In article ,
Not exactly. The regulator stabilizes the alternator/generator output to an appropriate level. (effectively a constant-voltage, variable-current power supply, "within limits".) The battery 'floats' across the alternator output as it powers the rest of the vehicle's systems.
To use a Clintonism, "That depends on what you mean by 'suitable'."
Standard auto batteries are -not- intended for deep-discharge cycles. Repeated deep discharge *radically* shortens battery life.
Standard auto batteries generally suffer if routinely discharged below 50% of full-charge level. "Deep discharge" batteries, on the other hand are good for 80%-90% discharge without damage.
*IF* you can afford to put in twice the AH you'll use, _and_ have a cut- off when the 50% level is reached, regular auto batteries are 'ok'.Also, if it is a true =emergency= (only!!) system -- where you just need 'something' for a relatively short, but _unspecified_ time period -- auto batteries do provide some of the least expensive per amp-hour storage, if maintained properly and _not_ drained excessively.
As an 'off grid' power supply, or as part of an 'uninterruptible' grid-based power source, auto batteries are 'medium lousy', to put it charitably.
If you have need to get a specific _duration_ of power, batteries designed for deep discharge *will* provide _more_ power for a _longer_ period, and for _more_ occurrences, than auto batteries.
It boils down to "if you expect to use it", get batteries designed for the task. If you _don't_ expect to use, it get the 'cheap' ones. Batteries do age, and *do* have to be replaced periodically. If the use will be only a few times during the projected lifetime, the benefits of 'deep discharge' designs are probably =not= worth the extra cost.
Analyzing the trade-offs is _not_ a simple process. :)