Is there a reliable low cost protector out there for my big screen tv and
DVD/VCR

Are the plug in strips worth a ****?

Thanks
Tom

Same ones you use for computers; all the same rules apply too.
Power strips as a rule have pretty minimal protection unless
they're designed for the job. You really have to check out the
specs on each one. Price isn't always a good indicator.

HTH,

Pop


"twfsa" wrote in message
news:WgYrf.34068$Mi5.11108@dukeread07...
: Is there a reliable low cost protector out there for my big
screen tv and
: DVD/VCR
:
: Are the plug in strips worth a ****?
:
: Thanks
: Tom
:
:

On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 14:20:37 -0600, "twfsa" wrote:

Is there a reliable low cost protector out there for my big screen tv and
DVD/VCR

You can look for something that will cover cost for any damage to your
equipment. Some ads say up to 25K or so for coverage. Personally, I
looked at a 50" PDP sit in my LR until I had what I thought was the
proper protection - then I plugged 'er in. Power surges or even
brown outs, lighting, etc. can cause damage.

Are the plug in strips worth a ****?

IMHO, they are great in the garage for an small items. I've seen a
Tech department insist (elbow bending) a Safety department ban them so
as to avoid equipment damage.

Oren
"My doctor says I have a malformed public-duty gland
and a natural deficiency in moral fiber, and that I am therefore
excused from saving Universes."

Details on effective protection recently were provided in
the alt.windows-me newsgroup on 18 Dec 2005 entitled "Dead
Computer :-)" also at:
http://tinyurl.com/99ho2

Other information in alt.home.repair is entitled
"Lightning protection AND putting a receptacle on UPS"
starting 20 Dec 2005.

Yes, plug-in protectors do for the TV what they also do for
a computer. Plug-in protectors can even make damage to
powered off electronics easier. Many use word association as
if it were science: "protector and protection sound alike -
therefore must be same". Reality, the protector is
ineffective without a short connection to protection. Those
who don't learn why it works also don't know the difference
between a protector and the protection. IOW they spend tens
of times more money (per protected appliance) on protectors
that basically enrich a manufacturer who hopes you never learn
this; nor learn what a protector does.

Described are effective protectors as part of a secondary
protection system AND inspection of your primary protection
system. Reading is required in previous discussions that also
provide sources of effective protectors. Those who recommend
ineffective protectors also don't learn this fundamental
fact. A protector is only as good as its earth ground. No
earth ground (such as with plug-in protectors) means no
effective protection.

twfsa wrote:
Is there a reliable low cost protector out there for my big screen
tv and DVD/VCR

Are the plug in strips worth a ****?

twfsa wrote:
Is there a reliable low cost protector out there for my big screen tv and
DVD/VCR

Are the plug in strips worth a ****?

Avoid the lowest-cost strip protectors. Consumer Reports found they
didn't protect very well compared to the higher-priced products from
APC,Tripplite, Curtis, etc. Look for products that include RF filters
consisting of both chokes and capacitors (cheaper ones have only the
capacitors) because the rest of the protector will be built better as
well.

A whole-house protector installed in the breaker box isn't very
expensive and can shunt surges to ground better than any plug-in
protector, and some also include protection for telephone and TV. In
old homes the protection provided by the phone company may consist only
of neon bulbs, which don't short as well as MOVs installed in newer
homes.

"twfsa" wrote in message
news:WgYrf.34068$Mi5.11108@dukeread07...
Is there a reliable low cost protector out there for my big screen tv and
DVD/VCR

Are the plug in strips worth a ****?

Thanks
Tom


The IEEE says if your going to install surge protection you need to protect
2 of the 3 zones. Zone 1 is out cause that is the utility. That leaves
Zones 2 and 3. Starting with your whole house surge protective device. It
has a let through of XXXX and then with the point of use protector it is an
incoming rating of YYYY. As long as the whole house let-through is less
than the point of use your as good as it gets, cheaply.

Your garage door opener my advise a surge protector as well as your
microwave and clothes washer/dryer mine all do.

The real problem is most of the cheapy stuff is based on MOV's, metal oxide
varistors. These are tested ONCE for UL. Not twice or 3 times. ONCE.
Do not forget to surge protect the coax, feeding your equipment.

Do you have a scope on your hunting rifle? What did you pay for the scope?

Where does the IEEE says one must protect all zones? The
spec defines what a protector would confront in each of three
zones - A B and C. Where does that say such is required in
each zone?

The utility is provides a primary protector. Inspection of
is demonstrated in:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

Secondary protection is also called 'whole house'
protector. It too is defined by the quality of and connection
to single point earthing.

So where specifically is this IEEE demand for a third
protection layer? And how does this protection layer do
anything without a short connection to earth? IEEE defines
three zones. That definition only defines what the protector
would confront in each zone - so that protector can be
designed also for human safety reasons. That does not say all
three zones must be protected. Where specifically does the
IEEE demand protection in all three zones? They define three
zones. But where do they require protection in each?

SQLit wrote:
The IEEE says if your going to install surge protection you need to protect
2 of the 3 zones. Zone 1 is out cause that is the utility. That leaves
Zones 2 and 3. Starting with your whole house surge protective device. It
has a let through of XXXX and then with the point of use protector it is an
incoming rating of YYYY. As long as the whole house let-through is less
than the point of use your as good as it gets, cheaply.

Your garage door opener my advise a surge protector as well as your
microwave and clothes washer/dryer mine all do.

The real problem is most of the cheapy stuff is based on MOV's, metal oxide
varistors. These are tested ONCE for UL. Not twice or 3 times. ONCE.
Do not forget to surge protect the coax, feeding your equipment.

Do you have a scope on your hunting rifle? What did you pay for the scope?

I have a couple of surge protector strips which were fairly cheap. They
do not protect from brownouts.

Consider the repair costs for what you are protecting. If you are
protecting $1000 + worth of equipment then $100 for a good device is a
worthwhile investment.

Also consider the number of brownouts and outages you may experiance.

Protection against lightning strikes should be considered on any
antenna cabling as well as the power wiring.

wrote in message
oups.com...
I have a couple of surge protector strips which were fairly cheap. They
do not protect from brownouts.

Consider the repair costs for what you are protecting. If you are
protecting $1000 + worth of equipment then $100 for a good device is a
worthwhile investment.

Also consider the number of brownouts and outages you may experiance.

Protection against lightning strikes should be considered on any
antenna cabling as well as the power wiring.

They will not be much help from a real close strike but as the name implies
should protect from a small surge. Best to pull the plug when lightning
approaches.

According to Redcloud, a $100 Monster Cable protector is
clearly superior. What Redcloud forgets to mention: the $100
Monster Cable product is electrically equivalent and just as
ineffective as a $10 plug-in protector. But Monster costs 10
times more. Therefore Monster must be 10 times better?

Redcloud must 'kill the messenger'. His solution to
technical naivety is more money, sound byte reasoning, and
personal attacks. When he posts numerical specs and industry
professional citations, then something useful may have been to
contributed. Instead he will only do again what he usually
does - personal attacks - 'kill the messenger'.

Commodore Joe Redcloud wrote:
Low cost protection is worth what you pay for it. What ever you
do, don't get sucked in by nitwits like w_tom, who will argue
endlessly that absolutely nothing works unless they personally
approve it. They are idiots.

I think I may fall over dead the day that Redcloud posts a
technical fact - and does so accurately. Meanwhile, details
on effective protection recently were provided in the
alt.windows-me newsgroup on 18 Dec 2005 entitled "Dead
Computer :-)" also at:
http://tinyurl.com/99ho2

Plug-in protectors are sold on sound bytes. Effective
protector for real world protection is promoted significantly
more technical facts.

Commodore Joe Redcloud wrote:
Typical emotional nonsense from W_Tom. He's right and the rest
of the world is wrong.

SQLit wrote:
The real problem is most of the cheapy stuff is based on MOV's, metal oxide
varistors. These are tested ONCE for UL. Not twice or 3 times. ONCE.

Anyone who owns a MOV-type protection strip should go immediately to
http://www.rbs2.com/fire.htm and read carefully.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

Anyone who owns a MOV-type protection strip should go immediately to
http://www.rbs2.com/fire.htm and read carefully

What earth shattering news! Haven't electrical fires been started by
virtually everything electrical at one time or another? Just plugging
in too many extension cords into a multi outlet has started them. So
have TV's, lights, outlets, etc. So, why should we be surprised that a
multi-outlet surge protector might not start a fire on a rare occasion
too?

wrote:

Anyone who owns a MOV-type protection strip should go immediately to
http://www.rbs2.com/fire.htm and read carefully

What earth shattering news! Haven't electrical fires been started by
virtually everything electrical at one time or another?

Wrong URL. I thought this was the one I read that suggested that every
"hit" degrades a MOV. Instead, start with the article at
http://www.cob.org/fire/safety/surge.htm:

"All MOVs gradually deteriorate with use."

"The problem found with some MOV components is that over a 18 to 24
month period the materials used begin to break down. As the MOV
ages, its operating characteristics change and it can become more
sensitive and dissipate more heat."

....and I'll try to find the URL to the article I really meant to post.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

When properly sized, MOVs degrade with each transient. The
manufacturer's chart has charts for number of transients, size
of transient, and number of joules. More joules means the MOV
life expectancy increases exponentally. However if MOV is
grossly undersized, then conditions cited by www.rbs2.com
cause an MOV to operate beyond what the manufacturer intended
- become a fire hazard.

A minimally sized MOV may degrade on the first transient. On
that chart is a curve for one transient. However there is no
curve for zero. No MOV should be so grossly undersized to
completely fail on the first transient. MOVs should only
degrade - end up on the curve for 1, 10, 1000, or 10,000.
Properly sized MOVs remain functional after every transient;
must only degrade. Most manufacturers define 'degrade' as a
10% change in its operational voltage. Manufacturers don't
define vaporization as acceptable. Vaporization is when a
human grossly undersizes the protector.

clifto wrote:
Wrong URL. I thought this was the one I read that suggested that every
"hit" degrades a MOV. Instead, start with the article at
http://www.cob.org/fire/safety/surge.htm:

"All MOVs gradually deteriorate with use."

"The problem found with some MOV components is that over a 18 to 24
month period the materials used begin to break down. As the MOV
ages, its operating characteristics change and it can become more
sensitive and dissipate more heat."

...and I'll try to find the URL to the article I really meant to post.

clifto wrote:
...
Anyone who owns a MOV-type protection strip should go immediately to
http://www.rbs2.com/fire.htm and read carefully.

Some quotes from that paper:
I know from my work in ANSI/IEEE standards during the late
1980s and early 1990s that manufacturers of surge suppressors
were vehemently opposed to tests in any performance standard
for surge-protective devices for failure modes, tests which
might have exposed fire or explosion hazards and found their
products to be unacceptable.

More pictures demonstrate the problem:
http://www.westwhitelandfire.com/Art...Protectors.pdf
http://www.ddxg.net/old/surge_protectors.htm or
http://www.nmsu.edu/~safety/programs...tectorfire.htm
http://www.ehs.washington.edu/LabSaf/surge.htm or
http://www.cob.org/fire/safety/surge.htm
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554

Meanwhile, appliances meeting standards even 30 years ago
would withstand transients of up to 600 volts without harm.
Internal appliance protection has been that robust. Therein
lies existing 'point of use' protection. Protection is inside
appliances. Protection that may be overwhelmed if a 'whole
house' protector is not sufficiently sized and properly
earthed.

Effectiveness of that protector is defined by earth ground.
Why do APC, Tripplite, and Belkin only promote plug-in
protectors? Meanwhile companies with superior reputations
(Square D, Polyphaser, Intermatic, Leviton, Polyphaser, GE,
Siemens, and Cutler Hammer) are selling 'whole house'
protectors. Not just for human safety reasons. Because
properly earthed 'whole house' protectors provide significant
protection AND do so costing tens of times less money.
Profits from ineffective plug-in protectors are immense since
those products are promoted mostly on myths.

Above are pictures that ineffective protector manufacturers
hope you never see.