In GM vehicles for decades.  The 10SI was GM's first internally regulated alternator.  They started using it in the early '70s.  It was a definite improvement from the externally regulated alternators that came before.  It eventually morphed into the 12SI, and even that was discontinued sometime in the mid '80s. 

IMO its dated technology.  I am also not a fan of one wire alternators.  Alternators work best when they are installed with proper feedback so they can properly regulate themselves.  The one wire installations just bypass the feedback so all it "sees" is what its putting out, not what the electrical system in the car is seeing.  Often they overcharge at idle and under charge during high demand.

Given the simple bolt in install, ease of wiring, and proper regulation; I'd use a 3G alternator.  Its a better option in most every way. 

Have to agree with TKO. The 93 Taurus alternator makes a better application than a one-wire. The wiring mods are simple. By connecting the reference wire at the main distribution point you will get better voltage regulation.

I've heard that too.  I run the 90amp version, and I had to get the belt REALLY tight to avoid annoying squeal.  The additional resistance created in a 130 amp alternator would likely require either a dual belt or serpentine belt setup to run squeal free.  With the typical crank pulley groove spacing on a SBF of this vintage I wouldn't think it would be too hard to set up a dual belt though.  If anyone needs anything PM me.  I've got a milk crate full of Ford pulleys I got from my neighbor.  All '60s-'70s vintage.  That's where I found the pulleys I needed when I went to PS and AC. 

Then the threshold for squealing is actually much lower than 90amops, because I'm certain that at start up there's no way my car needs all that amperage.  I doubt it needs it ever, which is why I didn't go to the extra expense of the 130, as I'm sure the 90 is already overkill. 

I've been running the 2G, which I think is a 75 amp unit) from an 89 Towncar for over ten years (nearly 25K) and never had any low battery issues.  I have a normal radio with no extra amp., AC, power windows/locks/mirrors, H4 headlights, and EFI.  The only problem I see with these alternators is that they used a double spade connector for the main battery connection.  My local rebuild guy was able to install an insulated stud with nut which is way better than Ford's original idea...I guess those were prone to extreme overheating and attendent smoke.

BB

Last edited by Bullet Bob (6/24/2018 10:19 AM)

I bought a direct replacement alternator at autozone that bolts in and hooks up like the original but puts out 65 amps.

https://www.autozone.com/batteries-starting-and-charging/alternator/duralast-alternator/333336_802609_0
 

Last edited by Michael H. (6/25/2018 3:57 PM)

Ah, crank that thing tight.  A complete rebuild kit is like $34 and it takes an hour at most to do the rebuild.  Belt squeal drives me nuts.

i am using PA performance 130 ah and conversion kit for external regulator. works really good but was a little pain  wiring it .  It could be easy if my wires were not cut and colors faded .  With an expert all went good. the old low bracket need longer 

I don't know if you've already purchased one yet but this seller is who I got mine from. He has been great to work with and fixed a warranty problem for no charge.  I highly recommend him.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/130-AMP-1-WIRE-FORD-REPLACEMENT-ALTERNATOR/132676315464?hash=item1ee41fe948:g:u7YAAOxyM89Sas4x
 

Last edited by JSHarvey (6/26/2018 12:24 PM)

I'm not ascribing to it BTW, but I suppose the idea is that you are placing a load (side, upward, or otherwise) on the crank snout that is not evenly distributed.  The main bearing wouldn't have to be worn from pushing the crank down; it could be worn on the side or top.  Really, considering the belt arrangement its loading the crank at an angle, not really up or down, but with the fact that there's rotation involved its even harder to figure exactly.  To me it comes down to the fact that the oil wedge is amazing strong; as is hydraulic force.  Considering clearance on a main bearing is all of what? 0.0020-0.0030"?  Now, the issue to my thinking is on startup, without pressurized oil forming that oil wedge, but by that rationale all the bearings are at risk from point loads in one plane or another.  Also, when I consider how tight the tensioner gets a serpentine belt I don't think its even possible to get a V-belt that tight, especially since a V-belt will stretch and a serpentine belt won't because its metal reinforced.  Granted, serpentine belt setups tend to have a bunch of accessories, so possibly there is the idea of even loading by placing multiple loads at different positions.