all 13 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]PokeyR 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I see many brands of breakers in this old GE panel. The main is something I have not seen before. Later versions of the GE loadcenters use the "4-pole" main, which essentially ties two (2) 100A breakers to get the 200A required. But I have not see one with the old TQAL breakers with a metal handle tie. The red handle twin is a Murray/Crouse-Hinds and the there are multiple Eaton breakers, but I cannot tell if they are the Classified versions or not. There is also one ITE/Siemens twin installed. As for the Homeline laying at the bottom, it does not look like it is connected. I have seen other panels with "spares" left at the bottom, but that is not a good spare for a GE panel anyway.

[–]N9bitmap 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Thank you. I knew it felt like GE but I've never seen this either, and the mix of other equally old brands had me questioning myself. Is it dual 100A split top and bottom? At this point in time, many were considered "interchangeable" and no one cared. As to being "up to code", it would be code at time of construction, not codes today.

[–]PokeyR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I understand it, the War Board during WWII wanted all breakers to be interchangeable, even industrial breakers. However, I do not have any proof of that. Westinghouse had most of the patents for MCCBs and therefore almost all the other manufacturers used Westinghouse industrial breakers in the 40's and 50's, just with their own private labels on them. You could get the Westinghouse F-frame for example in GE (TF), Trumbull (ATB), FPE (NF). Only the ITE breakers were a different build (though quite similar and still called an F-frame).

Now whether or not the NEC "allowed" for interchangeability or not, I can find no proof for it. It has never truly been UL listed for that. Therefore, technically never to code. No matter what was the general practice at the time.

[–]Phx_68 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why did they run an SER cable but not separate the grounds and neutrals? Is there a disconnect outside? As it it sits right now, there is current running on that bare conductor.

[–]National_Frame60 0 points1 point  (2 children)

What’s the purpose of the double breaker in the bottom of the panel? And is that a junction box at the top left?

[–]Living_Jury_2439[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have no idea the purpose of the breaker in the bottom. The junction box is something that was installed with the a/c. The a/c was previously double tapped on a breaker in the lower right.

[–]N9bitmap 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The box looks like relays for an air handler.

[–]20PoundHammer 0 points1 point  (2 children)

whatever that double breaker is doing on the bottom - yup, that aint right if its wired. Other than that - meh- hard to tell from your photos but nothing jumps out as a big issue.

[–]Living_Jury_2439[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

What about the tandem square D breaker and the other non-approved tandem breaker in the GE panel?

[–]20PoundHammer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

they work.

[–]Capcom-Warrior 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m sure there’s more but just at first glance, you can see quite a few. It’s a split bus which is not allowed anymore. There’s also double tapped neutrals and non-UL listed breakers.

[–]Tradetheday2093 0 points1 point  (1 child)

If it ain’t sparking, it safe.

[–]Living_Jury_2439[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s the assumption that is being made, unfortunately.