# Crimping Solid Ground Wire



## rellison (Mar 6, 2018)

I am curious if any of you use the crimping tool for barrel connectors, on solid wire? I ask because when I was a kid the company I worked for used them in dwellings. They just used pliers to crimp them. It is my understanding that you aren't really supposed to crimp solid wire and I have looked and looked, but can't find any real information on this. 
I'm just curious? Personally I don't use them or greenies, I prefer to twist and use a wire nut. I welcome your feedback. Thanks


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

No need to crimp solid wire, needle-nose pliers replace the connector.
And, no "we" don't crimp solid wire.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

rellison said:


> I am curious if any of you use the crimping tool for barrel connectors, on solid wire? I ask because when I was a kid the company I worked for used them in dwellings. They just used pliers to crimp them. It is my understanding that you aren't really supposed to crimp solid wire and I have looked and looked, but can't find any real information on this.
> I'm just curious? Personally I don't use them or greenies, I prefer to twist and use a wire nut. I welcome your feedback. Thanks


Yes, you can crimp a barrel sleeve on solid wire, it is done in resi work all the time.

I would recommend use a real crimper instead of just squeezing it with pliers.


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

The T&B website does not differentiate between solid or stranded. It only says to crimp the connectors, (small sized). 
I’ve always used a crimper and have seen to many bad crimps by people who use their needle nose or linemen’s.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

Where did the idea that you can just twist the bare ground wires together without a crimp or wire nut come from? Seen it done on residential jobs many times.


----------



## Buck Parrish (May 7, 2009)

As stated, you can use them on solid wire. But we had one inspector that would say. I turned it down because I found a loose sta-con (crimp) .

We would say which one? He says they all should be tight. lain:
That's when we switched to green wire nuts.

We've done work where we where specs required us to use a Buchana Tool. It crimps the barrel from 4 directions.


----------



## rellison (Mar 6, 2018)

I was taught as an apprentice that you never use sta-con connectors (fork, loop, etc) with solid wire because you're damaging the wire when you crimp it. That's never been an issue because on industrial jobs I've always used stranded wire in my conduit. But now I am curious if some of you use sta-con connectors on solid conductors? Again, specs are vague and hard to find. My journeyman year's ago did have a valid point though, even if there's a spec somewhere that allows it. 
Also, at my first job wiring houses, they would twist the grounds and then just sleeve them with the barrels and crimp. They were there for the inspector and nothing else, no doubt.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

rellison said:


> I was taught as an apprentice that you never use sta-con connectors (fork, loop, etc) with solid wire because you're damaging the wire when you crimp it. That's never been an issue because on industrial jobs I've always used stranded wire in my conduit. But now I am curious if some of you use sta-con connectors on solid conductors? Again, specs are vague and hard to find. My journeyman year's ago did have a valid point though, even if there's a spec somewhere that allows it.
> Also, at my first job wiring houses, they would twist the grounds and then just sleeve them with the barrels and crimp. They were there for the inspector and nothing else, no doubt.


I don't crimp a single solid wire. But with the barrel you are crimping multiple solid wires, which yields a similar effect to crimping stranded :biggrin:

I can assure you, crimping a barrel sleeve on multiple solid wires is acceptable, common, and works well.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I don't crimp a single solid wire. But with the barrel you are crimping multiple solid wires, which yields a similar effect to crimping stranded: biggrin:
> 
> I can assure you, crimping a barrel sleeve on multiple solid wires is acceptable, common, and works well.


It better work because it is in 1000,000 of houses.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

This is another one I have experimented with. I personally trust the twisting more than the crimp sleeve with solid bare ground wires, using the crimp lug on the linemans - which is in the instructions on the package. 

You fold the wires into the box and unfold them and take them out a couple times, and a lot of times it's rattling around on there. 

I might get one of the 4-way tools just to see


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

I absolutely hate ground crimps/buchanans. I prefer the "greenie" or a pigtail.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I like the crimps on 4 gang switchboxes when you have 4 cables. It makes it so much easier.


----------



## Buck Parrish (May 7, 2009)

Here's a pic of an old Buchanan tool. They really work good. We used them with a little bit bigger then average sta-con


----------



## varmit (Apr 19, 2009)

Way back when, it was acceptable to connect wires with "seven good twists". This was still compliant on ground wires only, when I first started in the trade.

I have always wondered about the wisdom of crimping solid wire, but have never heard of any prohibition of doing this. A real Buchanan crimper does a much better job of crimping ground sleeves. They seem to make a more rounded indentation that seems less likely to damage the conductors. As someone else posted, several solid wires would be the same as a larger stranded wire. 

Does anyone else use Buchanan crimp sleeves on smaller motor terminations? They are cheap, fast, and vibration resistant.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

varmit said:


> Way back when, it was acceptable to connect wires with "seven good twists". This was still compliant on ground wires only, when I first started in the trade.
> 
> I have always wondered about the wisdom of crimping solid wire, but have never heard of any prohibition of doing this. A real Buchanan crimper does a much better job of crimping ground sleeves. They seem to make a more rounded indentation that seems less likely to damage the conductors. As someone else posted, several solid wires would be the same as a larger stranded wire.
> 
> Does anyone else use Buchanan crimp sleeves on smaller motor terminations? They are cheap, fast, and vibration resistant.


I thought about trying the bigger sleeves and insulating caps for small motors, thanks for that feedback. 

I notice the instructions on those bigger ones actually only allow the 4-point tool, not the lug on linemans.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

splatz said:


> This is another one I have experimented with. I personally trust the twisting more than the crimp sleeve with solid bare ground wires, using the crimp lug on the linemans - which is in the instructions on the package.
> 
> You fold the wires into the box and unfold them and take them out a couple times, and a lot of times it's rattling around on there.
> 
> I might get one of the 4-way tools just to see


Never had any issues when using the Buchanan crimp on crimp sleeves.

I've used lineman's in a pinch to save a trip to the van........but in my defense I do kind of have Mongo grip strength! :whistling2:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

I pretty much exclusively use crimp sleeves on ground wires, with the Buchannan 4-way crimper. Saves a lot of room in the box. 

With regard to Rings, Pins, Spades, etc.... I worked for a long time for AMP, a major connector manufacturer. The crimp on terminals we generally use in our trade were almost all made at one particular plant, where I spent a great deal of time. Almost all were rated for solid and stranded wire IF... they were applied with the proper _full-cycle_ crimper. The "whatever will smash it" tools that most electricians tend to use will never provide the appropriate crimp.


----------



## rellison (Mar 6, 2018)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Never had any issues when using the Buchanan crimp on crimp sleeves.
> 
> I've used lineman's in a pinch to save a trip to the van........but in my defense I do kind of have Mongo grip strength! :whistling2:


We've all been there, hah!


----------



## rellison (Mar 6, 2018)

HackWork said:


> Yes, you can crimp a barrel sleeve on solid wire, it is done in resi work all the time.
> 
> I would recommend use a real crimper instead of just squeezing it with pliers.
> 
> View attachment 122985


Agree with using a real crimper. The lack of twist in that picture though? That's a lot of faith in a 2 cent crimp.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

You guys know that you can buy linemans with crimpers built in right? That's what I use on barrel crimps for grounds.


----------



## rellison (Mar 6, 2018)

Buck Parrish said:


> Here's a pic of an old Buchanan tool. They really work good. We used them with a little bit bigger then average sta-con


I wouldn't have asked my question, if this was the norm. That's definitely better than your average half hearted squeeze. I have known specialty tools exist for this, but have never seen one used on the job for crimping grounds at a dwelling. Thanks for the cool pic too.


----------



## Wirenuting (Sep 12, 2010)

I’ll use my Klein 1005’s to crimp the little stuff. 
But I ground the cutting tip down to a nice short bull nose. Made it easier to reach into those tight spots.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

Going_Commando said:


> You guys know that you can buy linemans with crimpers built in right? That's what I use on barrel crimps for grounds.


And if you buy the Ideal, it's 100% kosher - the Ideal linemans are listed in the instructions. 

I wouldn't use the Stakon type crimpers, the stakons are not made like the barrels. (Yes, I am sure many people have squeezed millions with whatever pliers was available and "never had a problem," but I still would not.


----------



## Arrow3030 (Mar 12, 2014)

I don't like working on an old box with a Buchanan crimp for the EGC. For some reason conductor length doesn't seem to matter to original installers....

If I have to change the box or add a wire getting that crimp off can suck.

I don't really find them great to install either since I need to carry two types of connectors and an extra tool just for crimping.

I prefer wire nuts and pigtails.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Arrow3030 said:


> I don't like working on an old box with a Buchanan crimp for the EGC. For some reason conductor length doesn't seem to matter to original installers....
> 
> If I have to change the box or add a wire getting that crimp off can suck.


I understand what you are saying, and find myself in the same situation since I do so much old (really old) work.

But when installing new electric, the last thing I worry about is someone needing to change the box in 50 years, or 50 days. If they need to change it, they can spend an extra minute or two getting the barrel crimp off. Or just cutting the grounds and them using a lever nut to connect the shorties.

For adding another cable, just splice the new ground onto one of the ones coming out of the barrel. 

To get an old wire out, just cut it. 

When doing a 4 gang switchbox with 4 switches and 4 cables coming in, do you use a wirenut with 8 wires? Is it rated for that? (Not that I worry about that lol :biggrin


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I like the crimps on 4 gang switchboxes when you have 4 cables. It makes it so much easier.


Now that is a good idea. Not a fan of barrel crimps but for that installation, I could get past my dislike.


----------



## Lone Crapshooter (Nov 8, 2008)

Back in the mid 70's when I worked in the DOH signal shop the wire to the signal heads where solid. It was terminated on both ends with terminals.
That is the on place I have seen terminals used

LC


----------



## Arrow3030 (Mar 12, 2014)

HackWork said:


> I understand what you are saying, and find myself in the same situation since I do so much old (really old) work.
> 
> But when installing new electric, the last thing I worry about is someone needing to change the box in 50 years, or 50 days. If they need to change it, they can spend an extra minute or two getting the barrel crimp off. Or just cutting the grounds and them using a lever nut to connect the shorties.
> 
> ...


All great points. 

I'm not worried about the guy 50 years from me either. I'm worried about me in 5 minutes when an outlet gets added, a box gets an extra gang or something similar. None of which would be a big deal if I liked crimps.

For multigang switch boxes I have two ways. 

I'll use a metal box if it's a change order. If It's plastic I'll leave a long a$$ pigtail that either continues to each terminal or (more likely) gets cut shorter and gets all the dimmer tails.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

Arrow3030 said:


> All great points.
> 
> I'm not worried about the guy 50 years from me either. I'm worried about me in 5 minutes when an outlet gets added, a box gets an extra gang or something similar. None of which would be a big deal if I liked crimps.
> 
> ...


If its a multi-gang box, I leave enough bares coming out of the barrel crimp to hit each device. Easy peasy. If it gets another gang added later, then I have to rip apart the splice anyways, so I just leave another long tail. If I am hopping out of that box to hit an additional receptacle or whatever, I just use another barrel crimp and crimp the bastard on after the original barrel crimp. Cheap and easy.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

I still use wirenuts for multi-gangs. Call me crazy but it's just personal preference. And yes, I'm certainly violating the listing of a red wing nut with conductor count. :whistling2:


----------



## Arrow3030 (Mar 12, 2014)

I may be alone here but I prefer a jumper over a blue nut for hots, neutrals and especially the EGC. I find everything lays on top of each other better. The trick is to make the jumper really long and never tell anyone you use jumpers... oops.

I remember the first time I saw a barrel crimp. I was about 12 years in and just moved to a new city. Everyone thought I was crazy. Maybe they're right


----------



## readydave8 (Sep 20, 2009)

varmit said:


> Way back when, it was acceptable to connect wires with "seven good twists". This was still compliant on ground wires only, when I first started in the trade.


compliant with NEC? or common practice and accepted by local inspectors?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

readydave8 said:


> compliant with NEC? or common practice and accepted by local inspectors?


I tend to have seen the "twist only" method with the early romex that had the #16 ground. If I was made to guess, I might guess that there were no prevailing codes that said otherwise. I've even seen that #16 tailed out through the screwdriver pry slot in a knockout and wrapped around the nail head holding the box on the stud. Of course, I'm sure we've all seen that #16 ground wire come back out through a romex connector and bound down under one of the romex connector screws. I guess electricians were still feeling things out in the early stages of the EGC.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

readydave8 said:


> compliant with NEC? or common practice and accepted by local inspectors?


It certainly was a common practice in my area for a long time. I almost never see any kind of mechanical splice on ground wires for most wiring I encounter that was installed prior to the mid 80's or so. Some EC's even persisted with that practice after that but that's when you start seeing crimps when doing device changeouts or adding circuitry.

I don't collect old code books so I can't comment on the legality of it, NEC wise. Inspections have always been pretty lax in my area at least for residential stuff doing a long way back, so that's not really a good indicator of code compliance.


----------



## Arrow3030 (Mar 12, 2014)

MDShunk said:


> I tend to have seen the "twist only" method with the early romex that had the #16 ground. If I was made to guess, I might guess that there were no prevailing codes that said otherwise. I've even seen that #16 tailed out through the screwdriver pry slot in a knockout and wrapped around the nail head holding the box on the stud. Of course, I'm sure we've all seen that #16 ground wire come back out through a romex connector and bound down under one of the romex connector screws. I guess electricians were still feeling things out in the early stages of the EGC.


I see #14/12 twisted, cut short and no crimp all the time. Not so much in 90's tracks but more in the mid 70's era non tracks.

I do agree the EGC did probably confuse folks. I might get hung for this but in 40 years I think the AFCI hate will be thought of in the same way.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Arrow3030 said:


> I do agree the EGC did probably confuse folks. I might get hung for this but in 40 years I think the AFCI hate will be thought of in the same way.


I think so also. At the present, it's been a little bit of a fiasco at customer expense, but GFCI's were the same way. On my other laptop I started collecting articles several years ago on the early GFCI backlash in the 1970's. Some of them read damned near word-for-word like the current AFCI outcry.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

MDShunk said:


> I think so also. At the present, it's been a little bit of a fiasco at customer expense, but GFCI's were the same way. On my other laptop I started collecting articles several years ago on the early GFCI backlash in the 1970's. Some of them read damned near word-for-word like the current AFCI outcry.


That may be so, but I still say it's not an apples to apples comparison. A GFCI is known quantity. We can all open one up and see what's inside, and at least visually see what it does. The AFCI, on the other hand, is still shrouded in mystery.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

MTW said:


> That may be so, but I still say it's not an apples to apples comparison. A GFCI is known quantity. We can all open one up and see what's inside, and at least visually see what it does. The AFCI, on the other hand, is still shrouded in mystery.


If it was simple, it would have been invented 50 years ago. Throughout history, people have always thought every new step-change invention was inspired by the devil in some way or another.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

MDShunk said:


> If it was simple, it would have been invented 50 years ago. Throughout history, people have always thought every new step-change invention was inspired by the devil in some way or another.


I see.


----------



## varmit (Apr 19, 2009)

Thinking about this practically, crimping a terminal on solid wire, if done properly, would be no more damaging to the conductor than tightening the set screw in a mechanical lug. I am sure that we have all seen over tightened mechanical lugs that had almost sheared the wire off.


----------



## Arrow3030 (Mar 12, 2014)

varmit said:


> Thinking about this practically, crimping a terminal on solid wire, if done properly, would be no more damaging to the conductor than tightening the set screw in a mechanical lug. I am sure that we have all seen over tightened mechanical lugs that had almost sheared the wire off.


Oh no! Now our crimpers are going to torque gauges.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

varmit said:


> Thinking about this practically, crimping a terminal on solid wire, if done properly, would be no more damaging to the conductor than tightening the set screw in a mechanical lug. I am sure that we have all seen over tightened mechanical lugs that had almost sheared the wire off.


I think a set screw is better in a way because it automatically adjusts to the exact size of the conductor. And the set screw is actually supposed to dig into the conductor a bit. 

With a crimp, there is some variation from wire to wire, and from sleeve to sleeve, the size of the die can't be exactly right with solid wire, and you don't get the set screw action you do with a screw terminal lug. 

But I think the reason crimps work well on stranded wire and poorly on solid wire is becaue there's some space between the strands and they can compress a little. We have all seen this. Stranded wire deforms very easily with the crimp sleeve / body and you have like a spring action, it maintains a lot of pressure between the wire and the sleeve / body. 

It's likely that with just three solid #12 there's too much wire and too little space for the wires to deform with the sleeve when you crimp them. With just one solid and a Stakon, well, I just wouldn't do that.


----------



## readydave8 (Sep 20, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> I tend to have seen the "twist only" method with the early romex that had the #16 ground. If I was made to guess, I might guess that there were no prevailing codes that said otherwise.


Its been a long time but I remember hunting through the NEC for requirement to use connector (wire nut or crimp) on bare

Most electricians around here just twisted, started seeing greenies and stacons in the early '80s.

I don't remember details, but don't remember seeing anything about ground splice. So I decided it was a splice whether or not it was bare ground, and so needed connector (or twisted and soldered)


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

Using the crimp barrels is a terrible idea.
In my career I have known only one person who used them and did so good and properly because he was the only person who actually used the corrrect 4 point crimp tool ie this 
https://www.amazon.com/Ideal-145669-C24-Crimp-Tool/dp/B000HEKRWA

Same job I saw people basically squeezing the barrels with lineman's, needle nose pliers or the improper crimp tool etc etc and that job failed inspection because of it. I have never used the barrels instead choosing to pig tail and because I dont have the proper crimper 
Almost no electrician on a job is walking around on a job with the proper crimping tool and if all that is on the job is ground barrels then they will be crimped wrong so that is why I say they are a terrible idea. Even with the proper tool I I am not a fan of them but done properly they do work good...thats the problem though they are not done good because almost no one has the right tool to do them properly


----------



## Switched (Dec 23, 2012)

bostonPedro said:


> Using the crimp barrels is a terrible idea.
> In my career I have known only one person who used them and did so good and properly because he was the only person who actually used the corrrect 4 point crimp tool ie this
> https://www.amazon.com/Ideal-145669-C24-Crimp-Tool/dp/B000HEKRWA
> 
> ...


I am not sure you are 100% correct... Every terminal manufacturer specifies exactly how their terminals are to be performed, and they will of course specify their specific tool.

Some of those crimp sleeves don't specify the use of the 4 point tool, some specify the common T&B or Klein style crimper tool. 

I don't use the crimp sleeves, but they sure do have their place in a residential multi-gang switch box.....


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

Switched said:


> I am not sure you are 100% correct... Every terminal manufacturer specifies exactly how their terminals are to be performed, and they will of course specify their specific tool.
> 
> Some of those crimp sleeves don't specify the use of the 4 point tool, some specify the common T&B or Klein style crimper tool.
> 
> I don't use the crimp sleeves, but they sure do have their place in a residential multi-gang switch box.....


I have only seen Buchanan barrels where I am. Might be a regional thing but I have never seen another brand. People usually older electricians will even call them Buchanans thus my post. Buchanans say to use a C24 crimper. I dont see any need even in resi multi gangs if the box is cut in properly and sized properly


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

bostonPedro said:


> I have only seen Buchanan barrels where I am. Might be a regional thing but I have never seen another brand. People usually older electricians will even call them Buchanans thus my post. Buchanans say to use a C24 crimper. I dont see any need even in resi multi gangs if the box is cut in properly and sized properly


Oh dear me. This is like saying you never have seen wire nuts and only. solder and tape is any good. Stakons are the leading brand of barrel crimps and they list a single point crimper as the one to use, which I have been doing now for a good 40 years without a problem. This is like the ground up or ground down stupid line of reasoning. Greenies take up way way too much room, even for a 21 cubic inch rated nm box. And cost a bundle as well. I would use a wago before a greenie any time, but I will continue to use stakon's as long as it is allowed before some creep tries to get em outlawed.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

macmikeman said:


> Oh dear me. This is like saying you never have seen wire nuts and only. solder and tape is any good. Stakons are the leading brand of barrel crimps and they list a single point crimper as the one to use, which I have been doing now for a good 40 years without a problem. This is like the ground up or ground down stupid line of reasoning. Greenies take up way way too much room, even for a 21 cubic inch rated nm box. And cost a bundle as well. I would use a wago before a greenie any time, but I will continue to use stakon's as long as it is allowed before some creep tries to get em outlawed.


When I think of Stakons I think of ring or fork terminals which are indeed one point crimp. When I think of barrel crimps I think Buchanan barrels that were used on mainly ground wires and are 4 point. No one here uses the Stakon barrels and I have never seen one used but I have seen Buchanans used and have come across them once in a blue moon. If a wire nut or greenie takes up too much room then you are using a box that is too small


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

bostonPedro said:


> I have only seen Buchanan barrels where I am. Might be a regional thing but I have never seen another brand. People usually older electricians will even call them Buchanans thus my post. Buchanans say to use a C24 crimper. I dont see any need even in resi multi gangs if the box is cut in properly and sized properly


You'll be interested to know that the Buchanan crimp sleeves do not list the C24 as the only acceptable tool. It's written right on the box. There are actually 8 different tools listed as being acceptable to crimp their crimp sleeves.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

MDShunk said:


> You'll be interested to know that the Buchanan crimp sleeves do not list the C24 as the only acceptable tool. It's written right on the box. There are actually 8 different tools listed as being acceptable to crimp their crimp sleeves.


And one of them is the Ideal 30-430 lineman pliers with crimp lug. (Ideal bought Buchanan.) I only see the Ideal steel ones and the Buchanan / Ideal copper ones in my area. 

I bought the Ideal linemans when I decided I wanted to try the crimps. They do save space, time, and money. They are real good linemans anyways. I figured I didn't have a set with a crimp lug, might as well buy the set that's 100% kosher. If the inspector asks, I can show it to him. 

As I said though I do agree with @bostonPedro on one point, they aren't that great ... both the copper and the steel... the crimps can get loose if you fold the wire a few times. One of these days I'll buy that four point tool and test it out.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Buchanans/crimp sleeves are extremely common in my area. The problem is that I almost never see them actually crimped, they are almost always smashed flat with pliers. In fact, my co-workers do it this way and it drives me crazy. I use the crimping die on my linesman pliers. Unfortunately, inspectors don't fail improperly "crimped" splices either. 

Regardless, my personal preference remains using greenies and wire nuts.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

macmikeman said:


> Greenies take up way way too much room, even for a 21 cubic inch rated nm box. And cost a bundle as well. I would use a wago before a greenie any time, but I will continue to use stakon's as long as it is allowed before some creep tries to get em outlawed.


What world are you living in? Greenies take up no appreciable room in a 21 cubic inch box even with 3 cables in there.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

bostonPedro said:


> Using the crimp barrels is a terrible idea.


 Yes, everybody but you is stupid, just like the with the GEC hole.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

HackWork said:


> Yes, everybody but you is stupid, just like the with the GEC hole.



Such a baby:vs_laugh: 

Like I said no one here uses them. You will find them on very old installations once in a blue moon
As far as the GEC hole, could care less. My stance is that a listed hole is a complete joke much like you


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

readydave8 said:


> Its been a long time but I remember hunting through the NEC for requirement to use connector (wire nut or crimp) on bare
> 
> Most electricians around here just twisted, started seeing greenies and stacons in the early '80s.
> 
> I don't remember details, but don't remember seeing anything about ground splice. So I decided it was a splice whether or not it was bare ground, and so needed connector (or twisted and soldered)


I think the language of the code is something like "must be mechanically secure", or something to that effect, so you could interpret that to mean that some kind of fastener is required to hold the grounds together.

An argument could be made that just twisting the wires is mechanically secure. But I just use a wirenut anyway.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

bostonPedro said:


> Using the crimp barrels is a terrible idea.
> In my career I have known only one person who used them and did so good and properly because he was the only person who actually used the corrrect 4 point crimp tool ie this
> https://www.amazon.com/Ideal-145669-C24-Crimp-Tool/dp/B000HEKRWA
> 
> ...


You are talking out of your arse there, fella. I have installed thousands of Ideal and Buchanan barrel crimps, and all were solid connections. Anyone that just smashes them down with the jaws of their needlenose or linemans is a hack, and should stick to green wirenuts.


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

macmikeman said:


> Oh dear me. This is like saying you never have seen wire nuts and only. solder and tape is any good. Stakons are the leading brand of barrel crimps and they list a single point crimper as the one to use, which I have been doing now for a good 40 years without a problem. This is like the ground up or ground down stupid line of reasoning. Greenies take up way way too much room, even for a 21 cubic inch rated nm box. And cost a bundle as well. I would use a wago before a greenie any time, but I will continue to use stakon's as long as it is allowed before some creep tries to get em outlawed.


Completely agree. Greenies are stupid, are gigantic, and a waste of money.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

I make it a point to know about electrical hardware of every odd sort, but I had to Google "greenie". Never used one. Never ran across one installed. Seen them for sale at the box stores. Probably just never caught on in my neck of the woods.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

Going_Commando said:


> You are talking out of your arse there, fella. I have installed thousands of Ideal and Buchanan barrel crimps, and all were solid connections. Anyone that just smashes them down with the jaws of their needlenose or linemans is a hack, and should stick to green wirenuts.



Learn to read. 
I also said if used with the right tool they are good. 
Why is that you old hens get PMS when someone says they are not used where they are. You want to use them go ahead. I dont use them nor are they used here.
BTW-if buchanans are so good then why dont you use them on ALL connections and just insulate them?


----------



## Going_Commando (Oct 1, 2011)

bostonPedro said:


> Learn to read.
> I also said if used with the right tool they are good.
> Why is that you old hens get PMS when someone says they are not used where they are. You want to use them go ahead. I dont use them nor are they used here.


Old hen? I'm 29, dude. I am also adept at reading, and you started out your post saying "Using the crimp barrels is a terrible idea"


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

bostonPedro said:


> BTW-if buchanans are so good then why dont you use them on ALL connections and just insulate them?


Some people do. The make a little rubber cover for them. They also make them in a preinsulated version. Was a fed spec (maybe railroad spec, I forget) on a job I did one time.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

Going_Commando said:


> Old hen? I'm 29, dude. I am also adept at reading, and you started out your post saying "Using the crimp barrels is a terrible idea"


So you didnt read the whole post and just cherry picked a line. You are 29 and using buchanans then you are stuck in the past. 
Do you use them on all connections or just the grounds because you think they save space?


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

bostonPedro said:


> BTW-if buchanans are so good then why dont you use them on ALL connections and just insulate them?


My boss told me to check out some suspicious splices he saw in a j-box on a walk through. I found them rubber taped. Underneath, the wire had been twisted, crimped with a sleeve, and then soldered. Later he asked me what I'd did with them. I told him I taped them back up and put the cover on. Why? Because no wirenut connection was going to come close to the integrity of that splice. If it ain't broke...


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

I'm genuinely puzzled why anyone should be put in a position to have to defend a compliant installation method? Some people drive Fords. Some people drive Chevrolets. They all get to work on time.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

MDShunk said:


> I'm genuinely puzzled why anyone should be put in a position to have to defend a compliant installation method? Some people drive Fords. Some people drive Chevrolets. They all get to work on time.


Tribalism.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

MDShunk said:


> Some people do. The make a little rubber cover for them. They also make them in a preinsulated version. Was a fed spec (maybe railroad spec, I forget) on a job I did one time.


I have seen insulated ones also.
The only ones used here are called "dolphins" and are only used on data wire or low voltage thermostat wire. Dolphin makes them thus the name


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

Personal preference should never be an excuse to condemn a compliant way to do things. The company I work for now requires the use of crimps on ground wires. On the other hand, when I worked for the large commercial EC, you would literally be laughed off the job if you suggested using a ground crimp. That company was all about streamline inventory and installation practice and it was standard policy to pigtail all ground conductors with a wirenut.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

bostonPedro said:


> So you didnt read the whole post and just cherry picked a line. You are 29 and using buchanans then you are stuck in the past.
> Do you use them on all connections or just the grounds because you think they save space?


Your trolling is stupid and amateur level at best. Go away and let the adults have a conversation.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

RePhase277 said:


> My boss told me to check out some suspicious splices he saw in a j-box on a walk through. I found them rubber taped. Underneath, the wire had been twisted, crimped with a sleeve, and then soldered. Later he asked me what I'd did with them. I told him I taped them back up and put the cover on. Why? Because no wirenut connection was going to come close to the integrity of that splice. If it ain't broke...


Its perfectly legal to do that, its just not common.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

MTW said:


> Your trolling is stupid and amateur level at best. Go away and let the adults have a conversation.



STF idiot 
Go find your bum buddy and have a bottle of wine together


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

bostonPedro said:


> STF idiot
> Go find your bum buddy and have a bottle of wine together


Depart from me along with your low IQ foolishness.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Pedro, I voted for you, so I can't have you hurting my feelings talking like that.


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

.............


----------



## bostonPedro (Nov 14, 2017)

MDShunk said:


> Pedro, I voted for you, so I can't have you hurting my feelings talking like that.


:vs_laugh:
It wasnt directed at you and thanks for the vote !!!!


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

bostonPedro said:


> :vs_laugh:
> It wasnt directed at you.


I was trying to say tone it down without calling you out. :wink:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

RePhase277 said:


> An argument could be made that just twisting the wires is mechanically secure.


Hmmmm, I can't say I agree with that. But I doubt you care and it's not a hill I want to die on.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

HackWork said:


> Hmmmm, I can't say I agree with that. But I doubt you care and it's not a hill I want to die on.


Do you ever see old soldered and taped connections in the old houses etc.? I don't think I've ever heard of someone finding one that failed. 

Of course a lot of them were torn out because the insulation was failing before those splices did. 

Either way it's pretty solid, if it appeared to be in good shape I'd have left it alone for sure.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

HackWork said:


> Hmmmm, I can't say I agree with that. But I doubt you care and it's not a hill I want to die on.


Correct, I don't care. And I agree with you. I don't believe just twisting satisfies the code wording. But an argument could be made. It's not a great argument, but it isn't without merit altogether.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

splatz said:


> Do you ever see old soldered and taped connections in the old houses etc.? I don't think I've ever heard of someone finding one that failed.
> 
> Of course a lot of them were torn out because the insulation was failing before those splices did.
> 
> Either way it's pretty solid, if it appeared to be in good shape I'd have left it alone for sure.


Yup, I've seen the often. I hate it, the wires are always super short.

What I was talking about was the mechanically secure requirement. It's actually only for soldered splices.

110.14(B) Splices. Conductors shall be spliced or joined with splicing
devices identified for the use or by brazing, welding, or
soldering with a fusible metal or alloy. Soldered splices shall
first be spliced or joined so as to be mechanically and electrically
secure without solder and then be soldered. All splices
and joints and the free ends of conductors shall be covered
with an insulation equivalent to that of the conductors or with
an identified insulating device.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

I didn't want to work on Saturday, but now I'm thinking I'm gonna go out and make about 50 boxes up with grounds crimped with pt70's and my Klien crimpers just in honor of Pedro's numbnutsness. anyway, I hate doing yard work.............


----------

