# 'Quick Wiring' question



## bjgelect (Sep 8, 2008)

Hi All,
I'm pretty new to this forum, but I'll throw in my 2 cents anyway.
Over here in NY we refer to the wiring method as "speed wiring". Speed wiring is good to me, usually 7 years after the house has been finished, they start to fail, and almost always it's the neutral on the receptacle, and it's usually the receptacle that's never used, (behind a sofa, etc.). No one will ever see a completed job done by me speed wired. There are times during a construction project that I will temp out a receptacle to be later replaced when trimming out, but that's it. About 15 years ago I attended an NEC seminar given by two commitee directors/chairmen. The seminar took several days and I was amazed how well these guys knew the code (they wrote sections of the code). After a day's session, I asked Jim Stallcup about speed wiring, and why the hell was it allowed. His response was although he agreed with me that it should be banned, other members of the NEC had wanted it because not only are electrical inspectors seated on the various commitees, but there are also manufacturers and contractors seated as well. This conversation I had with Jim was before the NEC limited speed wiring to 14AWG wire.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Sep 30, 2003)

bjgelect said:


> ........ because not only are electrical inspectors seated on the various commitees, but there are* also manufacturers* and contractors seated as well..


THIS is what sucks, and should not be allowed. Can we all say "AFCI"???

This is kind of like the folks from the city and Jersey coming up here and going to town board meetings trying to change things to suit their wants. Meanwhile they are only up here 5-6 weeks ends out of the year.

Same thing with the manufacturers. very few folks even know what is going on behind the scenes until the new code book comes out.


----------



## pjelect (Sep 9, 2008)

Interesting discussion. What is missing is that there is a wide range in the quality of devices using this sort of connection. The 40 cent items from Home Depot are UL listed but are junk. They fail at the back stabs fairly rapidly, but even if you side wire them they fail where the device plugs in. The internal parts don't hold their tension. 

Wago makes a popular 'wire nut' using this sort of tension clamp design. I believe there are also other manufacturers. We've used them frequently and never had a failure. Every fluorescent fixture manufactured uses this technology in the tombstones.

We buy a lot of terminal blocks. (We do a lot of industrial control work.) We prefer ones manufactured by Wago or Weidmueller using this sort of tension clamp design. Wires don't fall out due to vibration. The terminal block will never loosen up. Its easy to check your connection with a little tug and its fast when you're doing hundreds or thousands of terminations.

I guess my point is that a blanket curse isn't warrented. Just don't buy cheap junk.


----------



## mickeyco (May 13, 2006)

pjelect said:


> I guess my point is that a blanket curse isn't warrented.



Yes it is. 

Of note is that UL and several of the electrical supply manufacturers are in Illinois and have a very chummy relationship, hence the purple wire nuts.




.


----------



## Bubbles (Sep 27, 2007)

*Chummy*

I busted open a wago today. Just looks like a metal strip with a bend and tension on it, like a backstab??? You can't put stranded in a wago right? How can recessed light companies get away with putting stranded fixture wires in wago's anyhow?? Chummyness? Am I the only one who cuts out the wago's in fixtures and uses wire nuts?


----------



## Bkessler (Oct 8, 2005)

The ends of the wago in cans has been dipped in solder so its solid going in, and I believe there is a wago that is approved for stranded now.


----------



## Bkessler (Oct 8, 2005)

mickeyco said:


> Yes it is.
> 
> Of note is that UL and several of the electrical supply manufacturers are in Illinois and have a very chummy relationship, hence the purple wire nuts.
> 
> ...


Makes sense can you tell me more. I would like to blow the whistle on those ideal purple's even though I use them regularly because the amount of AL here in socal.


----------



## mickeyco (May 13, 2006)

Bkessler said:


> Makes sense can you tell me more. I would like to blow the whistle on those ideal purple's even though I use them regularly because the amount of AL here in socal.


Not much to tell, UL and Ideal met in hotel (right down the road from me), the purple wire nuts came up for discussion, "Bob" of Ideal assured "John" of UL, that they were fine and ordered a drink on Ideal's tab and all was fine.

Not to far from how it really happened, I went back and found my old post and the UL guys name is John, coincidence or conspiracy?




mickeyco said:


> I would NEVER use the Ideal purple wire nuts. The King Innovation AlumiConn connectors mentioned by Capt2 are newer and are UL approved under UL 486C but only time and independent real world testing will tell. I sent a picture I took of a melted Ideal 30-265 (Purple AL/CU wire nut) I ran across along with a letter to UL and haven't heard back. UL is and has been aware of the problems with the purple wire nuts for some time and hasn't done anything about it.
> 
> Here's some info about Ideals Purple AL/CU wire nut:
> 
> ...






.


----------



## excellencee (Feb 1, 2007)

I go on service calls for bad receptacles occasionally. If I had to count, I've probably ran in 1 or 2 with bad backstabs. I've run into dozens with loose screws. I came up backstabbing switches and receptacles, and continue to do so in new residential. In commercial, I only use the backwired receptacles, never sidewired. Just my experience.


----------



## Bkessler (Oct 8, 2005)

Thanks Mickeyco I printed that out and put it in my notes. I find most of my bad plugs are from the screws and not the push ins. And I have also noted that it is rarely an original outlet when i find a burned one it is usually a handyman/homewoner problem. Backstabs stop working and bad screw connections overheat.


----------



## Sparky Joe (Apr 29, 2006)

Bkessler said:


> I still backstab my outlets in new homes but I always pigtail the hot and neutral so the full current of the circuit does not go through the yolk of the device.


I like my yolks cooked so give 'em plenty of heat, but my yokes I like cool to the touch so never backstab. :whistling


----------



## Bkessler (Oct 8, 2005)

yoke's


----------



## Sparky Joe (Apr 29, 2006)

sorry bout that, I apparently didn't read on to the second page to comment on the topic at hand....
I also thought Wago's were not rated for stranded, but was told they were so I used them.

After thinking about it it seems they would work better with stranded, more surface to contact the spring.


----------



## pat c (Aug 18, 2008)

i never use the backstabs, takes 10 seconds more to put it around the terminal big deal, atleast i dont get call back...


----------



## Bkessler (Oct 8, 2005)

I backstab and do not get call backs either and like I said if one of my backstabs failed everything would work except the one outlet that failed because both hot and nutral are pigtailed. Also I have never seen backstab failure that overheated and "burned up" like you do with them on the screw terminal. Now I hate it when they are backstabed and not pigtailed or even worse two backstabs and all four screws are being used.


----------



## 220/221 (Sep 29, 2007)

> Who is it here who taglines....._Just cause it is to code doesn't make it safe............._


 
:clap:

I love the wagos on recessed cans.

I backstab if I have a whole house to do.

I never backstab a handfull of outlets or a 15A recep that may have a high draw (air handler etc)

Purple nuts are a scam and a half.

I don't use wagos in lieu of wirenuts (yet)

Backstabbed failures seem to be 50/50 hot/neutral


----------



## mattsilkwood (Sep 30, 2007)

pjelect said:


> Every fluorescent fixture manufactured uses this technology in the tombstones.
> 
> .


 theres alot of difference in what a flourescent lamp draws and say a vacuum. backstabs are for homeowners, electricians have screwdrivers


----------



## ctiautomation (Mar 18, 2009)

pjelect said:


> Interesting discussion. What is missing is that there is a wide range in the quality of devices using this sort of connection. The 40 cent items from Home Depot are UL listed but are junk. They fail at the back stabs fairly rapidly, but even if you side wire them they fail where the device plugs in. The internal parts don't hold their tension.
> 
> Wago makes a popular 'wire nut' using this sort of tension clamp design. I believe there are also other manufacturers. We've used them frequently and never had a failure. Every fluorescent fixture manufactured uses this technology in the tombstones.
> 
> ...



We have used entrelec (now ABB) and weidmuller before. They have very good quality terminal blocks. Weidmuller is a little more expensive I think. Not sure about WAGO, haven't used them before.

http://www.clrwtr.com/ABB-Entrelec.htm
http://www.clrwtr.com/Weidmuller-Terminal-Blocks-Power-Supplies.htm
http://www.wago.com/flash/start/start.htm


----------



## ampman (Apr 1, 2009)

company policy : no backstabbing


----------



## Archania (Jan 21, 2009)

I NEVER backstab. I cant count how many times I have pulled an outlet or a switch out and the wires just pop out of the back. I just don't trust them.


----------



## nEighter (Nov 24, 2008)

we have recepticles that are "backstabbed" but you still tighten the screws on the side to draw the clamp into them. With this type, that is all you can do, is to "technically backstab" although it s not the spring teeth type recepticle.


EDIT:


----------



## Speedy Petey (Sep 30, 2003)

nEighter said:


> we have recepticles that are "backstabbed" but you still tighten the screws on the side to draw the clamp into them. With this type, that is all you can do, is to "technically backstab" although it s not the spring teeth type recepticle.


This is semantics, but it is important. 

What you describe is know as "back wired". These are reliable and sound terminations. 

Terminations where the wire is wrapped around the screw and the screw tightened on the wire are called "side-wired".

The push-in ones, like in your picture, are "back-stab" or "quick-wire" connections.


----------



## sorethumbs (Apr 22, 2009)

If i've got six #12 awg solid wires to connect in a j-box I'm going to grab a Wago. I don't know how you guys can get that many connected in a twist-on wire nut, it'd take me 1/2 hour and I'd still have a loose one!


----------



## thom (Nov 3, 2006)

We can't backstab in NM. We are limited to #12 and larger wire on receptacles. 


*Section 210.19 Conductors - Minimum ampacity and size.* See this section of the NEC and add the following to subsection (A) Branch circuits not more than 600 volts. (1) General: see this section of the NEC and add: conductors for branch circuits shall be sized to prevent excessive voltage drop. Conductors of 15 ampere 120V branch circuits supplying general-purpose receptacle outlets shall be not less than 12 AWG.

Is NM the only state with this rule?


----------



## joelv1967 (Apr 10, 2009)

Bkessler said:


> I backstab and do not get call backs either and like I said if one of my backstabs failed everything would work except the one outlet that failed because both hot and nutral are pigtailed. Also I have never seen backstab failure that overheated and "burned up" like you do with them on the screw terminal. Now I hate it when they are backstabed and not pigtailed or even worse two backstabs and all four screws are being used.


 
I do the same....I pigtail using my Wagos, then backstab the outlet with my 12 gauge....of course I have to bore out the hole a bit so it will fit.....Is that wrong of me???

Seriously though...I never EVER use any of these type of devices. I cut the Wagos off, and connect them the 'right' way. Also, one big pet peeve of mine is when people use the wire nut to make the connection. I tell all my guys that the key to a good electrical connection is a good mechanical connection (of course I stole this from someone else, and don't remember who). twist the wires together with your linesman pliers before putting the wire nut on, and you'll never have a connection related problem.


----------



## joelv1967 (Apr 10, 2009)

sorethumbs said:


> If i've got six #12 awg solid wires to connect in a j-box I'm going to grab a Wago. I don't know how you guys can get that many connected in a twist-on wire nut, it'd take me 1/2 hour and I'd still have a loose one!


 
strip your wire back further, twist them NEATLY together with your linesman, and use the appropriate sized wire nut (there are sizes other than yellow and red). I do it all the time with a minimal amount of effort.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Sep 30, 2003)

sorethumbs said:


> If i've got six #12 awg solid wires to connect in a j-box I'm going to grab a Wago. I don't know how you guys can get that many connected in a twist-on wire nut, it'd take me 1/2 hour and I'd still have a loose one!


That's why you are a carpenter and we are electricians. :whistling


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

sorethumbs said:


> I don't know how you guys can get that many connected in a twist-on wire nut, it'd take me 1/2 hour and I'd still have a loose one!


It's easy. But you should probably let your thumbs heal up first. :thumbsup:


----------



## rescraft (Nov 28, 2007)

backstabbed=POS
screw terminations=PITA
backwired=The PRIMO


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

thom said:


> We can't backstab in NM. We are limited to #12 and larger wire on receptacles.
> 
> 
> *Section 210.19 Conductors - Minimum ampacity and size.* See this section of the NEC and add the following to subsection (A) Branch circuits not more than 600 volts. (1) General: see this section of the NEC and add: conductors for branch circuits shall be sized to prevent excessive voltage drop. Conductors of 15 ampere 120V branch circuits supplying general-purpose receptacle outlets shall be not less than 12 AWG.
> ...



Probably...considering back-stabbed devices are limited to #14 and SMALLER [by the MFG]:jester:


----------



## Inner10 (Mar 12, 2009)

I always figured that quick wire was a real quick and dirty way to make a connection. Many years ago the local inspector was looking over my father's job and saw a junction box (not exceeding capacity) with 3x 2 wires comming in, pigtailed nicely with the appropriate marretts. The inspector told him to clean up the box by using the side connections and the quick wire...I believe his words were to the effect of "get that crap outta there".

After that it changed my view of the quick wire a bit, if you strip the wire straight and the correct amount its really locked in there; I see alot of electricians using it. (Note that I am not a licenced electrician and the only time I ever used it was in my home or my shop)


----------



## JohnCarpenter (May 14, 2009)

Putting in kitchen cabinets a few years ago, and saw the guy doing the electrical with a cordless drill and small drill bit. He was making the stab holes bigger so he could stick 12g in there. Had a whole pile of switches and outlets.

Ran away from that builder.


----------



## naptown CR (Feb 20, 2009)

Why on earth would anyone back stab when there is a perfectly good screw to terminate under. I can see the tombstone argument but the loads are by far lower and less likely to cause a problem.


----------



## KennMacMoragh (Sep 16, 2008)

Finally found a thread I can actually use, thanks guys.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Sep 30, 2003)

JohnCarpenter said:


> Putting in kitchen cabinets a few years ago, and saw the guy doing the electrical with a cordless drill and small drill bit. He was making the stab holes bigger so he could stick 12g in there. Had a whole pile of switches and outlets.
> 
> Ran away from that builder.


Holy crap!


----------



## ampman (Apr 1, 2009)

JohnCarpenter said:


> Putting in kitchen cabinets a few years ago, and saw the guy doing the electrical with a cordless drill and small drill bit. He was making the stab holes bigger so he could stick 12g in there. Had a whole pile of switches and outlets.
> 
> Ran away from that builder.


 seems like it would be quicker just to wrap the screw with conductor


----------



## smoothblues (May 29, 2009)

> seems like it would be quicker just to wrap the screw with conductor


 well that would of been the preferred method. god knows what that dude was thinking making space for 12g. Run Far and Fast


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

naptown CR said:


> Why on earth would anyone back stab when there is a perfectly good screw to terminate under.



Because there is a perfectly good back stab connection available that is UL approved.


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Celtic said:


> Because there is a *perfectly good* back stab connection available that is UL approved.


Approved yes, good no!

:boxing: 

Again, again! :w00t:


----------



## MALCO.New.York (Feb 27, 2008)

Tinstaafl said:


> Approved yes, good no!
> 
> :boxing:
> 
> Again, again! :w00t:




Agreed!!!!!!




Who once said.................

"Just because it is Code, does not make it safe. Just because it is not Code, does not make it unsafe!" ?????



.


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Tinstaafl said:


> Approved yes, good no!
> 
> :boxing:
> 
> Again, again! :w00t:



Says you :laughing:

Until I have a VALID reason NOT to back-stab, I will continue to do so.

As of today, the ONLY valid reason not to back stab is money ~ either you have it or you don't...if you don't ~ #14 and back stab all the do-da-day...if you do have the money, I'll screw down a #10 homerun on every recept. :thumbup:


----------



## Speedy Petey (Sep 30, 2003)

Celtic said:


> Says you :laughing:
> 
> Until I have a VALID reason NOT to back-stab, I will continue to do so.
> 
> As of today, the ONLY valid reason not to back stab is money ~


Sorry, I must strongly disagree with you here. 

The opinions and real world feedback of MANY professional electricians, and my own personal experience with them, is MORE than enough VALID reason not to backstab. 

You of course may do as you wish, and I would hope that you do. :thumbsup:


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Celtic said:


> As of today, the ONLY valid reason not to back stab is money ~ either you have it or you don't...if you don't ~ #14 and back stab all the do-da-day...if you do have the money, I'll screw down a #10 homerun on every recept. :thumbup:


So if I'm rich you'll be a suck-up nice guy, but if I'm broke you'll be a lousy backstabber. I see. :laughing:

It's seldom an issue for me anyway. I almost never use 14 gauge.


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> Sorry, I must strongly disagree with you here.
> 
> The opinions and real world feedback of MANY professional electricians, and my own personal experience with them, is MORE than enough VALID reason not to backstab.
> 
> You of course may do as you wish, and I would hope that you do. :thumbsup:


Yup...we are all free to express our opinion ~ however erroneous that opinion may be :thumbup:

Fact is: Back stabbing is an approved method - until the rules change, there is no reason to change my SOP.



Tinstaafl said:


> So if I'm rich you'll be a suck-up nice guy, but if I'm broke you'll be a lousy backstabber. I see. :laughing:
> 
> It's seldom an issue for me anyway. I almost never use 14 gauge.


No - you don't see.
There is virtually no reason to run general lighting circuits on anything larger than a #14.

Explain to me why bigger is better in a resi. electrical application :blink:


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Celtic said:


> Explain to me why bigger is better in a resi. electrical application :blink:


Maybe for the same reasons it is in commercial? :shifty:

I've been in too many homes where over the years circuits have been tacked onto multiple times, air conditioners and other equipment are being used where never planned for originally, and so forth. 

It just makes sense to me to go "heavy-duty" for the relatively nominal price difference and not have people doing stupid stuff when they have trouble running a space heater, toaster and hair dryer all at once. Well, stupider, anyway.

Necessary? Not at all. But it suits my closet engineer mentality.


----------



## MALCO.New.York (Feb 27, 2008)

14 AWG is NON-EXISTENT in_ MY _World!!!



12 is a PITA at times, but 14 is just crap!!!


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Tinstaafl said:


> Maybe for the same reasons it is in commercial? :shifty:


ummm...not even close.
In a commercial application recepts. are calculated at 180VA per...this is NOT the case in resi.

In BOTH cases....15A CB's & #14 could be utilized.
In the end, the 15A ckts would probably result in a BETTER installation ~ more ckts with lower loads/possibility of nuisance overcurrent trips.
Would you rather 1-20A ckt with 13 devices or 2-15A ckts with 20 devices?
[Although all the comm. jobs I have done required a min #12/20 ckt by spec ~ not NEC]


Let's hear your explanation.....




Tinstaafl said:


> I've been in too many homes where over the years circuits have been tacked onto multiple times, air conditioners and other equipment are being used where never planned for originally, and so forth.
> 
> It just makes sense to me to go "heavy-duty" for the relatively nominal price difference and not have people doing stupid stuff when they have trouble running a space heater, toaster and hair dryer all at once. Well, stupider, anyway.
> 
> Necessary? Not at all. But it suits my closet engineer mentality.


What suits my electrical contractor mentality is size circuits for what they need and not waste materials wondering about a bazillion "What If" scenarios.

No matter how much you over engineer something, some idiot will always prove that you suck as an engineer :blink: ....classic examples: ... the penny behind a glass fuse...30A CB on a 15A or 20A ckt ~ both being the idiot's solution to a fuse/breaker over current issue.


50 years ago could anyone have envisioned all the pools and Central AC units..etc?

Who knew in 1980 that every home would have multiple computer stations that make the technology of the 1960's [? I'm no history buff] space launches seem Neanderthal?

In 20 years, what will be the norm in a home?
Will every home how require a gigantic plug for the car to get recharged?
Solar arrays on every roof?
Geo therm heat cooling?

Who knows?

The point is...you don't have any idea what the future holds and pretending you can engineer for that unknown is pure folly.

Give 90.1(B) an eyeballing


----------



## neolitic (Apr 20, 2006)

Celtic said:


> ummm......make the technology of the 1960's [? I'm no history buff] space launches seem Neanderthal?
> .......


You don't have to 
get so _personal_! :laughing:



I know I hate trying to 
sort out a house where
there is #12 in the panel,
and the breaker cuts off 
a switch with #14.
Gawd knows what's in between....
Name some variation 
on the theme, and it's been done.


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

neolitic said:


> You don't have to
> get so _personal_! :laughing:


LOL :laughing:


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Celtic said:


> Would you rather 1-20A ckt with 13 devices or 2-15A ckts with 20 devices?


2-20A ckts with 18 devices.



> The point is...you don't have any idea what the future holds and pretending you can engineer for that unknown is pure folly.
> 
> Give 90.1(B) an eyeballing


No sir, I demur. Building anything intended to last for more than a day to only minimum standards is shortsighted and certainly not likely to do much for your reputation, no matter what field you work in. 

While no one has a crystal ball, it's not that hard to make a few educated guesses. I'm sure you've worked on minimum-standard stuff in the past as well as "over-engineered", and I'd be surprised to hear that your lip didn't tend to curl a bit when encountering the former.

90.1(B): Compliance therewith and proper maintenance results in an installation that is essentially free from hazard but *not necessarily efficient, convenient or adequate for good service* or future expansion of electrical use.

Well, duh! 

Leave out the future expansion if you're a poor prophet. Read the bold part. That might meet your standards; it certainly doesn't meet mine.

All of which has nothing to do with backstabbing. :laughing:


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Tinstaafl said:


> 2-20A ckts with 18 devices.


That wasn't an option.
If you want to just toss out numbers, let's go with 20-20A ckts with 20 devices arty:...and super neutrals :thumbup:




Tinstaafl said:


> No sir, I demur. Building anything intended to last for more than a day to only minimum standards is shortsighted and certainly not likely to do much for your reputation, no matter what field you work in.


I guess you missed the part where the customer ONLY gets what they agree to pay for.:whistling
[ #*61* ]




Tinstaafl said:


> While no one has a crystal ball, it's not that hard to make a few educated guesses. I'm sure you've worked on minimum-standard stuff in the past as well as "over-engineered", and I'd be surprised to hear that your lip didn't tend to curl a bit when encountering the former.


You do realize they are probably a few homes that were built in the 20, 30, and 40's and they still function properly from an electrical standpoint....one - maybe 2 ckts, utilizing K&T wiring methods.




Tinstaafl said:


> 90.1(B): Compliance therewith and proper maintenance results in an installation that is essentially free from hazard but *not necessarily efficient, convenient or adequate for good service* or future expansion of electrical use.
> 
> Well, duh!
> 
> Leave out the future expansion if you're a poor prophet. Read the bold part. That might meet your standards; it certainly doesn't meet mine.


MY standard is not really mine at all - the "standard" is set on every job based solely on the client's wallet.




Tinstaafl said:


> All of which has nothing to do with backstabbing. :laughing:


...and yet you have still to show me how a #12/20A is an improvement over a #14/15A ckt in a general lighting ckt in a dwelling unit....which leads to backstabbing the 14's.


----------



## willworkforbeer (Mar 7, 2009)

I picked up some "rehab" work, not what I'm used to doing :no:. Anyway half the outlets in this house didnt work, quick check and guess what? Backstabbed outlets. Latest wiring addons look maybe 10-15 years old. I used to backstab a light circuit maybe but not no more.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 1, 2009)

Celtic said:


> .................and yet you have still to show me how a #12/20A is an improvement over a #14/15A ckt in a general lighting ckt in a dwelling unit....which leads to backstabbing the 14's.


That's way too much of a generalization.

Not everyone who uses 14 will use backstabs. I count myself in that group.


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Celtic said:


> That wasn't an option.
> If you want to just toss out numbers, let's go with 20-20A ckts with 20 devices arty:...and super neutrals :thumbup:


Now yer talkin'! Growlight heaven. :thumbsup:



> MY standard is not really mine at all - the "standard" is set on every job based solely on the client's wallet.


I do understand what you're saying, but so far I've generally been able to walk rather than work below my standards. In most cases, it's ethically (IMO) up to the professional to provide guidance to the client and not "allow" him to purchase a completely minimum-spec job. In the long run, he'd probably be sorry he did so.



> ...and yet you have still to show me how a #12/20A is an improvement over a #14/15A ckt in a general lighting ckt in a dwelling unit....which leads to backstabbing the 14's.


You can load a circuit with more devices without overloading it. You can run it lightly loaded and have capacity for future expansion. If somehow you wind up with only one roll of wire in your truck, you can always use 12--with 14, you may be SOL.

I don't recall ever seeing a backstabbable luminaire... :whistling


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Tinstaafl said:


> You can load a circuit with more devices without overloading it. You can run it lightly loaded and have capacity for future expansion. If somehow you wind up with only one roll of wire in your truck, you can always use 12--with 14, you may be SOL.


Again...how do we know what the load will be on a general lighting circuit in a home?

Why would I be SOL w/14?






Tinstaafl said:


> I don't recall ever seeing a backstabbable luminaire... :whistling


No one has mentioned a "luminaire" but you.:whistling


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Celtic said:


> Again...how do we know what the load will be on a general lighting circuit in a home?
> 
> Why would I be SOL w/14?


Since you don't, you probably shouldn't wire any. 

You'd use 14 on a 20A circuit?

Hey, I just used a height gauge on this horse. We have it pounded down to less than 1/4 thick. :thumbup:


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Tinstaafl said:


> Since you don't, you probably shouldn't wire any.
> 
> You'd use 14 on a 20A circuit?
> 
> Hey, I just used a height gauge on this horse. We have it pounded down to less than 1/4 thick. :thumbup:


If you don't know the answer to the question - just say so, there is no shame in not knowing.
There is shame in trying to pick a fight to compensate for incompetency.


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Celtic said:


> If you don't know the answer to the question - just say so, there is no shame in not knowing.
> There is shame in trying to pick a fight to compensate for incompetency.


You are asking an unanswerable question. No one can know exactly what load will eventually be put upon a general-use circuit. That has nothing whatsoever to do with competency or lack of it.

Who put the burr under your saddle?


----------



## Celtic (May 23, 2007)

Tinstaafl said:


> You are asking an unanswerable question. No one can know exactly what load will eventually be put upon a general-use circuit. That has nothing whatsoever to do with competency or lack of it.


If the question I ask is unanswerable [and it is] ~ how is it that a 20A ckt is somehow "better" than a 15A ckt as you contend?



Tinstaafl said:


> It just makes sense to me to go "heavy-duty" ...


I don't see it.
Like I said before...why not just use #10 on that 20A ~ that's pretty heavy duty.


If one doesn't know the load, and there is no way to calculate the load....just what the hell is "lightly loaded"?


Tinstaafl said:


> You can run it lightly loaded and have capacity for future expansion.


Your argument just doesn't make any sense....lightly load a circuit that doesn't even have a load associated with it.:blink:


A typical 1500 sq. ft home would require either:
- three 15-A, 2-wire or 
- two 20-A, 2-wire circuits
[plus the required SABCs and laundry ckts]

To ME...45A is better than 40A....and yet, a smaller conductor is used.
*****************



Tinstaafl said:


> Who put the burr under your saddle?


Maybe you did ...

...might have something to do with the ridiculous comments...



Celtic said:


> Explain to me why bigger is better in a resi. electrical application :blink:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Tinstaafl said:


> I don't recall ever seeing a backstabbable luminaire... :whistling
> 
> 
> Celtic said:
> ...


...maybe the innuendo of your comments..






Tinstaafl said:


> Since you don't, you probably shouldn't wire any.
> 
> You'd use 14 on a 20A circuit?





Tinstaafl said:


> Leave out the future expansion if you're a poor prophet. Read the bold part. That might meet your standards; it certainly doesn't meet mine.



...maybe.


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Celtic said:


> If one doesn't know the load, and there is no way to calculate the load....just what the hell is "lightly loaded"?


Oh, come on. We're just going in semantic circles here. Obviously some general assumptions have to be made to even attempt circuit layout. Using your numbers, if a 10 devices are "normal" load for a 15A circuit, 10 devices would constitute a light load for a 20A circuit. There's no need to make it seem more complex than that.



> ...maybe the innuendo of your comments..


I was joking! Seriously, I thought that you'd seen enough of me around here to recognize my somewhat warped sense of humor. I have no reason to doubt your technical competence and experience; there are a few thousand of your posts on here that testify to that. I sincerely apologize for not making that much more clear.

The one comment that I _will_ stand by is the bit about not building to bare-bones minimum standards. I'm pretty passionate about that.


----------

