Wagos and other MF connectors/enclosures...

[Knobhead]

Be careful with definition of MF. The standard WAGO range are NOT MF according to BS7671.

Be weary of those who try convince you otherwise!

Try LINE MF kit.l BS5733 mf maintenance free to BS7671

Bulk order? I can also gtee you the best prices for the full range!

You got a thanks for making me laugh.

You should use a spiel checker or in Yiddish a אויסלייג טשעקער

 

[LineProducts]

You got a thanks for making me laugh.

You should use a spiel checker or in Yiddish a אויסלייג טשעקער

Glad I made you laugh! The Freudian irony is that weary is probably more appropriate to these smoke an mirror merchants! weary besides tired is also: disillusioned, disenchanted, fed up!

So we should be both weary and wary of them. When listening to them, a spiel checker would be useful: where can I get one?
PS: Whats the difference between a lie detector and a spiel checker?

 

[telectrix]

difference? ... i can't spell the 2nd one.

 

[LineProducts]

Ray brewer said this would be happening earlier this year. They will be most welcome now the bs from certain other suppliers might stop.

I cant help thinking that this is a dig at me.

Regardless, lets get the truth out. After all, its in all our best interests.

The bottom line is which suppliers can you trust and which should you be wary smile of?

I feel that we could bounce around some of the issues raised in this thread for days and still be arguing. This is what I suggest:

BS7671, BS5733 are clear when it comes MF requirements. A clear unbiased article is needed to define this once and for all.

Would a any of you be willing to talk to the parties involved, look at their statements over the past year and reconcile to BS5733 and 7671?

 

[imago]

If I could add a comment as a totally impartial 'end user'.

I have used Wago products, I have not used LINE products. I would quite happily use either along with others as they all meet my requirements in different situations.

I couldn't give a stuff which has or has not got MF on them, it makes not a blind bit of difference to the work I do, or the end result. I will continue to use whichever enclosure I deem most suitable for the situation/location. The whole "ours is, there's isn't" stuff comes across as quite childish IMHO. Jumping up and down shouting that the sky is falling simply because some 'I' isn't dotted, or 'T' crossed comes across as pointless pedantry and doesn't cast a very good light on those doing so.

 

[LineProducts]

If I could add a comment as a totally impartial 'end user'.

I have used Wago products, I have not used LINE products. I would quite happily use either along with others as they all meet my requirements in different situations.

I couldn't give a stuff which has or has not got MF on them, it makes not a blind bit of difference to the work I do, or the end result. I will continue to use whichever enclosure I deem most suitable for the situation/location. The whole "ours is, there's isn't" stuff comes across as quite childish IMHO. Jumping up and down shouting that the sky is falling simply because some 'I' isn't dotted, or 'T' crossed comes across as pointless pedantry and doesn't cast a very good light on those doing so.

The issue is as follows: does a product meet the requirements of the standard or not? (This is about safety not labels)

Shouldnt manufacturers tell you the truth so that you can decide?

If you "couldnt give a stuff" and this is your approach to your work and BS7671 then that is your business but I know that the majority of members do take comfort in knowing that the products they use are fully compliant!!

 

[imago]

If you "couldnt give a stuff" and this is your approach to your work and BS7671 then that is your business but I know that the majority of members do take comfort in knowing that the products they use are fully compliant!!

Is this your response to your work and a potential customer then? My approach to my work is to use the mostr appropriate item for the job in hand, frequently that means using materials which exceed those required under BS7671. Because as I'm sure you are aware with you in depth knowledge of the standards, they are a minimum requirement. So rather than folling the guidlines set out in those standards I prefer to use knowledge, experience andd good judgement to select a product.

As for "fully compliant" OK, your product has lettering embossed into it and is fully copmliant with the minimum required, well done. :rolleyes2:

 

[LineProducts]

Is this your response to your work and a potential customer then? My approach to my work is to use the mostr appropriate item for the job in hand, frequently that means using materials which exceed those required under BS7671. Because as I'm sure you are aware with you in depth knowledge of the standards, they are a minimum requirement. So rather than folling the guidlines set out in those standards I prefer to use knowledge, experience andd good judgement to select a product.

As for "fully compliant" OK, your product has lettering embossed into it and is fully copmliant with the minimum required, well done. :rolleyes2:

I think you have misunderstood the issue. It is about safety. I agree with you that the standards should be a minimum. I am not talking about a label or an embossing. I am talking about products failing to meet the standards on SAFETY matters!

I would personally rather use a product that meets the safety requirements without a label than one that does not meet the safety standard but has the correct label - yes there are many products out there that do!!

LINEs philosophy is to provide its customers with all the FACTS so that they can use their own expertise to make a judgement.

The point here is that i am not arguing about dotting I's and crossing T's. The point is that some manufacturers are saying that their products meet the safety standards of MF when they clearly do not. Or, they give misleading information to make you think that they do when they do not.

For example if WAGO connectors (222 or 773 series) have been used, at or close their relative ratings as MF then the safety standards have been missed. If you are willing to search hard enough in the small print you will even find that WAGO admit this! So, every wagobox that has been used as a MF solution on a circuit close to the rated current OR with too many connections (e.g a 4 cable lighting circuit) does not meet the requirements of the SAFETY standards.

 

[imago]

I have no wish to get into an argument with you over your products, I have never used them so I couldn't comment. The only reason I have never used them is because I haven't bought any, I'm sure at some point I will.

My point was purely that the negative comments about other products doesn't sound good to an impartial observer. If you read through your post above, you'll see how many negatives there are in it. "products failing to meet the standards" "some manufacturers are saying that their products meet the safety standards of MF when they clearly do not" etc. It can lead to a bad image/association with the person posting rather than the issue/product that they're posting about.

Regarding the WagoBox itself, rating capacities, what's stamped on them (or not) isn't an issue for me as I never use them. I don't like the way they go together, hold the cable, fix to a joist or 'sit' once the cables are in.

 

[stan794]

I cant help thinking that this is a dig at me.

Regardless, lets get the truth out. After all, its in all our best interests.

The bottom line is which suppliers can you trust and which should you be wary smile of?

I feel that we could bounce around some of the issues raised in this thread for days and still be arguing. This is what I suggest:

BS7671, BS5733 are clear when it comes MF requirements. A clear unbiased article is needed to define this once and for all.

Would a any of you be willing to talk to the parties involved, look at their statements over the past year and reconcile to BS5733 and 7671?

Sorry Farrel

not a dig at you (the other one)

I use wagos in yours and wago boxes depending on the situation, both are good.

 

[i=p/u]

3 or 4 cables at the one junction and they are awkward to close and get sitting righgt, but maybe will get easier

 

[LineProducts]

I have no wish to get into an argument with you over your products, I have never used them so I couldn't comment. The only reason I have never used them is because I haven't bought any, I'm sure at some point I will.

My point was purely that the negative comments about other products doesn't sound good to an impartial observer. If you read through your post above, you'll see how many negatives there are in it. "products failing to meet the standards" "some manufacturers are saying that their products meet the safety standards of MF when they clearly do not" etc. It can lead to a bad image/association with the person posting rather than the issue/product that they're posting about.

Regarding the WagoBox itself, rating capacities, what's stamped on them (or not) isn't an issue for me as I never use them. I don't like the way they go together, hold the cable, fix to a joist or 'sit' once the cables are in.

The big question is how to communicate this information in a positive way?
My policy is to be 100% honest and not to pretend something is ok just to make a sale! There are several members here that could vouch for this.

I believe that manufacturers have an obligation to tell the truth and not to be misleading in any way. Their products should not meet standards via a dodgy interpretation. Products should meet the standard - period.

Unfortunately in reality few do!

After all, it is the electrician that signs the cert and takes responsibility. You should demand that manufacturers come clean!