Romex wire size designations

Status
Not open for further replies.

tonype

Senior Member
Location
New Jersey
In the past, I have always read wire sizes as #14, #12, etc. However, today I came across Romex brand wire with "#7 EXT" and "#5 EXT" designations. 1st time coming across this.

Is there some "translation" available? The #7 looked like a #14 and the #5 looked like a #12.
 
tonype said:
In the past, I have always read wire sizes as #14, #12, etc. However, today I came across Romex brand wire with "#7 EXT" and "#5 EXT" designations. 1st time coming across this.

Is there some "translation" available? The #7 looked like a #14 and the #5 looked like a #12.

Yes, this is part of the factory code to identify where it was made. That means it was made on extruder #5 and extruder #7.

Romex brand uses letters after the UL "E" number to identify the factory. For instance, E18679F means it was made in the Florence, Alabama plant.

All the different wire brands have different ways of tracing the factory, machine operator, shift, etc. They are printed right on the jacket.
 
Last edited:
peter d said:
Yes, this is part of the factory code to identify where it was made. That means it was made on extruder #5 and extruder #7..

Does extruder 5 always make a certain size? And what is that size?
 
peter d said:
Yes, this is part of the factory code to identify where it was made. That means it was made on extruder #5 and extruder #7.

Romex brand uses letters after the UL "E" number to identify the factory. For instance, E18679F means it was made in the Florence, Alabama plant.

All the different wire brands have different ways of tracing the factory, machine operator, shift, etc. They are printed right on the jacket.

And you know this --Why????:grin:
 
tonype said:
Where is the wire size shown? There were no markings.

310.11 (A) (4) states the AWG size or circular mil area must be marked on all conductors.

Time to throughly check the conductor - or your glasses:D I can say that because my arms are too short to read anything less than 5 feet in front of me!
 
peter d said:
Yes, this is part of the factory code to identify where it was made. That means it was made on extruder #5 and extruder #7.

Romex brand uses letters after the UL "E" number to identify the factory. For instance, E18679F means it was made in the Florence, Alabama plant.

All the different wire brands have different ways of tracing the factory, machine operator, shift, etc. They are printed right on the jacket.

Wow !!!!! That is impressive. They don't teach that at the high school I went to,,,,,all though the high school I went to was torn down 25 years ago.

As far as what size is the wire get out the gauge and messure it if you can't tell.
 
Dennis Alwon said:
And you know this --Why????:grin:

I knew someone would pick up on this incredibly useless information that I have. ;)

I was just curious what all that "other" information was on a piece of romex. I'm fascinated by manufacturers and how they use these incomprehensible codes to trace their products should a problem arise.
 
tonype said:
Does extruder 5 always make a certain size? And what is that size?


I don't have the answer to that one. But more than likely it's set up to make one size of wire and that' s it. I can only imagine that down time on a machine that makes NM-B means mega $$ lost for the manufacturer.
 
inspector23 said:
310.11 (A) (4) states the AWG size or circular mil area must be marked on all conductors.

Time to throughly check the conductor - or your glasses:D I can say that because my arms are too short to read anything less than 5 feet in front of me!


Cables are not required to have the individual conductors within the jacket marked. A surface marking on the jacket is all that's required.
 
infinity said:
Cables are not required to have the individual conductors within the jacket marked. A surface marking on the jacket is all that's required.

Sorry, thought that it was obvious I was referring to the outer jacket since the original post was referring to markings on Romex wire. I knew, and I presumed everyone else knew, the original post was referring to the outer jacket, even though it was not specifically referred to in the question. Should have used the word "jacket" instead of "conductor" in my first post.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top