# How would you clean this up?



## Hangry (Jan 10, 2017)

Cant upload file keeps failing


----------



## NJ Contractor (Nov 12, 2016)

I would recommend to the owner an electrician with experience in the type of work he wants done. Why would you take on a project you do not know how to perform?


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

I would rip everything out put a 60 space Siemens in. That actually looks alot worse than it is. Once you get all that **** out of there it won't be so hard. You don't have your location listed so if this is in Canada nevermind because their panels are stupid.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Personally, I don't like large panels, they get too jammed in with wires. I would rather install (2) 30 space panels than a 60 space.

I don't see any issue with this job, instal a main panel and a sub next to it and wire it up.


----------



## Hangry (Jan 10, 2017)

sbrn33 said:


> I would rip everything out put a 60 space Siemens in. That actually looks alot worse than it is. Once you get all that **** out of there it won't be so hard. You don't have your location listed so if this is in Canada nevermind because their panels are stupid.


Yes it is Ontario, Canada. The house is 30 years old. I was thinking to rip it all out and use 3/4 ply backer board. 200 amp 40/80 load center but wonder if I should reuse the generator panel or go with something new.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Hangry said:


> Yes it is Ontario, Canada. The house is 30 years old. I was thinking to rip it all out and use 3/4 ply backer board. 200 amp 40/80 load center


 That's crazy using tandems in a new 40 space panel. 



> but wonder if I should reuse the generator panel or go with something new.


That's something you need to discuss with the customer. Are they ok with the limited circuits they have in the transfer panel now? Would they prefer a switch that will power the entire panel? Are they willing to pay the high cost to change it?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Seriously, I don't see much of a mess. It might work to mount the new panel sideways. We can do that. It drives the Americans crazy  .


----------



## wildleg (Apr 12, 2009)

the adjacent pictures on that account make me believe that this is a troll thread, so I am out.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> That's crazy using tandems in a new 40 space panel.
> 
> 
> That's something you need to discuss with the customer. Are they ok with the limited circuits they have in the transfer panel now? Would they prefer a switch that will power the entire panel? Are they willing to pay the high cost to change it?


I use tandems all the time. Nothing wrong with them.


----------



## Hangry (Jan 10, 2017)

wildleg said:


> the adjacent pictures on that account make me believe that this is a troll thread, so I am out.


What?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

NJ Contractor said:


> I would recommend to the owner an electrician with experience in the type of work he wants done. Why would you take on a project you do not know how to perform?


Huh? He's just looking for pointers. If I didn't try anything different, I could be stuck out in the bush somewhere on a cable pull.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Hangry said:


> What?


What he said makes no sense. Carry on.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

NJ Contractor said:


> I would recommend to the owner an electrician with experience in the type of work he wants done. Why would you take on a project you do not know how to perform?


Everyone has to start somewhere. No need to bust his balls, that cluster is bad enough on it's own.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

99cents said:


> Huh? He's just looking for pointers. If I didn't try anything different, I could be stuck out in the bush somewhere on a cable pull.


If I was stuck in a bush it wouldn't be for cable pulling!


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Okay, here is how I would handle it:

First thing to consider is panel height. Your top breaker can't be higher than 1.7M. That will determine the orientation of your panel. Guaranteed your new 40/80 will be too tall if you mount it vertically like the old one. If you spin it sideways you might be okay.

I've never done it before but Hack's idea with two side by side panels could work well.

Fresh plywood is a must. You might have a little bit of grief extending your pipe in the back but all panel changes come with some grief.

4 X 4 boxes with extension rings where you need to extend branch circuits.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

MechanicalDVR said:


> If I was stuck in a bush it wouldn't be for cable pulling!


Go to your room.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Rip it all out and go from there!


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Putting 55 circuits into a 40 space panel in a brand-new installation is a disservice to the customer. The cost of those tandems alone will cover the cost of a second panel. You will have much more room for wiring and it will be neater.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> Putting 55 circuits into a 40 space panel in a brand-new installation is a disservice to the customer. The cost of those tandems alone will cover the cost of a second panel. You will have much more room for wiring and it will be neater.


One tandem is cheaper (marginally) than two individual breakers. How does a second panel save money? How many callbacks have you had with tandems? I have had zero. If you don't have enough wiring space, you're filling your panels up with unnecessary wire.

Schooled.


----------



## daveEM (Nov 18, 2012)

99cents said:


> If you don't have enough wiring space, you're filling your panels up with unnecessary wire.
> 
> *Schooled*.


Yep. He's gonna be unhappy tho. 

Right. No extra wire. Never moved a breaker... well maybe once and a giant marette fixed that problem. :thumbsup:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> One tandem is cheaper (marginally) than two individual breakers.


 A normal (non-cheater) tandem Siemens costs $3 more than 2 single poles. $3 times 15 circuits equals $45, a few bucks less than a MLO 30 space panel costs.



> How does a second panel save money?


 I didn't say it would save money. It's around the same, but it will yield a much better and more professional result.



> How many callbacks have you had with tandems? I have had zero.


 None, there is nothing wrong with tandems, I use them all the time on old panels that are full and the customer wants to add another circuit without upgrading the panel. But in a new panel installation, loading up a panel with tandems is silly, unless you have to for space constrictions. Loading a 40 space panel up with tandems in a new installation is downright stupid. You are supposed to leave room for upgrades in the future such as additions, car chargers, hot tubs, heated pools, etc. etc. Having to add those circuits to an already full panel is not giving the customer a great service, nevermind if they need AFCI's.



> If you don't have enough wiring space, you're filling your panels up with unnecessary wire.


 I don't have any unnecessary wires in my panels. I don't leave loops if that is what you are refering too. A typical panel with 40 circuits in it is pretty full and becomes hard to work in when adding new stuff, why would you leave a customer with 55 circuits in that panel when (for around the same money) you can install a second panel and have both of them easy to work in? 

I will typically leave 10 spaces open in the main panel for large future loads and load the second panel up with smaller lighting and general outlet circuits.



> Schooled.


Keep telling yourself that.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> A normal (non-cheater) tandem Siemens costs $3 more than 2 single poles. $3 times 15 circuits equals $45, a few bucks less than a MLO 30 space panel costs.
> 
> I didn't say it would save money. It's around the same, but it will yield a much better and more professional result.
> 
> ...


Okay, you begged and grovelled for my reply so here it is:

I already said your idea of two panels could be a good one. Nobody said he would fill up the panel with tandems. If you look at the number of circuits he has, he could use a combination of singles, tandems and two poles and still have lots of room for spares with a 40/80. I fail to see how two panels have significant more wiring space than one tall panel. They're still the same width and depth. I have never crammed a 40/80 panel with wire. Maybe yours' are different.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

The panels are the same width which means you are literally bringing twice as many wires down each side gutter in one panel as you would be in two panels.

In a narrow residential panel that is only 14.5 inches wide, adding more than 40 circuit tends to get crammed in and harder to work in in the future.

I count 60 circuits.

EDIT: I just realized, maybe the difference is that we bring all the circuits into the tops of our panels and run them down the side gutters to the neutral bars and breakers while your stupid Canadian panels are blocked off on the top so you bring each circuit into the sides.


----------



## flyboy (Jun 13, 2011)

I'll bet you can combine/eliminate a third of the circuits in that mess.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

flyboy said:


> I'll bet you can combine/eliminate a third of the circuits in that mess.


What would be your method?

For panel/service changes without doing any renovations, I hardly ever get to eliminate circuits unless they were abandoned in the panel when I opened it.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> The panels are the same width which means you are literally bringing twice as many wires down each side gutter in one panel as you would be in two panels.
> 
> In a narrow residential panel that is only 14.5 inches wide, adding more than 40 circuit tends to get crammed in and harder to work in in the future.
> 
> ...


You don't have knockouts in the sides and bottoms?


----------



## Maple_Syrup25 (Nov 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> The panels are the same width which means you are literally bringing twice as many wires down each side gutter in one panel as you would be in two panels.
> 
> In a narrow residential panel that is only 14.5 inches wide, adding more than 40 circuit tends to get crammed in and harder to work in in the future.
> 
> ...


Our Canadian Panels aren't so stupid now are they! 

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## flyboy (Jun 13, 2011)

HackWork said:


> What would be your method?
> 
> For panel/service changes without doing any renovations, I hardly ever get to eliminate circuits unless they were abandoned in the panel when I opened it.


We would price it out for two panels, but wouldn't really get into that amount of detail with the customer. We like a professional job that leaves room for expansion so we'd base the price on (2) 40 circuit panels. If we determined we could combine/eliminate circuits and still have room for expansion then we'd just install one panel.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

flyboy said:


> We would price it out for two panels, but wouldn't really get into that amount of detail with the customer. We like a professional job that leaves room for expansion so we'd base the price on (2) 40 circuit panels. If we determined we could combine/eliminate circuits and still have room for expansion then we'd just install one panel.


Dual 40 space panels make even the most uninterested old ladies get wet. Now that's how you provide value to the customer.


----------



## flyboy (Jun 13, 2011)

HackWork said:


> Dual 40 space panels make even the most uninterested old ladies get wet. Now that's how you provide value to the customer.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Dual panels are an aphrodisiac? Who knew???


----------



## flyboy (Jun 13, 2011)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Dual panels are an aphrodisiac? Who knew???


Stimulator...

You need to get out more.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

flyboy said:


> Stimulator...
> 
> You need to get out more.


Maybe so!


----------



## nrp3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Sat in code review and there was a picture up on the screen of what must have been a Canadian panel with the main enclosed. Changes in main breaker panels in the 17 code. They aren't available yet. What I did see on the Siemens site was some plastic over the lugs which doesn't change much space wise which is good. Not sure what other manufacturers have in store.

https://www.downloads.siemens.com/d...aspx?pos=download&fct=getasset&id1=BTLV_46859


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Can you tell me more about this, nrp3? Is this a code change? 

It's a smart idea, I always thought that they should have some type of cap to go over the lugs like some large commercial breakers do.


----------



## flyboy (Jun 13, 2011)

HackWork said:


> Can you tell me more about this, nrp3? Is this a code change?
> 
> It's a smart idea, I always thought that they should have some type of cap to go over the lugs like some large commercial breakers do.


This is right off the Siemens link nrp3 provided.

In addition to meeting new UL 67 requirements, these enhancements *will meet the new requirements in Section 408.3(A)(2) of the 2017 National Electric Code*.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

So this is all compliant, safe, and working now the HO just wants it to look better? That's great. I assume they don't want to pinch pennies. 

I don't see any reason to try to squeeze this into a small package. Two panels. My goal would be not to just make it look better but save money long term by being easier to service in the future and get a long life out of the equipment. 

TO clean it up, maybe a gutter over both panels. Screw on a sheet of plywood above the gutter so you don't have to look at the bundle of romex between the studs. 

The gutter would also be useful if you want to sort things out and consolidate some of these circuits, as @flyboy points out, do they really need so many circuits? 

A question is do you want to separate the circuits more or less randomly or apply some method to the madness? You could separate them so that one panel could be the generator sub panel in the future. Or maybe you could make one panel plug on neutral for afci / gfci. Of course with the gutter it wouldn't be so bad to sort them in the future either.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

daveEM said:


> 99cents said:
> 
> 
> > *Schooled*.
> ...


Why would I be unhappy? 99cent's self-righteousness in "schooling" me? 

Tell me, other than you, has anyone else agreed with him about jamming all those circuits into a 40 space panel?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

flyboy said:


> This is right off the Siemens link nrp3 provided.
> 
> In addition to meeting new UL 67 requirements, these enhancements *will meet the new requirements in Section 408.3(A)(2) of the 2017 National Electric Code*.


I still haven't looked at the updates for the 2014 code.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> Why would I be unhappy? 99cent's self-righteousness in "schooling" me?
> 
> Tell me, other than you, has anyone else agreed with him about jamming all those circuits into a 40 space panel?


Pffft.

I would put in a nice, big piece of plywood to hide the mess, throw in the 40/80, wire it up and go for lunch. There are only about fifty circuits there. Any electrician with a tool tray and a Homer bucket could do it. Easy.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> Pffft.
> 
> I would put in a nice, big piece of plywood to hide the mess, throw in the 40/80, wire it up and go for lunch. There are only about fifty circuits there. Any electrician with a tool tray and a Homer bucket could do it. Easy.


That's fine. As I mentioned before (and most people seem to agree with), you would be providing a disservice to the customer, which is what "_Any electrician with a tool tray and a Homer bucket_" always do. 

You want to stand out from the typical crappy electrician. So instead of worrying so much about "schooling" me, why not worry about doing what's best for your company? It's time you give up your stupid alpha dog attitude and take some advice.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Customer wants a new panel, customer gets a new panel, inspector puts a green sticker on it, done.

That's a disservice? :001_huh:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> Customer wants a new panel, customer gets a new panel, inspector puts a green sticker on it, done.
> 
> That's a disservice? :001_huh:


Yes, as it's been explained multiple times across 2 threads.

It's what you could expect from a guy working out of a used minivan, not a professional electrical contractor.


----------



## foothillselectrical (Mar 17, 2013)

Code minimum does not guarantee a quality installation, only that it will be relatively free from hazards!


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

All I get from this conversation is that Hack can't fit the wiring for 50 circuits into a panel designed for 80. If it can't be done, why do they make them?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> All I get from this conversation is that Hack can't fit the wiring for 50 circuits into a panel designed for 80. If it can't be done, why do they make them?


Don't say just me, there are a lot of other people who have agreed with me.

There are many hack things you can do that are code compliant. You can run a new 60 foot 50A feed to range with 3 piece of 20" cable spliced together. That's code compliant, right? But is that really a good installation? Does a customer pay a professional to scrap something together like that?


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

To me, a 40/80 panel is designed for 40 circuits. It just has overflow capacity for 80. If I have 50 circuits, I would use two 30 space panels, or one of those fancy 60 space panels.

Piggyback tandem breakers are for already-full panels and no hope for an upgrade.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

RePhase277 said:


> To me, a 40/80 panel is designed for 40 circuits. It just has overflow capacity for 80. If I have 50 circuits, I would use two 30 space panels, or one of those fancy 60 space panels.
> 
> Piggyback tandem breakers are for already-full panels and no hope for an upgrade.


Yup. In my experience, one of the things that customers want out of an upgrade is plenty of space for future expansion.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

RePhase277 said:


> To me, a 40/80 panel is designed for 40 circuits. It just has overflow capacity for 80. If I have 50 circuits, I would use two 30 space panels, or one of those fancy 60 space panels.
> 
> Piggyback tandem breakers are for already-full panels and no hope for an upgrade.


That's pretty much how I'd see it. 

There's enough TIME to do it in two panels 
There's enough SPACE to do it in two panels 
There's enough MONEY to do it in two panels 

What else is there?


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

HackWork said:


> Yup. In my experience, one of the things that customers want out of an upgrade is plenty of space for future expansion.


Can you imagine how pissed the customer is going to be if they put in an addition or a bigger generator or etc. in the future and the panel has to be redone again?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

splatz said:


> Can you imagine how pissed the customer is going to be if they put in an addition or a bigger generator or etc. in the future and the panel has to be redone again?


With 25 extra breaker spaces?


----------



## foothillselectrical (Mar 17, 2013)

I've told more than one customer that I didn't go in business to be the low bidder / code minimum contractor. I followed that up by telling them that if that was what they were looking for to make sure it wouldn't be their kids sleeping there at night. I usually got those jobs. 
It is my opinion, and only an opinion, that a 40 space panel was designed for 40 ckts. The advent of tandem breakers allowed more to be added without major expense, but should never be a design parameter for a quality job.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> With 25 extra breaker spaces?


You are so far off it's not even funny anymore.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

foothillselectrical said:


> I've told more than one customer that I didn't go in business to be the low bidder / code minimum contractor. I followed that up by telling them that if that was what they were looking for to make sure it wouldn't be their kids sleeping there at night. I usually got those jobs.
> *It is my opinion, and only an opinion, that a 40 space panel was designed for 40 ckts. The advent of tandem breakers allowed more to be added without major expense, but should never be a design parameter for a quality job.*


I agree with this completely, *especially* now that we have so many GFCI and AFCI circuit requirements.

For all we know, if a few years AFCI breakers might actually end up working well as a safety device and people might want them installed. Good luck on a panel filled with tandems.


----------



## foothillselectrical (Mar 17, 2013)

I'm thinking that the overarching question to ask here is why the hell ask for help if you're just going to argue and shoot it all down?

Y'all have fun, I'm Pigeon Forge bound!


----------



## flyboy (Jun 13, 2011)

99cents said:


> With 25 extra breaker spaces?


We are going to deport and restrict you to the Canadian Electrical Code Forum if you keep up this nonsense.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

flyboy said:


> We are going to deport and restrict you to the Canadian Electrical Code Forum if you keep up this nonsense.


That's racist.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

99cents said:


> With 25 extra breaker spaces?


Do you have the extra spaces if you find you have to arc fault everything in a major renovation?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Okay, let's back up here. 

Like I said to hangry, the first consideration is breaker height. That will go a long ways in determining the new panel orientation. In the old days, they often mounted panels too high compared to the rule we have to live up to now. If that's the case, I would spin the new panel sideways since it's fed from the bottom. We're allowed to do that in Canada. I wouldn't have any issues personally with a 40/80 in that situation.

If panel height is not an issue and he can more or less match up the existing panel locations using two panels, that would make sense. He wouldn't be installing too many JB's to extend his branch circuits, if any.

I would put in a nice, big piece of plywood to hide the mess. I like to drill holes in the plywood close to the panel and feed the wire through from the back. It looks neat with little stapling.

I can't comment on the generator setup because I have only done one. In that case, I ordered a Generac kit from HD. It arrived in a week and was priced right. My local wholesalers were lost when it came to generators.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> I wouldn't have any issues personally with a 40/80 in that situation.


And that's why we keep telling you that you are a silly boy!


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

With the generator, he currently has a combination ATS / subpanel. Sometimes it's better to use an ATS with a regular subpanel, with the generator backed loads on the subpanel.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> I agree with this completely, *especially* now that we have so many GFCI and AFCI circuit requirements.
> 
> For all we know, if a few years AFCI breakers might actually end up working well as a safety device and people might want them installed. Good luck on a panel filled with tandems.


I'm not in the business of anticipating what code changes will be ten years down the road. Besides that, you're the guy who takes AFCI's out after inspection and puts them in your pocket for the next job. And then you scold me for doing a disservice to the customer :blink: .


----------



## foothillselectrical (Mar 17, 2013)

splatz said:


> With the generator, he currently has a combination ATS / subpanel. Sometimes it's better to use an ATS with a regular subpanel, with the generator backed loads on the subpanel.


That's exactly how mine is.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

splatz said:


> With the generator, he currently has a combination ATS / subpanel. Sometimes it's better to use an ATS with a regular subpanel, with the generator backed loads on the subpanel.


Cool. Now we're actually helping hangry with his questions rather than having a silly conversation about wire cramming.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> I'm not in the business of anticipating what code changes will be ten years down the road.


 You need to change that, and quick. A good electrical contractor is in the business of providing an excellent service and value to their customers. Part of that is installing a new panel/s that will have the expansion that they may need.



> Besides that, you're the guy who takes AFCI's out after inspection and puts them in your pocket for the next job.


 Exactly, that is providing a service that the customer wants.


> And then you scold me for doing a disservice to the customer :blink: .


 Again, it's not just me. Even Dave left you, you are all alone in this silliness.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> Cool. Now we're actually helping hangry with his questions rather than having a silly conversation about wire cramming.


From the 7th post on the first page, before you started schooling me with your silliness:



HackWork said:


> That's something you need to discuss with the customer. *Are they ok with the limited circuits they have in the transfer panel now? Would they prefer a transfer switch that will power the entire panel?* Are they willing to pay the high cost to change it?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> You need to change that, and quick. A good electrical contractor is in the business of providing an excellent service and value to their customers. Part of that is installing a new panel/s that will have the expansion that they may need.
> 
> Exactly, that is providing a service that the customer wants. Again, it's not just me. Even Dave left you, you are all alone in this silliness.


If Dave tells me not to put in a 40/80 then I won't do it. Dave's a cool dude. He has a cool truck, Systainers, a Veto and a space age hammer. When I grow up I wanna be just like him  .


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> From the 7th post on the first page, before you started schooling me with your silliness:


I missed that with all your cacophony over wire cramming.


----------



## daveEM (Nov 18, 2012)

Yeah and not only that I have this 1-1/4 EMT man killer bender I can't even lift now let alone bend a pipe with it. 

Last bend was a 90 in 2012. I remember it well. Probably the cause of my hernia... or was that the 1" in 2014?

^^ I'm going to throw them both out.

I've always just wired smaller houses so a 16/32 panel always worked.  Now I have to vote in the poll going on in another thread.

Just kiddin on the panel. Always used a 40/80 but never put in more than 30 circuits in a house... so always 10 left for the basement... and then they could put in tandems? :no:


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> I missed that with all your cacophony over wire cramming.


Cacophony? My posts were well written and well thought out. 

This is why I say you are taking over for 360max... you are acting like a child, ignoring the facts and what truly happened, and not willing to admit that you were wrong even when everyone else says so.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

daveEM said:


> Yeah and not only that I have this 1-1/4 EMT man killer bender I can't even lift now let alone bend a pipe with it.
> 
> Last bend was a 90 in 2012. I remember it well. Probably the cause of my hernia... or was that the 1" in 2014?
> 
> ...


Damn.


----------



## eddy current (Feb 28, 2009)

To the OP.

Keep in mind of rule 8-108, number of branch circuit positions required.

Have to allow for enough space and space for spares


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

eddy current said:


> To the OP.
> 
> Keep in mind of rule 8-108, number of branch circuit positions required.
> 
> Have to allow for enough space and space for spares


_".... at least two additional spaces shall be left for future overcurrent devices."_

And these guys don't think twelve are enough :whistling2:


----------



## daveEM (Nov 18, 2012)

99cents said:


> Damn.


Truth be known I've always used tandems when they came with the panel pack. Never lost sleep on it. I don't recall buying any tho.

To Hack... Our panel packs came with quads... dp40 or dp30 or dp15 in the middle with skinny 15s on the outsides...










^^ don't get those anymore as we went to 20amp kitchen counter GFI receptacles.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

That seems reasonable, Dave. If you were to buy a 30 space 60 circuit panel and use tandem breakers that came with it to install 15 circuits, I would have no issue with that. Tandems are expensive here but if you get them for free then it's fine. You would have plenty of free space in that panel.

I have an issue with putting 55 circuits into a 40 space panel on a new installation.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

daveEM said:


> Truth be known I've always used tandems when they came with the panel pack. Never lost sleep on it. I don't recall buying any tho.
> 
> To Hack... Our panel packs came with quads... dp40 or dp30 or dp15 in the middle with skinny 15s on the outsides...
> 
> ...


QO still puts DP 15's in a panel package. Silly Schneider.


----------



## lightman (Oct 14, 2015)

If I did this job I would probably use two 40 circuit panels and feed it from a 320 amp meter socket. I probably would mount the panel between the studs and leave off the plywood. I do like the idea of surface mounting the panel on a new sheet of plywood and feeding them from the rear. The plywood would provide a way to mount the generator panel and those surface mounted receptacles. I've never used any of the 30-60 or 40-80 panels. I also never liked tandem breakers and only used them if I added a circuit on a full panel. Arc fault and ground fault breakers take up lots of room in a panel and are my reason for using 2 panels.

I would mark all of the circuits coming out of the generator panel and all of the 240 volt circuits before I tore out the old stuff.

Someone said that they would eat lunch after they finished but It would take me a day to do this the way I stated.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

99cents said:


> If Dave tells me not to put in a 40/80 then I won't do it. Dave's a cool dude. He has a cool truck, Systainers, a Veto and a space age hammer. When I grow up I wanna be just like him  .


You have plenty of time.


----------



## Patriot1776 (May 20, 2016)

Hangry said:


> Was sent a picture today from a potential client who would like a panel replacement and wiring cleaned up. how would you experts do this?
> I'm really green when it comes to panel replacements on existing services.
> http://imgur.com/a/uGKfd




I would start by labeling every wire coming from the panels. Reroute all wires that are currently making a mess of the space and laying on the floor. Then mount up the new panels to be recessed mounted, add the plywood to cover the space around the new panels, and mount up the generator panel on the plywood unless it can be recessed mounted. Once I had all the panels and outlets looking good then I would tackle the wires. If need be add splice boxes to the backside of the plywood wall for any circuits that need it. Put all the wires for the circuits to be on generator back up power in one panel and the rest of the circuits in the other panel. Definitely go with two panels though, it makes for a much more professional looking finished project the homeowner will be pleased with. 

I would probably even go so far as to paint the plywood white, and do very neat computer printouts of the panel schedules on cardstock paper with colored outline for the feeder breaker to the sub panel. 

Sure all the extra work takes extra time but the end product is worth it. Just be sure to take before and after pictures to share with us if you get the job. Good luck!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

After looking at that pic a little I think I'd rip out all that is there and mount a nice size (wider than the 2 stud bays) plywood backer in place. Then mount a trough at the top and put in a 60 space panel to the left and then remount that gen panel to the right. Which would leave 10 extra spaces for future expansion.


----------



## Missouri Bound (Aug 30, 2009)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Which would leave 10 extra spaces for future expansion.


Correct. That generator panel was surely added after the original install. That opened up a few circuits, 2 being needed to power the generator panel.
I'll bet there are unused circuits there or redundant runs. Pricing it will be the hard part since it will take a long time to wring it out properly. Surface mount a panel on a piece of plywood, :thumbsup:


----------



## Missouri Bound (Aug 30, 2009)

HackWork said:


> Are they ok with the limited circuits they have in the transfer panel now?


That may not be up to the home owner. The size of the generator determines the size of the panel. Those panels are usually supplied with the 7KW generators. A larger panel might not be an option. Besides the circuitry for the Generac equipment are proprietary in those panels. Sure, you could make another one work .....but it's not the issue here.


----------



## Navyguy (Mar 15, 2010)

I had to turn this uncompliant mess:










To this compliant install:










A couple things I did not like, but was sort of limited... was the routing for the PVC and the what I had to work with as far as the flex whip from the generator.

Might give you an idea or two.

Cheers

John


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

Navyguy said:


> I had to turn this uncompliant mess:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I hate how this site turns all the pictures sideways.


----------



## Maple_Syrup25 (Nov 20, 2012)

I can't help but say, just buy the 60ct panel everytime. It's not much more and you don't have to worry about running out of room. If you need 2x 40/80 panels you might need a load calc and 400a service. On 99cents side he can use a 40/80 and use 4 of his 25 extra spaces and install a sub panel. There is always a way ! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Siemens panel with the maple leaf. Canadian made. Well done  .


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

99cents said:


> Siemens panel with the maple leaf. Canadian made. Well done  .


So, do you remove the doors from the panel covers or do they come that way?


----------



## Navyguy (Mar 15, 2010)

No doors. There is a kit you can buy but it is almost the same cost as the panel!

Cheers

John


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

RePhase277 said:


> So, do you remove the doors from the panel covers or do they come that way?


Door is a PITA with a sideways panel half the time  .


----------



## Missouri Bound (Aug 30, 2009)

What's with the sideways panel anyways? Some breakers are off when up, some are on.
Seems like it's a good way to confuse the homeowner. Plus the circuit ID is now sideways which adds to the confusion. Plenty of room there to put it vertical. You get paid extra for doing it the hard way?


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Missouri Bound said:


> What's with the sideways panel anyways? Some breakers are off when up, some are on.
> Seems like it's a good way to confuse the homeowner. Plus the circuit ID is now sideways which adds to the confusion. Plenty of room there to put it vertical. You get paid extra for doing it the hard way?


It's a Canadian thing, after some Molsons one night these three code writers.........and then.........





the rest is history!


----------



## Maple_Syrup25 (Nov 20, 2012)

Because it's easier and works better for code sometimes. Don't worry man it's all good 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Missouri Bound (Aug 30, 2009)

Maple_Syrup25 said:


> Because it's easier and works better for code sometimes. Don't worry man it's all good
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm not worried. But I guess that if you can put the panel anyway you want it would make the install a lot easier. I guess I wonder why we can't do it here. 3 way switches allow both up and down positions for on / off and I thought that was the only code issue with sideways panels.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Missouri Bound said:


> Plenty of room there to put it vertical.


Your top breaker might be too high to meet code.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

Ancient knife switches could be closed by gravity if installed with off in the up position. Apparently this antique ghost still frightens the crap out of the NEC code writers.


----------

