Question for the MC-Ap users in the house

Status
Not open for further replies.
peter d

peter d

Senior Member
Location
New England
For all you progressively minded electricians who are using MC-Ap, are you following some of these guidelines to save time?

Things like:

1) Omitting the anti-short bushing (I know it's not required for MC, but many of you use them anyway)
2) Omitting the bonding jumper in device boxes in favor of self grounding devices
3) Using snap-in MC fittings



All of this assumes that MC-Ap is allowed by your job specs and local codes of course. :)

For those who have no idea what MC-Ap is, click here.
 
Last edited:
I elected to use MC-AP on my current job.

I have definately been using antishorts.
I turn the cut edge opposite the bonding wire and slide the opening of the bushing around the bonding wire.

I have been using bonding jumpers also.

As far as the connectors, they are snap in and are listed for MC-AP.

It is definately a time saver making up boxes and lights.
Especially the receptacles!

View attachment 2716
View attachment 2715

And the Gang Boxes:grin:
View attachment 2714
 
All of the above except the grounding jumper. It's a personal thing I just like knowing I have a good ground connection.
 
walkerj said:
I elected to use MC-AP on my current job.

I have definately been using antishorts.
I turn the cut edge opposite the bonding wire and slide the opening of the bushing around the bonding wire.

I have been using bonding jumpers also.

As far as the connectors, they are snap in and are listed for MC-AP.

It is definately a time saver making up boxes and lights.
Especially the receptacles!

View attachment 2716
View attachment 2715



And the Gang Boxes:grin:
View attachment 2714
Click to expand...

Have been using "ap" for about 6 months now. Sales rep from southwire stressed to us to NOT use anti-short bushings as it can insulate the grounding conductor and the sheath at the connector thus not making a good ground. The only approved connectors have antishorts built in to the connector. Of course this was back when it first came out and things might have changed but if you think about it, it does make sence.
 
I've only used it the time the supplier was out of regular MC or HCFC (AC style).

1) Omitting the anti-short bushing (I know it's not required for MC, but many of you use them anyway)
Used the bushings

2) Omitting the bonding jumper in device boxes in favor of self grounding devices
Always use a bonding jumper (if heath-care even more so)

3) Using snap-in MC fittings
C-510's. When they started making them in India last year, they stopped using the good cut and angled clamp and supplied them with the simple straight indentation like romex connectors that I don't think grabs the metal sheath as well. Bought all the old ones I could find to last a while.

Still havent used the snap-ins the Southwire rep gave me . . .
 
ceb58 said:
All of the above except the grounding jumper. It's a personal thing I just like knowing I have a good ground connection.
Click to expand...

I haven't ran any yet, but I'd install the grd pigtail too. Too many times the recep doesn't sit flat against the mud ring but rather sits against the sheetrock instead.
 
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes

When we first started using the MCap therre was a misconception concerning the connectors. I looked at the Southwire technical section containing the UL listing and found over 200 connectors that could be used with the cable.

I usually use the next size up palster ring (3/4" for 5/8" board) so the devices sit flush to the ring. My last big job was a college dorm with about 600 devices. Switches were self grounding and recepts were plug-tail.
 
iwire said:
Such a simple thing I have no idea why everyone does not do that. :smile:
Click to expand...


I read somewhere in a catalog that the mud ring manufacturer recommended using a mud ring sized 1/8" larger than the thickness of the sheetrock. This would allow for the thickness of the head of the 8-32 attachment screw which keeps the ring off of the back of the rock. The finished product would be perfectly flush with the front of the rock.
 
Cow said:
I haven't ran any yet, but I'd install the grd pigtail too. Too many times the recep doesn't sit flat against the mud ring but rather sits against the sheetrock instead.
Click to expand...

I have noticed that if I use 5/8" mudrings for 1/2" drywall they finish perfectly flush. The ring is 1/2" overall not just the raised part.
3/4" rings are a perfect fit for 5/8" drywall.
I still cringe when I see a box of worthless 1/2" rings on a job knowing that their is no hope that the ring will ever finish flush.
 
iwire said:
Such a simple thing I have no idea why everyone does not do that. :smile:
Click to expand...

jrannis said:
I have noticed that if I use 5/8" mudrings for 1/2" drywall they finish perfectly flush. The ring is 1/2" overall not just the raised part.
3/4" rings are a perfect fit for 5/8" drywall.
I still cringe when I see a box of worthless 1/2" rings on a job knowing that their is no hope that the ring will ever finish flush.
Click to expand...

But you can still use the 1/2" rings on 1/2" rock, ends up being set back about 1/8".
 
iwire said:
What is 1/2" rock? :D

Other then my DIY work at home I rarely run into 1/2" rock on the job. :smile:
Click to expand...


True for commercial work but residential still uses 1/2" rock. You could still use the 1/2" mud rings on 5/8" rock if you wanted. They would just end up about 1/4" back from the edge.
 
iwire said:
Such a simple thing I have no idea why everyone does not do that. :smile:
Click to expand...

I tried to explain this deal with some guys at work...needless to say I should have bet them a coffee that the 5/8 ring they used with 5/8 rock was going to be setback....they couldn't comprehend the fact to use 3/4 rings for 5/8 rock...I'll send them to this thread!
 
Nice threadjack going on here. Oh well...I do it all the time, so I deserve it. :cool:

At any rate, I have not seen or used the MC-Ap yet, but I plan to if the need arises. Given a choice I will use all the methods I mentioned in my opening post. I think this cable is one of the best innovations to come along in recent memory. :cool:
 
I would also like to add that MC-AP is much lighter(obviously) than traditional MC Cable.

If you work with guys like I work with, be prepared for some anomosity and heated debates:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top