in a 2&1/8" steel box can I get an 1&1/4" conduit KO?
is there any code section dealing with this.

I see that a 4&11/16 box that is 2&1/8" deep can do it but that is a bigger hole in the wall then I want.
thanks

This is a request from the IT data specialist.
because I know someone will ask why.
I did..

No. But it may not be because of a Code issue. If there's no market for a product, nobody will make it. If it's impractical or physically impossible to make, nobody will make it either.

But then IT folks regularly ask for things that don't exist.
I think it comes from spending more time in cyberspace than in the real world.
Send them a copy of the Appleton catalog and tell them to pick out what they want.
If it's not there, 2 possible courses of action remain:

have it made (with enough money you can get just about anything fabricated and UL Listed)

Change the laws of Physics to allow a hole that's larger than the metal that it's drilled in...like a 1.5" hole in the side of a 1.25" deep box. (The Star Trek fans will remember that even Scotty "cannot change the laws of Physics".)

There is nothing to keep you from punching a bigger hole. I assume this is so they can pull a DB9 through it with the shroud in place. We used to take the shrouds off but you need a cable that doesn't have the molded connector for that.
Plastic boxes make this operation easier since you can use a $3 hole saw instead of a much more expensive KO punch. I have seen IT managers, with too much time on their hands, cutting holes in boxes with a Dremel tool. I figure those holes cost the company about $50 each.

You can make up a custom box. No UL listing is required.

In the past I have had prints that called for a 2" EMT run to a 2 gang box so the IT folks could bring their cables out to office cubes.

As that is all but imposable all I did was provide a 2 gang extension ring and run the 2" EMT down to it with a bushing.

The IT folks found this more than adequate.

I've installed cases of this mythical product.

It is made in the 4-11 trade size box... side bracketed or without.

You'll get one or two KO's on each box side.

We use it exclusively for data cable chases into furniture feeds.

I see that a 4&11/16 box that is 2&1/8" deep can do it but that is a bigger hole in the wall then I want.

Both the 1900 and the 4-11/16 require a plaster ring. Last I looked the wall opening is going to be the same.

Come clean. YOU are the IT guy aren't you.

-Hal

There is no such thing as a DB9..

The correct designation for the 9 pin D-subminiature connector is DE-9. The second letter designates the connector shell size.
Using the standard #22 contacts, the sizes are DA-15, DB-25, DC-37, DD-50, and DE-9.

Other inserts are available, such as DB-13W3 (3 coax or high-voltage contacts + 13 #22 pins, used for older Sun monitors.)

source: ITT/Cannon D-subminiature connector catalogs, 1947-present. (my copy is a 1971 printing of a 1969 edition, which agrees with the current pdf version.)

Other common errors are RJ-45, which actually designates a specific connector, wired in a specific wiring pattern, for a specific telephone application having nothing in common with Ethernet. (if you use the specified connector, it not only won't fit into an Ethernet jack, but the wiring will have no wires in common with Ethernet.)

source: 47 CFR 68.502

I agree you can't plug an ethernet cable into a telephone jack and expect it to work but the wiring of the cables are the same. Aren't T568A/B AT&T specs? When I look in my Western Electric Registration Service Manual I see the RJ 45s defined as
1 n/c
2 n/c
3 MI
4 ring
5 tip
6 MIC
7 PR
8 PC

4&5 is a pair
3&6 is a pair
1&2 is a pair
7&8 is a pair
What wire would be different for ethernet?

I agree the term "RJ45" refers to a particular connection setup in the jack with a programming resistor on the 7/8 pair (RJ41S adds a pad on pair 1/2)
but the wiring itself is the same. At a certain point, if we all know what we are talking about who cares? That is like getting pedantic about the use of the term "Romex" or "Bell Box".

Thank you, Techie for bringing that up. The use of the term "RJ45" has also been a peeve of my for years. An RJ45 is an 8 position, 8 conductor jack wired to support leased modems. Old-school computer guys used to order these jacks from the telephone company and started the misnomer 20+ years ago. That's because the jacks looked similar to those used for Ethernet jacks and patch panels. It's not the piece of hardware that's an RJ45! RJ45 is the specific wiring pattern that you mentioned. Something tells me that this is a lost cause, though.

Not a lost cause, just an obsolete term that now has a new meaning. I doubt my telco still has ONE USOC RJ45S in service today.

This has been interesting I have always called them RJ-45s and thought I was correct.

Apparently I should ask for 8P8C jacks?

I think it is a done deal, Google RJ-45s and all the hits I followed showed things like this;

If everything is "RJ-45" how would you differentiate between an 8 pin USOC and 568A or B (WECO)?

-Hal

Thinking the same Hal.

As long as you stay consistant at each end of a particuular segment it really doesn't make any difference between 586 A or B.
The USOC RJ45S would be made apparent by the 97-A Type connecting block. You can see them down at the Smithsonian next to the leased line 4800 BPS modems.