per richzak's post you can just attach it straight on to the battery on the 4.2L cars as they don't have a battery monitoring system. That is where I attached it on my 07 XKR as it was the easiest to do given that there were handy spare posts to attach it to.

Some people have concerns about connecting both wires to the battery due to a paragraph in the Owners Handbook about not connecting 12v devices directly on to the battery as you can get a spark but I believe that is talking about things like an inspection lamp that draws a current as soon as you connect it so can cause a spark, not an unplugged battery charger/maintainer.

I use the CTEK accessory extension lead anyway so when that was first attached it was effectively just two separate wires so no danger of a spark.

 

After all of these discussions I really don't think it makes any difference where you hook up the neg terminal. Let's put this discussion to bed.

 

In case you haven't seen it before this is what Jaguar published on the Battery Monitoring System when it was introduced on the XK's and XF's:

"NOTE: When using a Jaguar-approved battery charger or maintainer, connect the charger to the recommended ground point to ensure that the charge flows through the BMS module instead of the negative battery terminal.

Failure to observe this will log a diagnostic trouble code (DTC), and incorrect battery condition information will be retained by the BMS module due to unmonitored current flow into the battery."

It therefore doesn't matter where you put the negative lead on the 4.2L's because they don't have the BMS but on the 5.0L it will confuse the BMS if you attach the negative lead directly to the battery.

The BMS will eventually sort itself out if you are just using a charger the odd time but if you are an occasional user of a 5.0L XK so have it connected to a battery maintainer a lot you really ought to connect the negative lead to a remote earth point for the above reason.

 

Right so i'm going to connect negative to negative and positive to positive on my 4.2 xkr
On another note, i have this thing going on with my xkr since i got it, and it has a new agm Bosch battery. Sometimes when i go to start it , pressing hard on pedal first then press button it just makes a click noise and i have to repeat the start process again, then it goes. Doing the process the other way round of Pressing button then pedal has no effect still does it sometimes, and battery fully charged, any ideas anyone.

 

This starting activation issue is very common - a minor annoyance, but an annoyance. It happens to me about once in every 10 starts.
As you press the button, look at the gauge unit in front of you: the central display section must be active. Frequently one push of the button will activate that display and then it will go out - no start! The second push of the button will generally activate and maintain the display and pushing the brake pedal will start the engine. I have had no satisfactory explanation for why this happens, but as I said, it is very common. It seems to make no difference whether you push the START button fist or the brake pedal first. This is NOT related to battery voltage so this interesting issue is really for another thread but I'd be very interested in hearing if anyone has had an explanation of why this happens. It could be a software issue of some sort, I would guess.