I checked today after reading in the "flickering lights" post I wanted to discuss the pros/cons of the ECU controlling the alternator. Is it better to make the alternator "dumb", IE less parts to fail (voltage regulator), and have the ECU regulate the DC voltage? What advantage would this serve? This is all based off the assumtion that the regulator is in the ECU. It is a simular setup like my old Volvo's had with the remote regulator.
It seems like the setup Mitsu has is like aircraft generators, where the GCU (generator control unit) is located far away from the generator. Maybe the ECU could display faults better with this setup? Or manage the DC system better? I'm just curious as why they went away from the one-wire alternator.

Rob

 

A lot has to do with losses in the system. The need for a stable voltage at the ECU and other computers makes it useful to do the voltage sampling directly at those systems. Adjustments can be made to keep things stable at the end user(computer).

 

Ok, I can relate to that. It's filtered clean power. Makes sense.
Rob

 

every automaker has been controlling the generator from the PCM for years. Its much more efficient.