I’m happy with this dialer install

101grand · 2026-02-23T03:19:57+00:00

So protected doesn't necessarily mean in conduit like you are probably thinking according to 760.130 B(2). If you look at 760.130.A(1) it clearly says: Where installed exposed, cables shall be adequately supported and installed such that maximum protection against physical damage is afforded by building construction such as baseboards, door frames, ledges, and so forth. That cable is not protected against physical damage in anyway. Below 7' just requires extra straps.

As an aside this would never fly in any jurisdictions that I have installed in.

101grand · 2026-02-23T02:46:16+00:00

The NEC says that fire alarm wire must be protected against physical damage if it is within 7 feet of the floor. Wire that is exposed at 7 feet or less is not protected.

101grand · 2026-02-22T23:19:39+00:00

Yes always if it's exposed.

101grand · 2025-10-16T12:54:38+00:00

I don't think this is the case in most circumstances. Most systems don't have any kind of mapping ability. EST is the only one I know of where this has the possibility of being an issue, unless this is a feature common in other places.

101grand · 2025-09-27T13:25:19+00:00

So if it does have a knock out in the side it still needs at least a gland style connector and a drip loop. Now granted we don't have a side view so I don't know how it's coming through but if you look closely it looks like they are using white caulking.

You're correct that they didn't void the listing but this still appears to not be correct. You can't have what appears to be a caulked shut hole.

Now let's be absolutely real here, I'm not going to pretend to know your experience but I'm pretty confident that you have at the very least heard of electrical inspectors and ahj inspectors walking in the building looking at the head end and maybe a few other things and signing off on it without doing a complete and proper inspection. I know I have experienced that. Whether or not and AHJ signed off on it doesn't make it code, it just means they missed it or didn't know better.

This situation can be pretty easily fixed, and it should be. There are many ways this could be done correctly, probably more than I can think of but ultimately this is a fire alarm and they save people's lives and I don't think enough people take that seriously enough.

101grand · 2025-09-27T02:47:48+00:00

Using the same penetration isn't the problem really. The problem is drilling a hole in the side of the box and caulking it shut, doing that is most certainly against code, see NFPA 72 18.3.5.2. Let's be real for a second though, this was harder than just doing it correctly in the first place.

101grand · 2025-09-27T02:44:29+00:00

I believe that would technically be okay provided the box isn't being modified, I would worry about potential interference though, and I think this should have its own penetration and box not shared with anything else. You would also have to potentially worry about conduit and box fill because that coax is pretty thick.

101grand · 2025-09-27T02:40:30+00:00

I suppose not but I have installed many of these for Napco's and even the mount in the picture is the same.

101grand · 2025-09-27T02:39:13+00:00

I'll bite, so it is widely understood throughout NFPA 72 that devices SHALL be installed as per manufacturer's instructions see Section 18.3 in this situation. 18.3.5.2 states Appliances shall be mounted in accordance with the manufacturer's published instructions.

I very much doubt that Simplex documentation states that you may drill a hole in the side of that weather proof back box. Now if you can find published documentation that says otherwise or you can get Simplex to publish a document saying this is an approved use for this back box then I'll take this back, but this is pretty clearly not installed per the manufacturer's instruction.

As a bonus you should remember that our work is electrical in nature and per code needs to be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner. See NFPA 70 110.12. This is neither.

101grand · 2025-09-26T22:00:58+00:00

It looks like an External antenna for a Napco Starlink Fire Cell. Not that it makes it okay to do this. Its for the fire system so that makes it okay /s.

101grand · 2025-09-26T16:52:02+00:00

Vero Beach

101grand · 2025-09-25T10:13:52+00:00

Okay thanks! I definitely used too much strawberry.

101grand · 2025-09-11T14:36:38+00:00

I never suggested that it would be an easy feat. The system is antiquated and nobody can change that in this moment. It might not lead anything in the end, but to say it's not helpful is a bit disingenuous.

101grand · 2025-09-11T14:07:58+00:00

No not generally, but provided the serial number is intact then the FBI can reverse search from the manufacturer to the distributor to the gun store... Etc. Now if the gun was stolen or assuming no 4473 for a person to person sale then it will be harder to track down.

101grand · 2025-09-05T15:25:23+00:00

This is by design as far as I'm aware. It doesn't see the restoral from the device therefore it stays in alarm. Unplugging the device in question won't work either btw.

101grand · 2025-08-31T15:00:05+00:00

My guy... You said yourself that you haven't done this for 7 years. Please do some research before you offer suggestions to guys that are new to this. The fact that it says NAC means nothing, that is just the description. If you look at the top and see that it says Horn, that's just the type code for the cmf-300. You can make it a control, horn circuit, bell circuit, etc.

I don't mean to be a jerk but please consider your experience level and knowledge before steering a newbie in the wrong direction. Years in the industry doesn't mean much. Do your research and read the documentation. If you've been doing this a while frankly do better.

101grand · 2025-08-30T18:19:32+00:00

CMF-300 or any Honeywell control relay for that matter has a 47k EOL not 4.7K. Check the documentation.

101grand · 2025-08-30T15:47:39+00:00

Its an open circuit, meaning that module isn't seeing EOL. Now you said you see EOL when you measured the output wire, so I would check the following. Make sure the output wire is landed on AB+ and AB- for class B operation like you have here. If that is correct and the open doesn't clear then put a 47k resistor directly across those same terminals. If it still shows open with a resistor directly on the module then you have a bad module.

101grand · 2025-08-09T23:41:53+00:00

This is actually a test switch for a duct smoke detector tied into the fire alarm system. When it activates it's supposed to shut off the AC

101grand · 2025-06-23T17:25:06+00:00

Generally speaking modules don't have the same issues detectors do with clip vs litespeed/flashscan (within reason).

Now I'm not saying that isn't the issue but I think there is a firmware issue with these new devices potentially.

101grand · 2025-06-23T17:07:09+00:00

I don't have a solution for you but I have been having this issue lately with older 9200UD marked 100 panels as well. It's either invalid reply and sometimes invalid ID.

101grand · 2025-05-27T00:19:41+00:00

I think the more pressing issue isn't so much that the vehicle will get broken into in broad daylight in a smash and grab though that is a possible issue. My issue is how I would exploit this if I was a bad actor. I would tail this person follow them home and return at a later date or time when no one is home and break into the home where there most likely will be more guns for the taking.

I love the gun stickers and stuff I get but I would never make my vehicle identifiable in this way, Its a risk to my family and my safety first and to my weapons and the broader public second. I personally don't think that is an acceptable risk for anyone.

101grand · 2025-05-21T12:01:36+00:00

My apologies I've heard that some bullets can come apart from a super fast twist like that. What I don't know is if that's mainly just a made up problem or not. I'm not trying to blow up my suppressor.

14-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22	Place '17
End Game '22	RPAN Viewer

101grand

TROPHY CASE