UL Document on Interchange of Certain Challenger, Bryant, Westinghouse and Cutler-Hammer Breakers

[brycenesbitt]

You might find this useful.,
for example if you have a Challenger apartment cluster meter with original Challenger breakers, you can replace those breakers with Type BR even if the original Challenger label is missing or does not list type BR. The Challenger during the Sylvania era were mostly Type C, and most Eaton BR are dual listed as Type C which has the same result. I've recently confirmed all this with Eaton technical support, based on this letter.

This shows that there are many brands, but only a few actual bus stab types.

Siemens bus stabs are thinner and while the standard BR breakers will insert, the fit is poor.
Eaton sells a line of "classified" breakers which are tested to various panels.
And Connecticut Electric sells a line of "classified" breakers which are simply repackaged Siemens breakers with a label saying they've been tested in certain older panels.

 

[brycenesbitt]

I don't know that there's credible evidence that Challenger Type C breakers, other than a single unrelated recall, are bad.
It's not like the Stab Loks.
But sometimes Insurance calls out Challenger. And it's good to know that modern BR breakers are the ready fix for quieting down insurance.

 

[Jraef]

I don't know that there's credible evidence that Challenger Type C breakers, other than a single unrelated recall, are bad.
It's not like the Stab Loks.
But sometimes Insurance calls out Challenger. And it's good to know that modern BR breakers are the ready fix for quieting down insurance.

The problem as I see it is that Challenger (division of Westinghouse by the way) was cobbled together from the old GTE Sylvania, who before their demise had bought out Zinsco to try to capture that market share, thinking they could "fix" the problems. They never did, and that actually contributed to the fall of Challenger. So there are a couple year's worth of Challenger / Zinsco panels out there, and then to cap off the death knell, Challenger bought the rights to Stab-Lok in the US! I have never seen a Challenger / FPE panel, I believe they just planned on trying to re-engineer the breakers to sell replacements. But holy cow, what were they thinking? As a result, insurance companies don't like to deal in subtleties or facts, they like broad strokes. So "No Challenger" saves them from having to look at the details about which Challenger product it is. I have now seen it start happening here in California with "No Pushmatic panels" too, because the old BULLDOG Pushmatic breakers didn't have mag trips. But when ITE bought them, they immediately fixed that problem so if the panel says "ITE Pushmatic", the breakers are Thermal-Mag. But again, insurance companies don't like details...

When I was working resi construction in the late 70s, my older brother owned a small supply house and he was a Sylvania panel distributor. My boss used me to get good deals on the Sylvania C-line panels and breakers from my brother, we put in a ton of them, never had a lick of problems with them. They were the ONLY manufacturer who, when the UL rules changed on breakers and panels having to be listed together, spent the money to have their panels listed with ITE, Bryant, Murray and GE breakers, and they tested and cross listed their C-Line breakers in those panels as well. That's why Eaton kept that product line when they got Challenger as part of their Westinghouse buy. They dumped everything else Challenger and kept just those breakers as their "Classified" C-Line breakers, which are unchanged since then.

 

[brycenesbitt]

Yep. Do note that when Eaton acquired Challenger, the terms of the deal were that Challenger/Westinghouse first wash it's hands of Stab-Lok.

The problem I have with insurance companies is they only know how to read the brand name. For example they'll approve a Thomas & Betts panel that has Stab-Lok internals. But reject a Challenger panel with modern BR breakers. Note I've seen many old panels with very odd mix of brand names, but never a Challenger branded Stab-Lok or Federal Whatever. I have convinced insurance to call an older Challenger panel a "BR breaker" panel in their report, and then issue the policy.

The listed together rule is unfortunate in that it masks the true compatibility gotchas that are out there (e.g. BR on Siemens Stabs). And it serves to create so much confusion that ripping things out becomes the easy path forward, which come to think of it is probably fine with all the current vendors, save a few old stock supply companies.

 

[jaggedben]

Yes Type BR breakers are also listed as C, they really are the same thing AFAICT. One should not even need a UL doc for this, the breaker label simply matches the panel label. And no, Challenger Type C didn't have problems that I know of.

FWIW the BR series tandems and quads are also listed as Type A, they say so on them as well. The original Challenger Type A - single pole breakers with what I call a 'side clip' to the busbar - do have problems. The side clips would lose the tension needed to keep a good connection to the busbar, and start arcing. I've seen it multiple times. If I had any of those breakers in my panel I would check for damage and if none found, replace them with BR series Type A without hesitation. Again, no UL doc needed, the breaker is listed and labeled as a type listed for the panel.

 

[Fred B]

Yes Type BR breakers are also listed as C, they really are the same thing AFAICT. One should not even need a UL doc for this, the breaker label simply matches the panel label. And no, Challenger Type C didn't have problems that I know of.

FWIW the BR series tandems and quads are also listed as Type A, they say so on them as well. The original Challenger Type A - single pole breakers with what I call a 'side clip' to the busbar - do have problems. The side clips would lose the tension needed to keep a good connection to the busbar, and start arcing. I've seen it multiple times. If I had any of those breakers in my panel I would check for damage and if none found, replace them with BR series Type A without hesitation. Again, no UL doc needed, the breaker is listed and labeled as a type listed for the panel.

The Connecticut Electric Challenger breaker replacement looks a little like a Siemens but with side clips. Side clip was an answer to the Tandem breaker as these were half sized and the you can also get 2 pole half size by using a left and right in a different layout and handle tie. My first contact with these originally thought they were GE because of the half size and all labels unreadable, then pulled the damaged breaker an saw the side clip.

 

[jaggedben]

The Connecticut Electric Challenger breaker replacement looks a little like a Siemens but with side clips. Side clip was an answer to the Tandem breaker as these were half sized and the you can also get 2 pole half size by using a left and right in a different layout and handle tie. My first contact with these originally thought they were GE because of the half size and all labels unreadable, then pulled the damaged breaker an saw the side clip.
View attachment 2579602

That looks like the Crouse-Hinds/Murray version of the 'side clip' breaker. Type MM. Which yeah, belongs to the ITE Siemens family, it seems. I guess as long as Connecticut Electric paid to get it listed.... Weird they don't also sell it as type MM.