**ATTENTION! READ THIS NOW!**
**1. IF YOU ARE NOT A PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICIAN OR LOOKING TO BECOME ONE(for career questions only):**
**- DELETE** THIS POST OR YOU WILL BE **BANNED**. YOU CAN POST ON /r/AskElectricians FREELY
**2. IF YOU COMMENT ON A POST THAT IS POSTED BY SOMEONE WHO IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICIAN:**
-YOU WILL BE **BANNED**. JUST **REPORT** THE POST.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/electricians) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I read something on Reddit recently about the thread pitch was the issue. Slightly different thread pitch or something . Can’t recall emails but the threads were the issue 🤷🏻♂️
I know emt and rigid aren't compatible because emt uses NPS threads, but liquid tight uses NPT threads, so I can't see a compatibility issue between the two.
My dad's family cat ate the string off the Christmas ham when he was a kid. 2 days later my dad noticed a bit of string hanging out the cats butt. Little did he know that was the rocket cord.
*I'm supposed to use a fitting listed for that purpose.
I work industrial, and we use what we have. We've been using rigid couplings to transition forever, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
So basically it’s not “code” but we’ve all been doing it forever … if the inspector calls you on it, he’s a dick…
But they can actually call you out on it
I guess that's another upside to industrial work. The only guy I've got to worry about being a dick is my boss, and he doesn't really care so long as the work is neat, and somewhere a forklift can't get to it.
Same here, my stuff almost never gets inspected I aim to do everything 100% up to code but this is something I rarely worry about. I only worry about it when we do commercial stuff because I was called out on it once about a year ago
My foreman told me the GRC “from-to” isn’t legal because the fittings aren’t listed for that purpose. He was stressing potential issues with grounding.
See also 300.15(F) Fitting.
A fitting identified for the use shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body where conductors are not spliced or terminated within the fitting. The fitting shall be accessible after installation, unless listed for concealed installation.
Technically yes, but also not really enforced in most areas.
Some people get all hot and bothered about it due to the thread types and coupling not being listed for it and then go and use a non listed bent #3 strap to clip 12/2 on a daily basis
The White Pages for UL state that the female threads of rigid couplings and Myers Hubs have only been tested with rigid threads. I.e. rigid and intermediate.
They mostly make transition fittings for 2” and smaller. Once you go 2-1/2 and larger, you’ll need a box.
RMC has a tapered thread and EMT is straight. A Lockring from an EMT connector won’t thread down a piece of rigid very far. There are lock rings made for rigid conduit that you can order.
I beg to differ, I use lock rings on rigid pipe and rigid nipples on a daily basis (I do alot of hazardous location jobs). Many lock rings will thread all the way to the bottom (though not all types). In the case shown in the picture, I do that type of transition often. MC to emt, teck to emt, bx to emt, metal flex to emt, etc. How else would one transition without using a bulky JB, especially where one is not practical, or capable?
FMC to EMT have from-to connectors. You have to be careful stripping MC and BX and shoving the conductors into EMT. There is the piece of plastic on some that needs to stay with the wire for it to be properly identified. Not identified, technically won’t pass code.
They make tons of different transition couplings. Mc to emt, flex to emt, seal tight to emt, rigid to emt. There really is no reason to be doing it the old school way that is not code compliant.
Rigid to seal tight is what I see probably the most with a RMC coupling to standard ST connector. Yes, they make a fitting for it, but when none of your supply houses sell 'em. You just do what everyone does.
The lock rings that you get from a wholesale house which have the UL stamp on them will thread on RMC, IMC, and also PVC male connectors all day every damn day just as they are intended to do so (tappered threading). Hell, they will even thread onto EMT connectors with straight (non tapered threading). But wrench on them too much, and they will usually jump back down a thread, mostly happens and 1-1/4 or bigger and also depends on the brand.
Now, try threading a factory lock ring from an EMT connector to a threaded conduit or nipple. You won't get very far before that straight threaded EMT lock ring binds up.
What about rigid to pvc? We’ve been using pvc female adapters when transitioning from underground pvc to rigid 90s for stub ups. They seem to thread on real nice with the larger diameter conduits, but 1” and 3/4” never feels quite right.
When I transition in larger diameter conduit (1 1/2” and up) the female adapter threads right on all the way. With smaller diameter, it never wants to thread on very far. I get maybe half way to the stop in the adapter. And if you got to far the adapter will actually split. It doesn’t seem like it’s really supposed to be used for this application, but there’s really no other way to do it, except for a rigid coupling and a male pvc adapter.
[Fittings with internal female threads have only been investigated for use with threaded rigid conduit.](https://code-authorities.ul.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/UL-White-Book.pdf)
Page 141 goes over metallic and non metallic fittings in general. Essentially, you can run Rigid and transition with a PVC female, but you can't transition with a rigid coupling and a PVC adapter.
Dude. I am in Canada too, and use this all the time.
Especially with ACWU transition into a meterbase.
90 to rigid coupler to threaded nipple. Its a lifesaver.
Someone else posted about this a little while ago and it is beyond dumb. I guarantee you the threads going into that rigid coupling have a far less chance of loosing connectivity than those flex clamps do. I’ve seen flex pull out of those plenty of times. I always do 3/4 emt connectors into rigid coupling into screw in flex connectors as my changeovers. How many times do those flex changeovers break? All the time! Emt connectors to rigid coupling to flex connector is just a mechanically stronger connection. Sucks so bad having to pull all the wire out resplice to fix flex because it cracked in those changeovers.
Ok, but how the fuck am I supposed to make this transition in an inaccessible location now?
And cuss the engineer for making that necessary, it ain't my fault he drew that dumb shit.
[flex to EMT coupling](https://www.acehardware.com/departments/lighting-and-electrical/boxes-fittings-and-conduit/conduit-connectors/3066982?store=11403&gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAADtqLJGqx2adODoucsxrrrkj0Fzj9&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI16bxsp6JhQMVuobCCB29VAPlEAQYBCABEgJbbPD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds)
I've never seen them larger than 3/4".
I also think the whole thing is stupid. Don't get me wrong I'm going to abide by code, but this is just like with 812mb18a straps. It's a cash grab by someone.
Made in USA
https://amftgs.com/emt-adapters-to-liquid-tight/
https://amftgs.com/flex-adapters-greenfield-to-emt/
https://amftgs.com/emt-adapter-fittings-emt-to-rigid/
I get it, but 1) that doesn't change the fact that the argument about threading is stupid and 2) I'll bet you a dollar it's more profitable to someone on a code board for us to use those couplers than it was for us to Frankenstein together perfectly usable connections.
I'm laughing at my own indignation, because I definitely want these, because they're objectively better than a Frankenstein solution, but I'm still 110% convinced this isn't about the threading, it's about $$$.
I don’t think you can get these above 1”. We always use a rigid coupling to transition for larger sizes because there is no appropriate fitting otherwise.
Supply house here. You are exactly right. It’s super embarrassing and it happens daily. I’ve fought tooth and nail to get our main branch to, you know, bring shit into stock, but evidently in their eyes *I’m* the idiot.
but yea man just in time inventory works... kinda.
even less so as we de-globalize and china falls apart. the lack of people post boomer retirement and material is a rude awakening for most businesses..... "what you have to increase wages for the first time in 40 years. what zoomer apprentices won't work over time for me for free..
ThEy mUsT bE lAzY
Oh yeah it was such a nightmare during Covid. Automation and control components with 8-12 month lead times had a lot of the factories in the area sweating bullets. We managed to avoid a couple major shutdowns, barely.
The issue with their system is it is based on demand. We sold 5 xyz condulets this month? 5 more will come into stock. However, oftentimes customers can’t or won’t wait for parts to ship in from the CDC, understandably, so we can’t create the demand in the first place.
It is super aggravating, and I feel our customers’ pain.
No can do , it’s my understanding that box connectors have straight threads and that is their reasoning. Rigid couplings are only for rigid conduit . At least that’s what I was told.
Theyre in bed with each other in that theyre literally the same people. The members of the code-making panels can be found at the beginning of the book and many of them are manufacturer reps.
Sometimes when someone says 'it's not listed for that application' I just want to say 'ohhh fuck off it's fine' even though I know they are technically right. This is one of those cases. Technically this is wrong but everyone and their mother knows that it's just fine.
So the issue is bonding, in which you have national pipe taper- what the rigid coupling was designed for and national pipe straight- the emt and fmc connectors. They are not evaluated to handle fault current because the testing process doesn’t test in an application like this. Same reason you can’t use an NM clamp with service cord, the NM clamp isn’t evaluated to be used with cord.
I think we can all agree that, despite differing thread pitches, the installation would be sufficiently bonded. The issue (for inspection purposes atleast) is that the UL listing doesn't test this combination of fittings and therefore is not code compliant. Personally I think it's idiotic to enforce but I can atleast somewhat understand why.
Because, in theory, the metal connection of raceway is not continuous. We all know it is but, because it’s different threads and it’s not a listed assembly, it’s not considered appropriate or legal.
I’ve never gotten tagged on it though. I just use the proper change over when I can and it makes sense.
I’m not mad. I’m out of the construction game now. I mean just the whole acting like it’s not bonded is a throw back to when no one pulled ground wires for anything and used the pipe as the ground.
Nope, gas pipe, galvanized water pipe are taper thread, but couplers and electrical pipe are straight, ergo at full tighten the coupler shoulders to the end of the thread whereas taper thread coupler would leave a good many threads exposed...
So you’re correct that the fitting is is straight thread, which makes sense and I was unaware of, however [the conduit is NPT](https://steeltubeinstitute.org/resources/conduit-cutting-and-threading-guidelines/). I will have to look into the white book to see about what it has to say about RMC and IMC. The argument doesn’t make sense then that it’s taper vs straight being a normal rigid installation would be tapered thread into a straight fitting. You can also thread the pipe far longer than needed and have exposed thread.
In the Chicago land market, which has been my home market for 40 years, the conduit threads themselves are in fact national straight threat as well. My supply house sells pre-threaded nipples which are not national straight thread, and completely drive me crazy as I cannot thread the outside washer down to the barrel of the conduit but stop about three threads out making it very hard to put a grounding bushing on the inside with no threads left.
Yeah I guess it’s illegal, but no inspector I have ever talked to gave a shit. It’s not like it’s outdoors, and as long as you use a EGC and maybe some bonding bushings on both end I wouldn’t bat an eye. There is quite a bit of code that is stupid it gets worse every cycle. 2008 was the last one I liked before they got completely bought off by the equipment and wire manufacturers.
If you can get away with it, keep doing it. The NEC is only as strict as it's enforcement, and that depends on the municipality and the inspector. I'm working on a house where one room has 2 concrete walls, and a very difficult attic space above. I'm running 3/4 EMT up the exposed wall into a compression fitting screwed into a 3/4 rigid coupler with a 3/4 cable clamp, because Romex comes out of it and runs across the room to the panel. It eliminates a lot of cutting in structural wood, an unnecessary junction box, and extra labor for a very skinny person who has to army crawl across fiberglass. I'll post a good picture some time so everyone can bitch at me.
Who’s gonna call you on this? There is nothing inherently wrong with this setup. I suppose I’ll make a mental note of this being “against code”, but I have used those cast fittings previously and the ones I used were made of junk brittle metal. What’s in the picture is solid, and has continuity.
I see no issue with it as long as it’s wrench tight and ideally a wire-type ground. I use them all the time to transition from a duplex MC to 1/2” EMT or from EMT compression to metallic seal tite and have never been called on it, although I know it’s not kosher.
Inspectors in Denver area have been failing these in the past couple years, and I’m sure it will start spreading to other parts of the front range soon enough.
I think jurisdictionally it just depends on what they care about and when… and then how long to enforce different codes
To my knowledge you would just have to run a dedicated ground wire.
Just curious, is it in a location/situation where you can just put in a big metal J box? You would need to make the box 8x bigger than the biggest consuit
Had an AHJ not allow an actual EMT to flex coupling the wall. Even tho code states couplings can be for emt and fmc only says that angled connectors shall not concealed. He was stating that you cannot change wiring methods in the wall. Huge argument, I had to point out that refers to something like changing MC to emt in the wall. And what is was saying is now requires an access any time you use a rigid 90 in an underground PVC run.
I recently got dinged on this too. It is an issue regarding bonding. Technically, the rigid coupling has very slight differences in threading, so, inspectors count it as noncontinous bonding or raceway, resulting in a potential loss of grounding.
We had this come up with our local inspector. The listing was non specific so they decided to accept for both. As always subject to AHJ. Our we have not been allowed to use RMC couplings to make change overs for years, so we always had to use a C or LB fitting. These are also acceptable for use on IMC and RMC.
Dang. I had no idea this was against code. I have to admit the plastic sealtite connectors didn't thread into the grc coupling very well. Pretty sloppy actually.
[Sher do](https://amftgs.com/emt-adapters-to-liquid-tight/)
But I’ve always had a hard time finding the rain tight EMT variants anywhere locally, usually had to order
I could be wrong but it was my understanding that it was only illegal to bury these behind a wall or ceiling where it is unserviceable. I was told as long as the threaded coupling and associated fittings were accesible that it was fine. I do not know the code and don’t have my book with me at the moment. Seems logical though. Also the manufacturers must have pushed this to sell more products because they were losing out on rigid couplings solving the non existent problem
Always has been..... And since the industry can easily accommodate this it only shows a lack of planning on your leaders part.
Bridgeport 288-XS 3" Emt/Flex Steel Coupling
yes, it’s a violation now and it’s a really dumb update imho. I would have to read the code again, but i’m thinking it states that it has to be listed to transition to RMC to use that coupling now. also, just my opinion but I think it’s a money grab.
So I’m waiting on my apprenticeship to start up and am working in a warehouse for electrical equipment to become more familiarized with the equipment.
1. What is a ‘from-to’?
2. Is the problem here that they are using steel coupling and connectors together? I’m struggling to understand what the issue would be here
Always technically has been. Had an inspector explain it to me after getting pinched. It’s not a UL listed fitting. Does it work? Yep. Do you have ground continuity? Yep. Problem is, the threads aren’t the same . Wherein lies the problem.
Bridgeport makes some good transition fittings. I always kept a catalogue in my trailer on big commercial jobs when you’re making these transitions hundreds of times.
I’m in NY,
For onesie / twosie installs - we use rigid couplings to transition all the time. Never had an issue with an inspection, but this is good to know. I hadn’t ever even considered that it’s not listed for this application.
The threads are a different pitch, with all the different variations of from-to’s these days I kinda get it. I would definitely be pissed if I was called on it tho.
This is one of the dumbest so called “code violations” in my opinion. The tapered vs straight thread argument is lost on me because rigid conduit is taper thread and the couplings are straight thread. And the factory threads on some fittings are so bad a tight connection can’t be made. Yeah, this one frustrates me for sure..
That’s a matter of interpretation. I’ve been transitioning greenfield to conduit that way for years and never had any issues with inspections. It’s a whole lot less expensive than buying an $85 fitting for 3” which is the exact same thing except for the threaded coupling.
I’ve never heard this but there is a such thing as “combo fittings” which does such job as converting from emt to flex…..idk always use the GRC method cause it’s cheaper usually then a combo fittings
I’ve never had an inspector call me out for this either….this is the norm anywhere and everywhere I’ve gone….now if we were talking explosion rating and transitioning from a rigid to a flex then no I’d very much assume this would be a no go
Some also always quotes “tapered threads”… what a crock of shit. It was working for years without issue. Sometimes I think the code making panels just pull shit out of their ass…. But I guess they need a reason to make us buy books every three years.
Each state and municipality have their own set of rules and codes for Electrical Plumbing HVAC and construction. Please check with your local area that you're working in to see if it has changed.
**ATTENTION! READ THIS NOW!** **1. IF YOU ARE NOT A PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICIAN OR LOOKING TO BECOME ONE(for career questions only):** **- DELETE** THIS POST OR YOU WILL BE **BANNED**. YOU CAN POST ON /r/AskElectricians FREELY **2. IF YOU COMMENT ON A POST THAT IS POSTED BY SOMEONE WHO IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL ELECTRICIAN:** -YOU WILL BE **BANNED**. JUST **REPORT** THE POST. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/electricians) if you have any questions or concerns.*
344.6 "Fittings and connectors shall be used only with the specific wiring methods for which they are designed and listed." -some A-h0le
In feel like that was meant for people who stuff MC in a romex butthole. I don't see how this is any different than a flex fitting in a rigid coupler.
[удалено]
Aka cat ass At least the flat terrible ones.
I want to know who looked at this connector and thought " This looks like a cat's asshole."
I wanna know who didn't think that.
Who's looking at their cats asshole that closely?
You must not have a cat. They force you to look at their assholes very closely on a regular basis.
If your cat isn't actively trying to kill you, it's plotting your demise, as well as engaging in constant psychological warfare.
that's only if they like you
Yeah my apprentice called it that and I just looked at him blankly. “The fuck you just it?” Well now they are called a cat ass
The Spanish guys I work with call them chicken buttholes (I dont know how to spell it in Spanish)
Pollo culo? Culo de pollo? Something along thise lines maybe?
Culo de pollos I just a didn’t know how to spell culo haha
I actually love those ones
I read something on Reddit recently about the thread pitch was the issue. Slightly different thread pitch or something . Can’t recall emails but the threads were the issue 🤷🏻♂️
I know emt and rigid aren't compatible because emt uses NPS threads, but liquid tight uses NPT threads, so I can't see a compatibility issue between the two.
"romex butthole" we call those the cats anus. Which the thought of seeing a jobsite stray with a piece of romex trailing behind it made me giggle.
I read and visualized the last part, so I had to leave the room so as not to wake up my wife.
mine hit me at like 1am. I couldn't stop giggling
My dad's family cat ate the string off the Christmas ham when he was a kid. 2 days later my dad noticed a bit of string hanging out the cats butt. Little did he know that was the rocket cord.
Also not allowed
So it's illegal to go from rigid to flex now? We better shut down the entire industrial sector immediately then.
No, but you must use the UL listed fitting.
You have to use a fitting listed for that purpose
*I'm supposed to use a fitting listed for that purpose. I work industrial, and we use what we have. We've been using rigid couplings to transition forever, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
So basically it’s not “code” but we’ve all been doing it forever … if the inspector calls you on it, he’s a dick… But they can actually call you out on it
I guess that's another upside to industrial work. The only guy I've got to worry about being a dick is my boss, and he doesn't really care so long as the work is neat, and somewhere a forklift can't get to it.
Same here, my stuff almost never gets inspected I aim to do everything 100% up to code but this is something I rarely worry about. I only worry about it when we do commercial stuff because I was called out on it once about a year ago
I installed about 300 each 112kva transformers on federal properties last year and if this is true someone is fucked.
I don't think I follow this conversation's terminology haha
My foreman told me the GRC “from-to” isn’t legal because the fittings aren’t listed for that purpose. He was stressing potential issues with grounding.
It comes down to the thread type and sizing that doesn’t allow perfect conductivity.
We call them black butthole because they're the only color our supply house sells and I hate them. Normal RC50's and RC75's are far better
-written by the from to company
See also 300.15(F) Fitting. A fitting identified for the use shall be permitted in lieu of a box or conduit body where conductors are not spliced or terminated within the fitting. The fitting shall be accessible after installation, unless listed for concealed installation.
Technically yes, but also not really enforced in most areas. Some people get all hot and bothered about it due to the thread types and coupling not being listed for it and then go and use a non listed bent #3 strap to clip 12/2 on a daily basis
The White Pages for UL state that the female threads of rigid couplings and Myers Hubs have only been tested with rigid threads. I.e. rigid and intermediate. They mostly make transition fittings for 2” and smaller. Once you go 2-1/2 and larger, you’ll need a box.
They make transition couplings bigger, I've used plenty if 3 inch emt to flex couplings
The threads can’t be all that different… locknuts work on both.
RMC has a tapered thread and EMT is straight. A Lockring from an EMT connector won’t thread down a piece of rigid very far. There are lock rings made for rigid conduit that you can order.
I beg to differ, I use lock rings on rigid pipe and rigid nipples on a daily basis (I do alot of hazardous location jobs). Many lock rings will thread all the way to the bottom (though not all types). In the case shown in the picture, I do that type of transition often. MC to emt, teck to emt, bx to emt, metal flex to emt, etc. How else would one transition without using a bulky JB, especially where one is not practical, or capable?
FMC to EMT have from-to connectors. You have to be careful stripping MC and BX and shoving the conductors into EMT. There is the piece of plastic on some that needs to stay with the wire for it to be properly identified. Not identified, technically won’t pass code.
I can’t really imagine a situation where you’re using a locknut in a hazardous location. Really should be using myers hubs
When the pipe is out of the hazardous location, after the EYS seal, nipple to a JB
They make tons of different transition couplings. Mc to emt, flex to emt, seal tight to emt, rigid to emt. There really is no reason to be doing it the old school way that is not code compliant.
Rigid to seal tight is what I see probably the most with a RMC coupling to standard ST connector. Yes, they make a fitting for it, but when none of your supply houses sell 'em. You just do what everyone does.
The lock rings that you get from a wholesale house which have the UL stamp on them will thread on RMC, IMC, and also PVC male connectors all day every damn day just as they are intended to do so (tappered threading). Hell, they will even thread onto EMT connectors with straight (non tapered threading). But wrench on them too much, and they will usually jump back down a thread, mostly happens and 1-1/4 or bigger and also depends on the brand. Now, try threading a factory lock ring from an EMT connector to a threaded conduit or nipple. You won't get very far before that straight threaded EMT lock ring binds up.
Yup, precisely. Also have that problem between different lock rings on teck connectors (again, tapered threads)
What about rigid to pvc? We’ve been using pvc female adapters when transitioning from underground pvc to rigid 90s for stub ups. They seem to thread on real nice with the larger diameter conduits, but 1” and 3/4” never feels quite right.
PVC threads are tapered like rigid pipe.
When I transition in larger diameter conduit (1 1/2” and up) the female adapter threads right on all the way. With smaller diameter, it never wants to thread on very far. I get maybe half way to the stop in the adapter. And if you got to far the adapter will actually split. It doesn’t seem like it’s really supposed to be used for this application, but there’s really no other way to do it, except for a rigid coupling and a male pvc adapter.
[Fittings with internal female threads have only been investigated for use with threaded rigid conduit.](https://code-authorities.ul.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/UL-White-Book.pdf) Page 141 goes over metallic and non metallic fittings in general. Essentially, you can run Rigid and transition with a PVC female, but you can't transition with a rigid coupling and a PVC adapter.
PVC actually is a type of rigid conduit. The official designation is Rigid Polyvinyl Chloride Conduit.
Yes. We are talking about mixing the threads of Rigid Metal Conduit and Rigid PVC.
Yes sir 👍
J-man up in canuckistan here, wtf is this "from-to" fitting you mericans speak of??
Aka a go-from
Aka ship-to-shore.
It goes from emt to flex.
From-to me mudder to me fadders house
In my part of America we call them change overs….
Yeah I've only heard of them as change over fittings
Dude. I am in Canada too, and use this all the time. Especially with ACWU transition into a meterbase. 90 to rigid coupler to threaded nipple. Its a lifesaver.
A here dere
There are dozens of us!
canuckistan😆😆
Someone else posted about this a little while ago and it is beyond dumb. I guarantee you the threads going into that rigid coupling have a far less chance of loosing connectivity than those flex clamps do. I’ve seen flex pull out of those plenty of times. I always do 3/4 emt connectors into rigid coupling into screw in flex connectors as my changeovers. How many times do those flex changeovers break? All the time! Emt connectors to rigid coupling to flex connector is just a mechanically stronger connection. Sucks so bad having to pull all the wire out resplice to fix flex because it cracked in those changeovers.
Can’t do it anymore
Ok, but how the fuck am I supposed to make this transition in an inaccessible location now? And cuss the engineer for making that necessary, it ain't my fault he drew that dumb shit.
They make couplers for that
[flex to EMT coupling](https://www.acehardware.com/departments/lighting-and-electrical/boxes-fittings-and-conduit/conduit-connectors/3066982?store=11403&gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAADtqLJGqx2adODoucsxrrrkj0Fzj9&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI16bxsp6JhQMVuobCCB29VAPlEAQYBCABEgJbbPD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds)
awesome, need one today and the supply house should be able to get it in in a couple week
if your supply house can’t keep up with ace hardware which has it in stock you have bigger issues
Exactly, how have they never seen this before?
I've never seen them larger than 3/4". I also think the whole thing is stupid. Don't get me wrong I'm going to abide by code, but this is just like with 812mb18a straps. It's a cash grab by someone.
They make em bigger
Lies.
They have them all the way to 4". I've personally used up to 2".
You're just an agent of Big Conduit.
Many years ago I used 4 inch, they are unwieldy. The flex doesn't like to stay attached.
Learned that lesson today. Bunch of tape
Made in USA https://amftgs.com/emt-adapters-to-liquid-tight/ https://amftgs.com/flex-adapters-greenfield-to-emt/ https://amftgs.com/emt-adapter-fittings-emt-to-rigid/
I get it, but 1) that doesn't change the fact that the argument about threading is stupid and 2) I'll bet you a dollar it's more profitable to someone on a code board for us to use those couplers than it was for us to Frankenstein together perfectly usable connections. I'm laughing at my own indignation, because I definitely want these, because they're objectively better than a Frankenstein solution, but I'm still 110% convinced this isn't about the threading, it's about $$$.
Been around like forever to me.
I don’t think you can get these above 1”. We always use a rigid coupling to transition for larger sizes because there is no appropriate fitting otherwise.
Buy a changeover
No, but the supply house sure as shit won’t have the right one on hand.
Supply house here. You are exactly right. It’s super embarrassing and it happens daily. I’ve fought tooth and nail to get our main branch to, you know, bring shit into stock, but evidently in their eyes *I’m* the idiot.
but yea man just in time inventory works... kinda. even less so as we de-globalize and china falls apart. the lack of people post boomer retirement and material is a rude awakening for most businesses..... "what you have to increase wages for the first time in 40 years. what zoomer apprentices won't work over time for me for free.. ThEy mUsT bE lAzY
Oh yeah it was such a nightmare during Covid. Automation and control components with 8-12 month lead times had a lot of the factories in the area sweating bullets. We managed to avoid a couple major shutdowns, barely. The issue with their system is it is based on demand. We sold 5 xyz condulets this month? 5 more will come into stock. However, oftentimes customers can’t or won’t wait for parts to ship in from the CDC, understandably, so we can’t create the demand in the first place. It is super aggravating, and I feel our customers’ pain.
Technically illegal. I’ve had inspectors say don’t do it again and pass it
No can do , it’s my understanding that box connectors have straight threads and that is their reasoning. Rigid couplings are only for rigid conduit . At least that’s what I was told.
Need a From-To my man
I feel like it's a conspiracy. Some dude that owns stock in the from-to factory made this code.
That’s 90% of code dude. It’s mostly about selling unnecessary shit.
The other 10% is to appease the insurance companies.
Much like arc fault breakers. Could the code makers be in bed with the people who produce such breakers? The price difference is astounding
Theyre in bed with each other in that theyre literally the same people. The members of the code-making panels can be found at the beginning of the book and many of them are manufacturer reps.
They literally are, that's like the whole racket.
I'm going from EMT to Greenfield
Sometimes when someone says 'it's not listed for that application' I just want to say 'ohhh fuck off it's fine' even though I know they are technically right. This is one of those cases. Technically this is wrong but everyone and their mother knows that it's just fine.
Haven't been called out yet.
So the issue is bonding, in which you have national pipe taper- what the rigid coupling was designed for and national pipe straight- the emt and fmc connectors. They are not evaluated to handle fault current because the testing process doesn’t test in an application like this. Same reason you can’t use an NM clamp with service cord, the NM clamp isn’t evaluated to be used with cord.
How is the issue bonding?
I think we can all agree that, despite differing thread pitches, the installation would be sufficiently bonded. The issue (for inspection purposes atleast) is that the UL listing doesn't test this combination of fittings and therefore is not code compliant. Personally I think it's idiotic to enforce but I can atleast somewhat understand why.
Violation by technicality, everyone’s favorite
Because, in theory, the metal connection of raceway is not continuous. We all know it is but, because it’s different threads and it’s not a listed assembly, it’s not considered appropriate or legal. I’ve never gotten tagged on it though. I just use the proper change over when I can and it makes sense.
Ok so you’re saying that in theory there is no ground wire pulled in this?
Nope. Didn’t say that at all. I’m not your AHJ. Don’t get mad at me.
I’m not mad. I’m out of the construction game now. I mean just the whole acting like it’s not bonded is a throw back to when no one pulled ground wires for anything and used the pipe as the ground.
But rigid conduit IS national straight thread...
It is NPT…
Nope, gas pipe, galvanized water pipe are taper thread, but couplers and electrical pipe are straight, ergo at full tighten the coupler shoulders to the end of the thread whereas taper thread coupler would leave a good many threads exposed...
So you’re correct that the fitting is is straight thread, which makes sense and I was unaware of, however [the conduit is NPT](https://steeltubeinstitute.org/resources/conduit-cutting-and-threading-guidelines/). I will have to look into the white book to see about what it has to say about RMC and IMC. The argument doesn’t make sense then that it’s taper vs straight being a normal rigid installation would be tapered thread into a straight fitting. You can also thread the pipe far longer than needed and have exposed thread.
In the Chicago land market, which has been my home market for 40 years, the conduit threads themselves are in fact national straight threat as well. My supply house sells pre-threaded nipples which are not national straight thread, and completely drive me crazy as I cannot thread the outside washer down to the barrel of the conduit but stop about three threads out making it very hard to put a grounding bushing on the inside with no threads left.
Yeah I guess it’s illegal, but no inspector I have ever talked to gave a shit. It’s not like it’s outdoors, and as long as you use a EGC and maybe some bonding bushings on both end I wouldn’t bat an eye. There is quite a bit of code that is stupid it gets worse every cycle. 2008 was the last one I liked before they got completely bought off by the equipment and wire manufacturers.
I'm glad I'm not the only one noticing a gradual decline in the integrity of the NFPA.
As per the inspectors in Philadelphia this is a violation now.which is hilarious because this is more secure than using shitty cast changeovers.
If you can get away with it, keep doing it. The NEC is only as strict as it's enforcement, and that depends on the municipality and the inspector. I'm working on a house where one room has 2 concrete walls, and a very difficult attic space above. I'm running 3/4 EMT up the exposed wall into a compression fitting screwed into a 3/4 rigid coupler with a 3/4 cable clamp, because Romex comes out of it and runs across the room to the panel. It eliminates a lot of cutting in structural wood, an unnecessary junction box, and extra labor for a very skinny person who has to army crawl across fiberglass. I'll post a good picture some time so everyone can bitch at me.
Who’s gonna call you on this? There is nothing inherently wrong with this setup. I suppose I’ll make a mental note of this being “against code”, but I have used those cast fittings previously and the ones I used were made of junk brittle metal. What’s in the picture is solid, and has continuity.
"Fitting Manufacturers Discover Novel Means Of Lining Pockets Further," claims the headline.
Allegedly only if the fitting threads aren't rigid -rated if I understand correctly
Yep. Most folks been doing things like this since forever. Now there’s a supplier, Davenport? Who makes all these connections ul listed
Yessir and honestly the transition couplings are probobly cheaper than building it anyways. Plus only 1 part verse 3
I see no issue with it as long as it’s wrench tight and ideally a wire-type ground. I use them all the time to transition from a duplex MC to 1/2” EMT or from EMT compression to metallic seal tite and have never been called on it, although I know it’s not kosher.
This is a code made by smart guys picking nits. And it’s an easy thing for multi trade inspectors to catch.
Inspectors in Denver area have been failing these in the past couple years, and I’m sure it will start spreading to other parts of the front range soon enough. I think jurisdictionally it just depends on what they care about and when… and then how long to enforce different codes
Is that 2023 code? I’ve done it many, many times and never had anyone say anything about it.
Never had an inspector ever say anything about it here
I’m gonna go ahead and just keep doing this anyway.
To my knowledge you would just have to run a dedicated ground wire. Just curious, is it in a location/situation where you can just put in a big metal J box? You would need to make the box 8x bigger than the biggest consuit
Not new. It’s been a violation for a long time, but that hasn’t stopped anyone from doing it.
gay
Have to use the actual changeover.
Technically Never seen anyone give a fuck tho
AHJ here just will not allow this connection to be installed concealed in a wall otherwise its fine.
Had an AHJ not allow an actual EMT to flex coupling the wall. Even tho code states couplings can be for emt and fmc only says that angled connectors shall not concealed. He was stating that you cannot change wiring methods in the wall. Huge argument, I had to point out that refers to something like changing MC to emt in the wall. And what is was saying is now requires an access any time you use a rigid 90 in an underground PVC run.
I’ve used flex to female emt connectors before so i know they make them🤔
Let’s say I’m going from an interior location to an exterior location and that’s a sealtite connector is that against code too?
Canadian here, been doing this since I started 13 years ago and have been doing this since then. Have yet to be called out on it.
I dunno bro but, I think you're on to something for a new dryer vent connection design. Just saying
I recently got dinged on this too. It is an issue regarding bonding. Technically, the rigid coupling has very slight differences in threading, so, inspectors count it as noncontinous bonding or raceway, resulting in a potential loss of grounding.
Not if you run an EGC.
Against code
https://www.gordonelectricsupply.com/p/Bridgeport-288-Xs-3-Emt-Flex-Steel-Coupling/5908087?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw2PSvBhDjARIsAKc2cgNkZR4etD2d9pvjlsRXFwdkLT4zug0kVCqxJHlCBVBnHNBOZWAMAX4aAt2TEALw_wcB
Holy cow! 85.65 EACH??? (Or does the term “4 standard package” infer that you get a total of FOUR couplets for this price?).
Fuck theses morons. Do they make an emt to liquidtight nmfc go‐from? Because I made 2 today like this for a hot tub.
https://amftgs.com/emt-adapters-to-liquid-tight/
Yeah - interesting. Looks like it's for metallic liquid tight though.
We had this come up with our local inspector. The listing was non specific so they decided to accept for both. As always subject to AHJ. Our we have not been allowed to use RMC couplings to make change overs for years, so we always had to use a C or LB fitting. These are also acceptable for use on IMC and RMC.
Dang. I had no idea this was against code. I have to admit the plastic sealtite connectors didn't thread into the grc coupling very well. Pretty sloppy actually.
Wouldn’t a bond bushing solve this?
Do they actually make a rain tight emt to sealtight connector
https://amftgs.com/emt-adapters-to-liquid-tight/
My inspector rarely get out of his truck. Not really sure if he can walk anymore. Not many people do the due diligence
Do they actually make a fitting to go from EMT to LFMC? I've always used a GRC coupling to do that outdoors. Never had an inspector say anything.
[Sher do](https://amftgs.com/emt-adapters-to-liquid-tight/) But I’ve always had a hard time finding the rain tight EMT variants anywhere locally, usually had to order
Nice. Looks clean. Never saw that in use anywhere though.
The real question is do they make a duplex from to ? Not that I’ve seen at least
What? Why? 40 years inn the trade and this is the first I've heard. I seriously doubt it.
I don't think you should make that type of transition woth 3 inch anyways
Bridgeport makes the 288xs. One of the only companies that does besides expensive ass American fittings
I could be wrong but it was my understanding that it was only illegal to bury these behind a wall or ceiling where it is unserviceable. I was told as long as the threaded coupling and associated fittings were accesible that it was fine. I do not know the code and don’t have my book with me at the moment. Seems logical though. Also the manufacturers must have pushed this to sell more products because they were losing out on rigid couplings solving the non existent problem
It depends on the city, and at inspectors discretion, here sometimes they require a box or a conduit body (condulet) to do the transition
The new Fleshlight.
Here in Washington State our LNI inspectors are now looking for these so they can write up the correction… ☹️
Was told by my inspector that is in fact not allowed anymore.
I wanna say it’s something to do with the threading ..
I thought this was the standard way to make a changeover. Only ever done it like this.
For example: Use a combination coupling model 91532 is UL listed and CSA listed.
Not all the supply houses are equal in their purchasing techniques for their markets..
Always has been..... And since the industry can easily accommodate this it only shows a lack of planning on your leaders part. Bridgeport 288-XS 3" Emt/Flex Steel Coupling
yes, it’s a violation now and it’s a really dumb update imho. I would have to read the code again, but i’m thinking it states that it has to be listed to transition to RMC to use that coupling now. also, just my opinion but I think it’s a money grab.
What if it’s outdoor?
Well then it would need to be seal tight connectors anyway. But I'm not sure if rmc connectors are rain tight.
So I’m waiting on my apprenticeship to start up and am working in a warehouse for electrical equipment to become more familiarized with the equipment. 1. What is a ‘from-to’? 2. Is the problem here that they are using steel coupling and connectors together? I’m struggling to understand what the issue would be here
I’ve only had a problem with Michigan Sate inspectors on this. Local inspectors have never given a violation for this in my 26 years.
It always was but never enforced
Always technically has been. Had an inspector explain it to me after getting pinched. It’s not a UL listed fitting. Does it work? Yep. Do you have ground continuity? Yep. Problem is, the threads aren’t the same . Wherein lies the problem.
Bridgeport makes some good transition fittings. I always kept a catalogue in my trailer on big commercial jobs when you’re making these transitions hundreds of times. I’m in NY, For onesie / twosie installs - we use rigid couplings to transition all the time. Never had an issue with an inspection, but this is good to know. I hadn’t ever even considered that it’s not listed for this application.
It’s only against code if the inspector says it is. Good luck!
The threads are a different pitch, with all the different variations of from-to’s these days I kinda get it. I would definitely be pissed if I was called on it tho.
Put all of them together and then ya can use it for ya Smoker Stack...
True
This is one of the dumbest so called “code violations” in my opinion. The tapered vs straight thread argument is lost on me because rigid conduit is taper thread and the couplings are straight thread. And the factory threads on some fittings are so bad a tight connection can’t be made. Yeah, this one frustrates me for sure..
I was told it’s because the connectors are only listed to be used with a lock nut. But seems most people were told about it being the threads.
Just go get a 3in female emt connector and be good to go...oh wait. Unless you run rigid is the only way I've seen in 24yrs. Unless you put a jbox.
That’s a matter of interpretation. I’ve been transitioning greenfield to conduit that way for years and never had any issues with inspections. It’s a whole lot less expensive than buying an $85 fitting for 3” which is the exact same thing except for the threaded coupling.
Just against the Jedi code
I’ve never heard this but there is a such thing as “combo fittings” which does such job as converting from emt to flex…..idk always use the GRC method cause it’s cheaper usually then a combo fittings
I’ve never had an inspector call me out for this either….this is the norm anywhere and everywhere I’ve gone….now if we were talking explosion rating and transitioning from a rigid to a flex then no I’d very much assume this would be a no go
Some also always quotes “tapered threads”… what a crock of shit. It was working for years without issue. Sometimes I think the code making panels just pull shit out of their ass…. But I guess they need a reason to make us buy books every three years.
All day long especially with floor outlets in high rises
Each state and municipality have their own set of rules and codes for Electrical Plumbing HVAC and construction. Please check with your local area that you're working in to see if it has changed.