Competence with Megger testing, Ohm meter, heat shrink at outlet wiring, and xFCI per 406.4(D) may satisfy remodel inspections, but disturbing existing cables can change test results, and GL policy wont warranty existing wiring, which risks your assets with any casualty claim.
Just my personal opinion from using AC, MC and NM for many years. Back in the 40's, 50's and 60's home builders were often given the choice of armored cable or Romex by the EC. Armored cable was an upsell and if you were building a custom home, it's what you used. Romex was what was used in those cheap cookie cutter development homes, modulars and manufactured homes. But eventually builders stopped caring about something the buyers couldn't see and saw how they could put more money in their pockets. Cheaper, less experienced labor, rodent damage, staples overdriven, nails into the cable, ground to neutral shorts- cheaper to pass those problems off onto the EC if and when they happen than spending the money upfront to make sure they won't happen to begin with.
I have heard this rumor also.
Since hacks prefer Romex, the absence of NM may presume absence of hack jobs.
No offense taken. The term "may presume" suggests a degree of prejudice.
We have many homes and apartment complexes wired entirely in NM by licensed contractors who have been in business for decades. Other than service masts it is possible these contractors have not pulled conductors through raceway in many years.
And the owner should be requesting to remove anything that compromises insurance coverage, or at least the EC should be informing them of such possibility, especially on some remodel job where you might at least want to replace anything that ends up exposed or is otherwise relatively easy to replace during such a project.
NM cable from 60's through 80's had a tougher sheath as a general rule than many the cables made since ~2000. Today's cable you have to be careful pulling across the floor or over top of the bottom chord of a truss rafter during installations, if you rub against some metal object it may tear the sheath much easier than it would have most those older cables.
xFCI design violates UL 489 Marking Guide at Topic # 50, 55, 90, and 94.
Funny.. i quesstion contractors that want to pipe or mc a whole house...
Don't General contractor laborer shops run the multi-tenant industry sector?
No.
It's the cheapest allowable wiring method so, if the NEC says it can be used why would residential builders waste money on a more expensive alternative if they didn't have to? We all agree that the NEC is a minimum requirement for a safe installation. If NM is so good, why then are there so many restrictions on its use? Why can't it be used in all places of occupancy, in all types of multifamily dwellings, above hung ceilings in commercial construction when there is no restriction for such use in one and two family residential hung ceilings? Is the safety of office workers more important than a family's home?
I agree. I'll give you another example from this monkey house, an EMT run that goes from the panel around the basement and through the partition into the garage for receptacles on the walls. Whoever did it was probably a mechanic for the EC and knew something about bending conduit but that's where it ends. Nice, neat work unless you know something about it. He used deep handy boxes and at one point he has four runs coming into a box plus the receptacle. I'm afraid to take the cover off. Then he has five 90's plus offsets to go around a corner and window. To top it all off he used blue for the neutrals.
