raised cover on 1900 box

[al hildenbrand]

It says a Listed 731A Cover. Can you find a listed 731A product other than this one that uses such a cover?

Yes. Again, reposting the Raco catalog page I entered earlier in this thread:

 

[Smart $]

Yes. Again, reposting the Raco catalog page I entered earlier in this thread:

As best I can determine, nothing on that page links the "Listed 731A Cover" to anything.

Go to this catalog and view pages A32 and A33: https://www.hubbell-rtb.com/literature_pdf/Hubbell-RTB_Catalog.pdf

This the only place on the web that I could find any 4 square product related to a 731A listed cover. Note the outlet boxes are for "audio, video, power and data". Seeming more like 731A is a listed assembly... but we have to find the actual listing to verify anything. :roll:

FWIW, I think Hubbell Raco is using word play to specifically not openly call "certain" raised covers mud rings.

 

[iwire]

FWIW, I think Hubbell Raco is using word play to specifically not openly call "certain" raised covers mud rings.

FWIW I think you are grasping at straws. The Raco products above the one in picture I posted from HD where raised covers for switches, decora, duplex etc. Those ones Raco labeled as "Surface covers" the one in my picture of course is a "device cover" per the manufacturer. It seems to me the surface covers can only be used for surface work, while the device covers can be used for either.

To recap your position as it is coming across to me. Outside documentation is only important when it supports your position. If you can't find outside documentation to support your view you tell us that outside documentation is not available or needed.


When you tell us the info is in the labeling and the labeling does not support your position you ignore it and try to work around it. :happyyes:




All this has reminded me of something from the distant past and I think you may be having trouble the 'W' word as well. :lol:

 

[al hildenbrand]

As best I can determine, nothing on that page links the "Listed 731A Cover" to anything.

Go to this catalog and view pages A32 and A33: https://www.hubbell-rtb.com/literature_pdf/Hubbell-RTB_Catalog.pdf.

Sure it does.

Take the UL File Number on the Raco Catalog page A29 and look it up. You will come to a single file that includes ALL the model numbers of the products on A32 and A33 along with the Raco model numbers on the page I've shown (A29) along with a lot more product model numbers. . .ALL lumped in the UL Certifications Directory under the File Number QCIT.E195978. Click here to go to the Online UL Certifications Directory.

 

[Smart $]

Sure it does.

Take the UL File Number on the Raco Catalog page A29 and look it up. You will come to a single file that includes ALL the model numbers of the products on A32 and A33 along with the Raco model numbers on the page I've shown (A29) along with a lot more product model numbers. . .ALL lumped in the UL Certifications Directory under the File Number QCIT.E195978. Click here to go to the Online UL Certifications Directory.

Been there done that that...

...FWIW, the product shown's base model is UL Listed as 769 under file E195978 and more specifically, category QCIT and therein listed in the paragraph "Covers for outlet boxes, ..."

So if you go by that, you are saying that no one has to add a wall plate to the assembly. Those parts are listed under a paragraph header, "Covers for outlet boxes, ..." So you just mount your flush device in there and you are done. Is that what you are saying? Please tell me or give me some indication you have more common sense than to rely on the written word all the time, every time... :blink:

 

[Smart $]

FWIW I think you are grasping at straws. The Raco products above the one in picture I posted from HD where raised covers for switches, decora, duplex etc. Those ones Raco labeled as "Surface covers" the one in my picture of course is a "device cover" per the manufacturer. It seems to me the surface covers can only be used for surface work, while the device covers can be used for either.

To recap your position as it is coming across to me. Outside documentation is only important when it supports your position. If you can't find outside documentation to support your view you tell us that outside documentation is not available or needed.


When you tell us the info is in the labeling and the labeling does not support your position you ignore it and try to work around it. :happyyes:




All this has reminded me of something from the distant past and I think you may be having trouble the 'W' word as well. :lol:

I have no problem with my position. Describe it however you see it. It's good to see how others perspective can get warped along their journey through life. Wouldn't expect anything less from you. Please continue to be bulletin bully you are. I'll not budge one iota from my position.

It's plain as day Raco is using shady trade practices. So you believe listing a mud ring as an outlet box cover makes it not a mud ring?

And I pose the same question to you as I did Al: You are saying that no one has to add a wall plate to the assembly because the part is listed as an cover for an outlet box?

 

[al hildenbrand]

Been there done that that...So if you go by that, you are saying that no one has to add a wall plate to the assembly. Those parts are listed under a paragraph header, "Covers for outlet boxes, ..." So you just mount your flush device in there and you are done. Is that what you are saying? Please tell me or give me some indication you have more common sense than to rely on the written word all the time, every time... :blink:

C'mon now, don't spin off the subject into your provocations.

I'm showing you that the Raco Model 769 and it's similar products can be part of a SURFACE assembly, and I am challenging you to provide documentation to your assertion that the Raco Model 769 can only be used in a FLUSH assembly.

So far, you have clung to the trade jargon term "plaster ring" as the fount of truth and certitude, so intuitively obvious as to need no more documentation . . . undocumented opinion.

 

[Smart $]

C'mon now, don't spin off the subject into your provocations.

I'm showing you that the Raco Model 769 and it's similar products can be part of a SURFACE assembly, and I am challenging you to provide documentation to your assertion that the Raco Model 769 can only be used in a FLUSH assembly.

So far, you have clung to the trade jargon term "plaster ring" as the fount of truth and certitude, so intuitively obvious as to need no more documentation . . . undocumented opinion.

UL category QCIT backs up my assertion about [plaster/] mud rings.

You found one niche company using shady listing practice to emphasize your position... and you feel comfortable with that. :thumbsdown:

How many bona fide listed mud rings do you want me to throw your way before you see the light of day!

 

[al hildenbrand]

UL category QCIT backs up my assertion about [plaster/] mud rings.

You found one niche company using shady listing practice to emphasize your position... and you feel comfortable with that. :thumbsdown:

How many bona fide listed mud rings do you want me to throw your way before you see the light of day!

Try documenting how the Raco line of "Device Covers" is the exception to your opinion, and sharing that documentation with us.

 

[al hildenbrand]

. . . one niche company using shady listing practice . . .

You have a gift for hyperbole. Hubbell as a niche company. Heh!

 

[wwhitney]

To those who see a violation in using "mud rings" in exposed work:

Suppose I take a small square of plywood of the appropriate thickness, cut out a hole for the raised portion of the mud ring, and fit it over the mud ring under the cover plate. Have I now made a compliant flush installation with the mud ring? If so, doesn't that seem absurd?

Cheers, Wayne

 

[iwire]

I have no problem with my position.

Other being wrong it is a fine one.

Describe it however you see it.

I did.

It's good to see how others perspective can get warped along their journey through life.

Wouldn't expect anything less from you. Please continue to be bulletin bully you are.

Oh please, you are just as much as a bully as I can be. (And by the way, that video was hardly bullying, it was joking around, loosen up a bit.)

I'll not budge one iota from my position.

Which is your SOP, other than admitting to a typo I do not recall you every changing your position on any subject. It must be nice to be right 100% of the time.

It's plain as day Raco is using shady trade practices.

LMAO, now it is Raco that is the problem.

Come on, you can do it. You can admit you made a mistake and you will not die.

I admit my mistakes when they are pointed out and it has not killed me yet.

 

[iwire]

You found one niche company using shady listing practice to emphasize your position... and you feel comfortable with that. :thumbsdown:

Hubbell a niche company? As compared to who? :huh:

 

[Smart $]

You have a gift for hyperbole. Hubbell as a niche company. Heh!

Hubbell products used to have the highest regard any manufacturer could get in my book. Subdivision products changed that. But I'll still use most all their products, even from the subdivisions. The whole world is going cheap and false representation abounds. And it's not just Raco.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Hubbell products used to have the highest regard any manufacturer could get in my book. Subdivision products changed that.

OK. Now document how this niche company is the exception to all the non-niche non-shady companies. . . . or is this just more unsubstantiated grousing for effect in this banter?

 

[Smart $]

Other being wrong it is a fine one.
I did.

Oh please, you are just as much as a bully as I can be. (And by the way, that video was hardly bullying, it was joking around, loosen up a bit.)

That's right, I can be. Do you think I am in this thread? And for the record, I didn't watch the video.

Which is your SOP, other than admitting to a typo I do not recall you every changing your position on any subject. It must be nice to be right 100% of the time.

LMAO, now it is Raco that is the problem.

Come on, you can do it. You can admit you made a mistake and you will not die.

I admit my mistakes when they are pointed out and it has not killed me yet.

Well you've actually commented on me openly stating I was wrong... so you have poor recall, :happyyes:

And I do admit when I'm wrong. This isn't one of those [rare, according to you] occasions.

 

[Smart $]

OK. Now document how this niche company is the exception to all the non-niche non-shady companies. . . . or is this just more unsubstantiated grousing for effect in this banter?

:lol: yeah right... that smiley is all the documenting your going to get on that.

 

[Smart $]

To those who see a violation in using "mud rings" in exposed work:

Suppose I take a small square of plywood of the appropriate thickness, cut out a hole for the raised portion of the mud ring, and fit it over the mud ring under the cover plate. Have I now made a compliant flush installation with the mud ring? If so, doesn't that seem absurd?

It does compared to just using a raised cover!!!

 

[al hildenbrand]

It does compared to just using a raised cover!!!

What??? You didn't quibble about the piece of plywood not being a "finished wall surface". . . . per QCIT Mud Rings . . . That was an easy one.

Or are you allowing that this "mud ring" Wayne is describing covering with plywood might actually be a "Device Cover"?

 

[Smart $]

What??? You didn't quibble about the piece of plywood not being a "finished wall surface". . . . per QCIT Mud Rings . . . That was an easy one.

Or are you allowing that this "mud ring" Wayne is describing covering with plywood might actually be a "Device Cover"?

Suffice it to say I skipped the rhetoric portion of a response and went directly to the absurd comment.