Square D QO load centers

Status
Not open for further replies.
jaylectricity said:
One thing about QO breakers is that they really are "Quick Open". The other day I was working on two panels. One was a bolt-on ITE panel, the other was a QO panel. While livening up a circuit on the ITE panel there was a short. There was a small arc-flash contained mostly within the breaker, but I saw light. There was a small explosion sound. The breaker tripped.

Same scenario on the QO panel. I hadn't even gotten the handle completely closed and there was a click and the window showed orange. No flash, no explosion sound.
Click to expand...

I've had that happen a few times when cutting through live conductors or accidentally causing a short on QO or Homeline (since they are the same guts.) My pliers were still usable but when I've done the same thing with GE or BR, they were trash. :ashamed1::lol:
 
peter d said:
:blink:

I was comparing the CH-CH bus connection to QO, I think CH is better.

As for the guts, I'd rather have QO if CH is simply BR guts with no improvement in the reaction time.
Click to expand...

The CH CH, and BR, lines used to be made by different companies, BR has been branded as Bryant, andWestinghouse, before Eaton bought the Westinghouse electrical business 20+ years ago, the CH style a prem. product & the BR line is used by those who would be using Zinsco if it was still around.
 
peter d said:
:blink:

I was comparing the CH-CH bus connection to QO, I think CH is better.
Click to expand...

My mistakes :ashamed1: Though IMHO, the design of the breaker is more important then the bus connection.


As for the guts, I'd rather have QO if CH is simply BR guts with no improvement in the reaction time.
Click to expand...


QO will always have a lower mag trip and faster operation compared to BR/CH, at least right now. The older CH guts were more robust when compared to that of BR, in fact the BR mechanism originated decades back from the old Bryant/Challenger/Westinghouse breakers. Manufactures assume no one will be taking a peak at their guts, so its cheaper to just have the least expensive design across all brands. Much like QO and Homeline have the same guts, but in that case Square D actually choose to put the high end design into the low end casing, which IMO was one of the best business and market decisions made.
 
mbrooke said:
My mistakes :ashamed1: Though IMHO, the design of the breaker is more important then the bus connection.





QO will always have a lower mag trip and faster operation compared to BR/CH, at least right now. The older CH guts were more robust when compared to that of BR, in fact the BR mechanism originated decades back from the old Bryant/Challenger/Westinghouse breakers. Manufactures assume no one will be taking a peak at their guts, so its cheaper to just have the least expensive design across all brands. Much like QO and Homeline have the same guts, but in that case Square D actually choose to put the high end design into the low end casing, which IMO was one of the best business and market decisions made.
Click to expand...
Square D decided to make a second lower end line and already had internals for their main line - they decided to use the same internals. Eaton took over the lower end line that someone else was already making.

I don't know if they decided to use the BR guts in in the CH units because they were cheaper, or if they determined it was better then what they had before and now that they have rights to any patents they can use them, or if they made some changes took the best parts of both lines and now incorporate them into both. Does make sense to me to narrow it down to one base design though.
 
kwired said:
Square D decided to make a second lower end line and already had internals for their main line - they decided to use the same internals. Eaton took over the lower end line that someone else was already making.

I don't know if they decided to use the BR guts in in the CH units because they were cheaper, or if they determined it was better then what they had before and now that they have rights to any patents they can use them, or if they made some changes took the best parts of both lines and now incorporate them into both. Does make sense to me to narrow it down to one base design though.
Click to expand...

One design is less $$$, but Id wish they left the old more robust design instead. Eaton had the CH line for some time as well as the BR line. Only in the last few years did the consolidated designs.
 
mbrooke said:
QO will always have a lower mag trip and faster operation compared to BR/CH, at least right now. The older CH guts were more robust when compared to that of BR, in fact the BR mechanism originated decades back from the old Bryant/Challenger/Westinghouse breakers. Manufactures assume no one will be taking a peak at their guts, so its cheaper to just have the least expensive design across all brands. Much like QO and Homeline have the same guts, but in that case Square D actually choose to put the high end design into the low end casing, which IMO was one of the best business and market decisions made.
Click to expand...

I prefer Homeline over QO. :cool:
 
I prefer Homeline over the competitor's 1 inch wide breakers, but QO is still better IMO. Though I don't run into many of them anymore CH series is right there with QO in most aspects.

They don't make three pole/three phase Homeline load centers.

I have a couple NQ panels 84 circuit main lug on a current project - the cabinet is only 50 inches tall. For same spacing on ends of the panelboard with 1 inch breakers the cabinet would need to be 60.5 inches tall. They all get even taller when you have a 400 amp main breaker installed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top