On May 27, 3:32 pm, N8N wrote:
OK, lesson learned. No matter how well-intentioned, any question
regarding surge protection turns into a flame-fest on this NG.

What flame war? One is posting myths and personal disparagement.
Another is posting responsible source after responsible source
followed by basic electrical concepts backed by 100 years of
experience and knowledge. Did you read these posts emotionally or do
you grasp the facts and numbers? If using technical facts, then every
Bud citations contradict his claims:
What these protective devices do is neither
suppress nor arrest a surge, but simply divert
it to ground, where it can do no harm.

Quoted directly from Bud's citation. It contradicts what Bud
claims. That quote also agrees with everything posted by w_tom. Bud
even refuses to post a manufacturer spec that supports his claims.
Why? No source supports what Bud posts. Even the protector
manufacturer does not claim what Bud posts. Bluntly obvious: even
Bud's citations contradict what Bud claims.

In every responsible source - including Bud's IEEE and NIST
citations - the protector is only as effective as its earth ground. A
protector that, by itself, somehow provides protection instead will
not even make that claim. 600 requests and Bud still cannot quote
even one manufacturer spec. No flame war. Bottom line facts. Even
the manufacturer will not claim what Bud posts. Why is this so
difficult? Every Bud citation says an effective protector must have
that short connection to single point earth ground. Why is this
difficult to understand? Where is your confusion?