[QUOTE] I will never agree to that ( I stick to what I know and have been taught)[/QUOTE] I think that translates as I'm too stupid to think for myself, n'est ce pas ? [QUOTE] - one being current drawn, the other being turning force> required load is load , as in work to be done /required so whether explained as turning force or current drawn they bear a direct relationship of watts and where's consumed[/QUOTE] Ya gotta love a guy who makes a statement to which the only answer is "yeah but"...<pause> actually no you don't. Yes, load is load, it's measured in work done, hence why I put the bits in brackets about how it was measured (that'd be that torque thingy). But Andrew seemed to be differentiating between two different types of work (he later said things that make me doubt he had a clue, but that's a different discussion) the actual statement he made is (pedantically) correct. There's work to turn the metal things in the alternator around- that load is a constant, it doesn't change regardless of the electrickery. Then there's the electrickery, the EMF is going to create a different load depending on the watts being consumed by dint of how much electrical load is attached. Add the two together and you get the total one is variable, one is constant. Not difficult really. [QUOTE] (2) still not sure I'm explaining that particularly well No you didn't , I suspect it's some bullshite machination dreamed up to split hairs buy a drunken masturbaterpoofta ( tell me if I am wrong)[/QUOTE] Well i wasn't drunk but I don't know what the latter bit means so I can't comment, it's obviously intended to be pejorative so I guess the obvious reply is "gefuggedyastupidkuntgetabigblackdogupya" JL