vanwill52

The Panhard rod is the single 2" square tube that runs crossways of the frame. One end is connected to the coach frame, the other to the H-frame. The other four 2" square bars running front-to-rear (two on each side) are the trailing arms. They locate the H-frame (and therefore the axle) front-to-rear, but are long and spindly. If there were NO Panhard rod, the H-frame would wallow INCHES side-to-side. The SINGLE Panhard rod stops that extreme movement, but does not stop the H-frame from twisting along a vertical axis with its pivot point being the end connection of the Panhard rod. Bushing wear is only a problem on approximately 1999 and older coaches. There are much stiffer bushings available from ATRO and I have installed several sets. On 1999 and older coaches, they make a very large difference. On coaches with the later design bushings, the difference is minimal. In short, the wandering is from a design defect in the Roadmaster chassis, not from wear. They wandered when brand new. The chassis needed TWO Panhard rods, or ONE with a very long engagement distance at each end--instead of one bushing in each end, it needed two in each end, housed in a tube (I'm guessing) about 6-8" long.

Tag axle coaches wander less because there are TWO fixed axles. It is simply harder to cause the coach to change direction. That is why you are advised to raise the tag when sharp turns are required. The lack (or an extreme amount) of "porpoising" has nothing to do with the wandering. "If the amount the pan hard bar moves the H frame side to side results in wandering..." It does not. The amount the Panhard rod moves the H-frame side-to-side is negligible when traveling down an straight highway. It amounts to very little side-to-side movement even during its full range of travel. The wandering is due to the H-frame "squirming" under the coach and changing the direction of the wheels. Prevent the H-frame from "squirming and twisting" under the coach, and wandering ceases. As an illustration, imagine a vertical shaft was welded to the H-frame and extended through your floor, where a steering wheel was mounted to it. Have someone twist that steering wheel back and forth while you are driving. The H-frame will twist with it, changing the direction the wheels are pointing. And, of course, your coach will go where its wheels are pointed.

Tag axle coaches wander less because there are TWO fixed axles. It is simply harder to cause the coach to change direction. That is why you are advised to raise the tag when sharp turns are required. The lack (or an extreme amount) of "porpoising" has nothing to do with the wandering. "If the amount the pan hard bar moves the H frame side to side results in wandering..." It does not. The amount the Panhard rod moves the H-frame side-to-side is negligible when traveling down an straight highway. It amounts to very little side-to-side movement even during its full range of travel. The wandering is due to the H-frame "squirming" under the coach and changing the direction of the wheels. Prevent the H-frame from "squirming and twisting" under the coach, and wandering ceases. As an illustration, imagine a vertical shaft was welded to the H-frame and extended through your floor, where a steering wheel was mounted to it. Have someone twist that steering wheel back and forth while you are driving. The H-frame will twist with it, changing the direction the wheels are pointing. And, of course, your coach will go where its wheels are pointed.

The Panhard rod and the Watts links do not have coincident travel arcs. (Image two hinges with the hinge pins not in line with each other--one hinge "fights" the other.) The Panhard rod, when the H-frame moves up and down, causes a slight sideways motion of the H-frame. That is the reason it is placed as nearly horizontal at normal travel height--to minimize that sideways motion. The Watts link tries to keep the motion of the H-frame PERFECTLY vertical. So, the Watts link and Panhard rod are "fighting" one another. As it applies to curing wandering, that conflict is definitely NOT a problem. The farther the Panhard rod is from the Watts link, the less the conflict. However, if you were to couple TWO Watts links to the H-frame (one toward the front, one toward the rear) that conflict of motion between the Panhard rod and two Watts links would develop some huge forces. Something will probably break. DON'T DO IT. OTOH, if Watts links were rugged enough (ours are NOT), you could eliminate the Panhard rod altogether and depend on the two Watts links (one front of H-frame, one rear of H-frame) to thoroughly stabilize the H-frame. Similarly, TWO Panhard rods (with NO Watts links) would accomplish stabilizing the H-frame. Had the original Chrysler design incorporated those two Panhard rods, "wandering" would never have been a topic of conversation.

Thanks, Bob. She is really having a tough time. Trigeminal Neuralgia is such a rare condition (one in 15,000) that very few practitioners in the entire country have any experience with it. The pain is excruciating. If you Google "suicide disease", Trigeminal Neuralgia pops up.

David, check your private messages. Send me your personal email address and cell number. I've got something for you.

David, I'll look to see if I still have some pix. It was very simple to do.

At the risk of being repetitive, I remind all of you trying to cure wandering that there is nothing magic or mystical about why your coach wanders left or right. It is simply going exactly where its wheels are pointing. If you can keep your wheels pointed straight ahead CONSTANTLY, even in the face or wind or road abnormalities, your coach will continue in a straight path. When a gust of wind hits the side of your coach and blows you to one side of your lane or the other, it is NOT because your tires are magically "slipping sideways". The gust of wind was able to twist your H-frame(s) in relation to the centerline of your coach and change the direction in which your wheels are pointing. When you turn your steering wheel to recover, what you are doing is compensating for the H-frame having twisted and changed the direction the wheels were pointing. If you had the physical strength, you could lie under your coach, grasp the front and rear crossmembers of your H-frame and twist it left and right. The pivot point would be where the H-frame attaches to the Panhard rod. I used to demonstrate this by carrying an 8-foot length of 2" square tubing in my coach. I could plug that into your hitch receiver and two stout fellows could grab the extended end of that piece of tubing and push it side-to-side. When they got into the right rhythm, it would amaze you how much they could cause the body of the coach (especially the front) to move side-to-side WHILE THE FRONT WHEELS OBVIOUSLY DID NOT MOVE. That is how loosely the H-frames are attached to the coach chassis. Prevent that movement, and you have cured your wandering. On the subject of anti-sway bars--I happen to be a "believer" in them doing what they are designed to do. They are designed to minimize body roll, especially under extreme conditions like rolling over the curb entering a Walmart lot (the infamous "Walmart wobble"). Under those conditions, they do the job for which they were intended. But just as with shock absorbers, when you are traveling down a smooth, straight highway with no other vehicles in sight, the anti-sway bar can do NOTHING to contribute to eliminating your wandering. How could it?--it is barely moving. The same can be said for shocks absorbers. Anti-sway bars, necessarily, have vertical links that allow the axle to twist in relation to the coach frame. Those vertical links prevent them from stabilizing the H-frame even a modest amount. And BTW, "shock absorbers" is a bad misnomer. They do NOTHING to "absorb" shocks. They TRANSMIT shocks to the coach chassis in varying degrees, depending on how stiffly they are valved. What they ARE is "motion dampers"--they resist being either compressed or extended, again in varying degrees depending on their valving. Anyone who reports that he installed stiffer shocks on his coach and the result was "reduced rebound" AND "smoother ride" is the first person in history to defy the laws of physics and the practice of mechanical engineering. I suspect I am the only person on this, or any other forum, who cured his wandering with X-bars and Watts link, THEN totally removed all eight shocks and went for an extended ride on country roads and highways to see if having NO shocks would affect wandering. IT DID NOT. Rebound was worse, and recovering from a pre-planned "panic lane change" was sloppy, but the coach still tracked perfectly on smooth, level, straight roads. And, of course, that was the "smoothest" it ever rode. Shocks, anti-sway bars, and "steering stabilizers will NOT cure wandering, simply because they do not address the core issue--the platform to which your wheels are attached is "squirming" around under your coach, even as you travel down a smooth, level, straight highway. Stabilize that platform, such that it acts as a rigid pivot should, and your wandering is cured. And should anyone come up with an idea to employ X-bars on the FRONT of a 1994 or newer Roadmaster chassis, please share it with me. I spent untold hours trying to come up with such an idea and I failed...hence, the Watts link solution. I'm getting a bit long in the tooth to enjoy wallowing around on a concrete floor, but to try out a plausible idea, I would do it. Yes, David, I will use multiple 12-ton jack stands. 😄

Sorry. Temporarily unavailable. Medical problems for my wife.

Essentially, what I did was reinforce the 1-1/2" vertical supports for the rear of the genny with 1-1/2 x 3 rectangular tubing, then triangulated the assembly with a 3/8 x 5 flat bar connecting it all together. the flat bar was the mount for the Watts pivot bar assembly. Depending on your coach, there could be other ways to do it.

JD, although it is still possible, in nearly 200 coaches I've dealt with, I have never heard of a single instance in which alignment improved wandering one iota. It's true that their are two alignment specs that could exacerbate (not CAUSE) wandering. They are toe-in and caster. When you have an alignment done on a solid front axle chassis of any kind, the only adjustment made 95% of the time is toe-in. If toe-in is too small, or toe-"out" actually exists, you can easily check it with a tape measure. Jack each front wheel off the ground, rotate it while making a soapstone mark in the center of the tread area. Use a tape measure and a helper to measure the distance between those lines at the back of the tires, and again at the front. The front measurement should be slightly less than the rear. That is "toe-in". If there is "toe-OUT", that MIGHT cause some wandering. You adjust it yourself with the RH/LH threaded relay rod that connects the two spindles. The other alignment spec affecting tracking is caster. If you had negative caster, that would present a tracking problem. But caster is "built-in" to the mounting pads of the chassis where the axle attaches. It is easy to see with the naked eye. It can only be changed by adding tapered shims between the chassis mounting pads and the axle. You might read multiple instances where someone deliberately increased caster (more positive) to cure a wandering condition, because they read about it in "Alignment 101" at trade school. But, again, the improvement is much like the improvement in wandering from changing shocks--it exists between the ears of the person who went to the trouble and expense to do it. The last alignment spec is camber. Camber is "built-into" the axle. It can only be changed by using powerful hydraulic equipment to BEND the axle to a new camber spec. Your camber will never need adjustment unless the vehicle has been in a serious accident which bent the axle. Most alignment shops are not equipped to change camber. Josam's, probably the best large-vehicle alignment shop in the country, can change camber...but I bet they very seldom do it. When you get an alignment done, you are generally paying $300 to set toe-in. The bottom line is that there might be dozens of contributing factors that make a TINY improvement in wandering, but the basic problem is simply that the "platform" (H-frame) to which both your front and rear axles are attached is "squirming" around under your coach because it it not rigidly restrained from doing so. The reason is the H-frame is attached to the chassis with long, spindly trailing arms with compliant bushings in each end, and the entire assembly is constrained from rotating under the coach with a single Panhard rod. That is a near-geometric impossibility. Had the chassis been originally designed with TWO Panhard rods on each H-frame, the wandering problem would never have existed. The simple reason your coach wanders is that it is going where its wheels are pointed...NO OTHER REASON. Force your wheels to stay pointed straight ahead and there is NO wandering. NO shock absorber will do that. NO steering stabilizer will do that. To accomplish that on a Roadmaster chassis, you must stabilize the H-frames. The best way is with X-bars, which accomplish what the missing SECOND Panhard rod WOULD have done. When X-bars are not possible, the Watts link is the "second-best" alternative. And just as would have happened with two Panhard rods, the further they are apart, the better they work. Since my coach was not a terrible wanderer, when I installed my Watts link in the front, I went to great lengths to mount it as far from the Panhard bar as possible...to be sure I got a result that was not just "between my ears". That required machining parts and welding in additional components. My short 36' coach is a two-finger driver, even when being passed by a tractor-trailer...and so was my "cured" 1993 Dynasty, which originally felt as if you could not guide it in a straight line if your life depended on it. JD, in your case, I can only suggest that you investigate mounting your front Watts link as far from the Panhard rod as possible. One enterprising fellow on iRV2 actually added a second Panhard rod and it was, of course, successful. That was my first thought when I realized I could not fit X-bars to my coach, but decided at the time it was beyond my capabilities at the time--I had no plasma cutter, and my welding equipment was not powerful enough. If you are ever in the Southeast, I will be glad to look at your coach for you, although I stopped installing X-bars and Watts lengths years ago, as soon as I had proven to my satisfaction they were a solution.

Quite a compliment, coming from you, Frank! You are one of the most technically competent folks in this group. Thanks!

JD, you can still slide the outboard clamps toward the coach center, so the Watts lever is nearly vertical, not that it will make much, if any, difference in how it works. You might have to notch the corner braces of the H-frame slightly to clear moving the outboard clamps inward. The worst, most road-wild coach I ever drove was my first Monaco, a 1993 Dynasty with Kohler LPG generator, which did not roll out on a slide. That was the coach that got me to delve into what was actually causing all the wandering...that is, AFTER I followed the "herd wisdom" that shocks could cure wandering. The truth is that shocks do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to prevent wandering...except between the ears of the person who just shelled out a small fortune for them. And the shocks certainly did nothing for my 1993 Dynasty wandering. All they did was make the ride harsher. When I finished with it, that was the absolute BEST driving/handling coach I ever owned, including my present 2000 Dynasty. The 1993 Dynasty never got a Watts link. I had not thought of that at the time. The 1993 Dynasty was the last year that X-bars could be installed FRONT and REAR. I welded small tabs with a hole for a 1/2" bolt near both ends of the two lower trailing arms front and rear. My X-bars were 1/2" diameter steel bars, threaded at each end for small Heim joints. Yup, they worked perfectly. If you think about it, the X-bars perform in TENSION--when one bar is being "stretched" the other is lightly loaded in compression. Even 1/4" X-bars might have worked on that 1993 Dynasty. The idea of the Watts link came to me as I was trying to come up with something that would work for the front of coaches that had a generator in the way and prevented the use of X-bars in the front (ALL coaches 2004 and newer). After the experience with the 1993 Dynasty, I decided X-bars were best for both front and rear, but simply could not be fitted to most post-1993 coaches. The X-bars always acted at the extreme ends of the trailing arms, where they were best at preventing the H-frame from "squirming" under side loads. But I never came up with a way I liked for putting X-bars on the front, hence the development of the Watts link application. And yes, the farther the Watts link is located from the Panhard bar, the better it controls the H-frame. But it makes a huge improvement, even if it is closer than optimal to the Panhard bar. Another consideration in the Watts link development was to make something that did not require welding. On my 2000 Dynasty, I WELDED the Watts link assembly to attach to the FRONT crossmember of the H-frame, nearly triple the distance from the Panhard bar as it would have been had I mounted it overlaying the front jack mount. That type installation is possible on most coaches, and surely performs better, but requires some extensive welding and extra steel tubing and flat bar and additional machining. I have a fully equipped machine shop at my home.

JD, I don't see anything obviously wrong. You could slide the outboard mounts for the Watts link arms toward the center of the coach on both sides to cause the Watts pivot bar in the center to be more nearly vertical, but I have never seen that make any difference. It is always preferable to mount the Watts link as far from the Panhard rod as possible, which would be near the front of the H-frame. But on 98% of the coaches, the only practical place to mount it is where yours is--behind the Panhard rod.

Mike, as Rick said, it appears the relay you show connects the two battery banks only when the alternator (engine) is running. I'm not familiar with the details of the wiring on your coach, so the one thing that I don't understand is that there are two different sized large cables attached to the main terminals of the contactor. Yes, the ML-ACR is bi-directional. Any time a charging voltage is detected from ANY source, the ML-ACR detects it and connects both battery banks together to charge them at once. When the charging voltage disappears, the ML-ACR disconnects the two battery banks, preserving the charge on the chassis battery, even as the coach batteries are being depleted. It also accomplishes the Battery Boost function, so that no Big Boy is needed. Each ML-ACR installation is only slightly different, depending on how the coach was originally wired. The bottom line is that you connect the alternator output directly to the chassis battery, then connect another heavy cable from the positive terminal of the CHASSIS battery to one large post of the ML-ACR, and connect another heavy cable from the positive terminal of the HOUSE batteries to the other large post of the ML-ACR. Attach the two (black and red?) small wires from the ML-ACR to ground and an "always on" positive supply. The ML-ACR then takes over the function of both the IRD and the Battery Boost contactor, and both original devices can be removed. Bear in mind as you wire it that the ML-ACR does only ONE thing--it either connects the positive terminal of both battery banks, or disconnects them, based on whether any charging source is detected.

What Bob Nodine said about the steering gear needing to have minimal play to minimize wandering is correct. If you jack up your rig's front tires off the ground (DON'T let it hang on the shocks), you can grab the tire and move the front wheels back and forth. That demonstrates that the steering gear has very low internal friction and is easily moved by even a small outside force. When a side force acts on the coach, it tends to cause the front wheels to want to change direction (in addition to trying to "twist" the H-frame, which also changes your wheels' direction). If the caster was set at zero, this effect would be minimized, but positive caster is necessary for the coach's wheels to have a natural tendency to "return to center" after you make a turn. Were it not for caster, you would have to crank the wheel back to center. Even in the TRW gear (just as in the Sheppard) the Pittman arm is driven by a purely mechanical rack-and-pinion. When you turn the steering wheel (through a low-friction ball screw and nut) you are moving the rack. The rack, in turn, causes the pinion to rotate. The pinion is rigidly attached to the Pittman arm which (through linkage) turns the wheels back and forth. The genius of the TRW gear design, as opposed to the Sheppard, is that the rack gear (mounted to the ball nut inside the gear) is cut with "crowned teeth". That is, the teeth are "higher" (greater pitch diameter) in the middle (the dead-ahead position). The "dead ahead" position is where most of the wear occurs on both the pinion and the rack, since you spend the great majority of your time driving in a nearly straight line (down a straight highway, for instance). Since the center is the position where the maximum wear will occur, if you could increase the size (pitch diameter) of the pinion, you could compensate for that wear. Fortunately, the TRW gear is equipped with a pinion whose teeth are cut in a "cone shape". That is, the pitch diameter increases (very slightly) along its tooth length. The adjustment on the TRW gear allows you to increase the engagement of the pinion gear into the rack gear, increase the pinion's effective pitch diameter, and decrease the backlash to near-zero. This works only because the rack gear is cut with its teeth higher in the middle. Were that not the case, if you increased the engagement of the pinion to compensate for wear of the rack gear in the "straight ahead" position, it would bind as it traveled to either side of center. This is the reason that a Sheppard gear CANNOT be "blueprinted" by ANY method to have near-zero backlash EXCEPT by sorting through parts to find the largest pinion and rack that will fit together. There is NO adjustment for depth-of-engagement of the pinion to the rack gear. Then, over time, backlash will grow in the "straight ahead" position and nothing can be done about it. The Sheppard has a straight-cut rack and a straight-cut pinion. To its credit, the Sheppard gear is significantly more rugged than the TRW, and that is perhaps why it is the steering gear of choice on many heavy off-road vehicles, where travel speeds are low and "straight ahead" backlash is of little consequence. The reason that Sheppard gears perform OK in road tractors is that the front axle of the tractor is orders of magnitude more stiffly connected to the truck chassis through heavy leaf springs. Therefore, the tendency of the wheels to remain "dead ahead" is much greater than our coaches with axles connected to separate H-frames connected by spindly trailing arms and supported by mushy air bags, and held in position by ONE Panhard rod, before connecting to the coach chassis. Add to that the tendency of multi-axle vehicles to continue in a straight line in the face of side forces, and you have a case where the "dead ahead" backlash is of little consequence. The tendency of tag-axle coaches to exhibit much less tendency to wander is due to this multi-axle tendency to move in a straight line. It is also the reason that most coach manufacturers advise you to lift the tag axle when attempting to make sharp turns at low speeds.

JD, I have never found the 3/4 hex locknut on dozens of TRW boxes I've adjusted to be too tight to get loose. Often, however, the locknut is rusted to the adjustment screw, and some serious back-and-forth is required to break them loose from one another. To get an accurate adjustment, the locknut and adjusting screw must be very freely turning. You MUST have the steering gear witness marks aligned to adjust the gear (wheels straight ahead). If your steering gear has any significant play, gusting winds or passing tractor-trailers will be a handful. Check your Watts link and X-bars for any indication that the mounting plates are moving, or something is loose. Check for any deterioration in the bushings at the ends of the trailing arms (4 front and 4 rear). You almost surely have the one-piece later design of bushing, so unless something odd has happened, they should be OK. I was in a caravan of five coaches leaving from the southeast to Alaska in 2016. Four of the coaches had my prototype rear X-bars and front Watts links. We went through some truly brutal gusting winds in Nebraska (white caps on the drainage ponds along the Interstate) which the radio reported were gusting to over 40 MPH. EVERYONE remarked how stable their coaches were, even when being passed by semi's. 2000 Dynasty 36 (mine), 2006? Diplomat 40 (Bob Nodine), 2011 Camelot 45 (Tom Moore--only tag-axle in the group), 2013 Knight (Craig French).

JD, if you already have rear X-bars, adding a Watts link in the rear will make very little difference. I developed the whole X-Bar / Watts link system. Bob Nodine was my first "Guinea Pig" coach. My coach was among the last to be equipped with my devices, since I thought my coach did not wander badly enough to be a good test platform. After installing many of the X-bar / Front Watts links, I finally added them to my own coach. It made a huge difference, even though I had thought previously that it did not wander much. Adding the front Watts link makes a large difference. NO, the Watts lever need not be perfectly vertical. It performs just as well with the Watts lever +/- even 20 degrees. The anti-sway bar may have some benefits, but stopping wandering is not one of them. Bob Nodine can confirm that. He installed them front and rear to cure his wandering. It had little to no effect. Bob Nodine and I both removed our S-T-+ hydraulic stabilizer. I'm not knocking it. Both of us felt it just added to much effort to steering. And NO device like that, adjustable or not, will mitigate GUSTING winds...and how often are winds consistent in speed and direction? I think you have done most of the things to improve your coach's handling. Are you still dissatisfied?

If your furnace is Suburban, it is rated for ZERO clearance on its BOTTOM side. Many of the Suburbans are mounted on "stilts". Remove the stilts, mount furnace to floor. Use holesaw to add additional thru-wall hole for relocated in/out air/exhaust. This gave me just barely enough room to install Samsung RF18 in my 2000 Dynasty. There are many threads on this forum and iRV2 describing this modification. Best modification to the coach interior I ever made!

2011 Camelot. It is the title of the post.

It's in the TITLE of the post. 2011 Camelot. Thanks.

Thanks, Skipjack. I'll have him look. Are these in the FRB?

Once again trying to help a friend with a problem remotely. He is located in FL, several hundred miles from me. I do not have access to his wiring diagrams.He has total loss of power to his instrument panel and AC blower. Speedo, tach, and all instruments go dead, but coach continues to drive OK. On my 2000 Dynasty, when that happened to me, it was a single contactor in the FRB. It looked like an old Ford starter relay. I could tap it lightly with a screwdriver handle and all power would be restored. I replaced the contactor and never had another problem.His coach is much newer than mine and has a multitude of small relays on a printed circuit board, and nothing that resembles my layout. I’m assuming there is one relay or contactor that provides power to the dash and AC blower. I tend to doubt it’s one of those small Bosch-type relays.We replaced all his house batteries with AGM’s before our last trip together and had no issues. His engine will start normally.Has anyone ever dealt with this same problem?

Ken, I think it will become more clear to you as you begin removing things. You will remove the blue SSI, the green Lambert, and the Big Boy (Battery Boost) contactor. You'll then have plenty of room for the ML-ACR. The center cable on your SSI is ALWAYS from the alternator. You connect that center cable AND the cable going to your chassis batteries TOGETHER onto either of the large posts of the ML-ACR. That means your alternator will ALWAYS be charging your chassis batteries anytime your engine is running. Connect the other cable on your SSI (it is from your house batteries) to the OTHER large post on the ML-ACR. BE SURE BOTH HOUSE AND CHASSIS BATTERY CABLES ARE NOT "HOT" BEFORE YOU BEGIN!!! The present wires going to the Lambert Charger you can either remove or simply cover in heat-shrink tubing and tie out of the way. You can do the same with the small wires going to the Big Boy. You will almost surely have to make additional cables to extend their reach to the ML-ACR, or make a workmanlike extension, covered in double layers of heat-shrink tubing. Before you start, insure that you have enough additional 4/0 cable and all the copper end lugs you will need. Be sure you buy WELDING cable, NOT battery cable. Battery cable is MUCH less flexible and difficult to work with. I have run so many 4/0 cables on mine and other's coaches that I have a large assortment of the lugs and a cheap $60 Chinese hydraulic crimper (Amazon) that makes a hexagon crimp on the lugs. Buy 4/0 lugs with the smallest available hole, and you will only need one part number. Enlarge the hole to suit using one of the multi-step drill tools. DO NOT USE A DRILL BIT! It will INEVITABLY grab in the copper material as you break thru. Use heat-shrink tubing on all your crimps and remember to slide the heat-shrink on the cable BEFORE you crimp the lug! Question #1--YES Question # 2--YES, your inverter/charger will be applying its 3-stage charging to BOTH your house and chassis batteries. No problem with overcharging. Question #3--The house side of your battery bank (according to your diagram) is the bottom cable on the SSI. That IS your B+ for the house batteries. It IS the cable that will connect (alone) to one of the ML-ACR large lugs. The OTHER large lug on the ML-ACR will have your ALTERNATOR output and your CHASSIS battery cable lugs connected (together). You are welcome to private message me (or post your cell number) and we can exchange cell numbers, so I can help you. I don't answer calls from numbers I do not recognize. Good luck! It is much simpler than it seems. Just remember that the ML-ACR uses some internal circuitry similar to BIRD circuitry to accomplish only ONE thing--it either CONNECTS both of the large lugs of the ML-ACR together (charging all batteries from any available source) or it DISCONNECTS the chassis batteries from the house batteries (when there is no charging source) to PRESERVE the chassis battery charge.

Waterskier (Rick?) I think the Lithium battery subject does indeed deserve its own thread. I think Walter had started one. Perhaps you can start another or join Walter's original thread. I find the Lithium battery subject quite fascinating. But like Jim, I would have to understand it a lot more thoroughly before I dump my 1000 AH FLA (8 T-145 size 6V batteries) and switch to it. You, and several others, seem to have PERSONAL experience with the subject. As Bill D famously said (ad nauseum) "Don't tell me what you read on the Internet. Tell me what YOU have done." Some of you guys with PERSONAL experience in converting to Lithium batteries could do the rest of us peons a great service by keeping us informed of your progress, experiences, and your thoughts. By all means, do start a new thread. And not because your contributions aren't welcome on this one, but with "DUVAC" as the heading of this thread, it would be harder to search for info on Lithium batteries. Perhaps Scotty could "cut and paste" to save some of this Lithium info to a thread devoted to it. Thanks so much for your detailed input!! At present, all I can add is QUESTIONS. Some of you guys have ANSWERS. Thank you!