Here is a question that often starts a long conversation. How many people reverse feed their switchs ie feed to the light or outlet to save on wire? I myself do not! for the reason down the line when happy h/o wants to change something out you got no neutral. How ever several people i work with do it all the time. I do not see the big picture cost wise here for a few feet of romex. what does everyone else out there do?
I usually bring the feed in at the switch location, so there is a neutral here for future use (timers/motion detectors/X10, etc.). I also use a 3 conductor run between the switch and the light, in case a ceiling fan gets installed later.
Re: Feed @ the light/recpt. or not?#43051 10/03/0406:04 PM10/03/0406:04 PM
NJ, We've used that method here for wiring lighting circuits for years. It's a throw-back to the days of steel conduit, where you'd only have two single wires at the switch. I'm glad it's not used much these days. Light circuits are looped at the switches these days.
Re: Feed @ the light/recpt. or not?#43053 10/03/0409:21 PM10/03/0409:21 PM
Loop-in is normal set-up in UK. Feed runs from light to light where standard ceiling fittings have line, neutral and loop terminals.
For commercial use, 'Romex' equivalent with two hot colored wires (plus ground) is available to loop to the switch. Otherwise feed switch with hot colored wire, return on recolored (taped) neutral wire – opposite to US practice.
Re: Feed @ the light/recpt. or not?#43054 10/04/0405:05 PM10/04/0405:05 PM
NEC Code Article 410.11, “Temperature Limit of Conductors in Outlet Boxes”, paragraph 2, “Branch-circuit wiring, other than 2 wire or multi wire circuits supplying power to luminaries (fixtures) connected together, shall not be passed through an outlet box that is an integral part of the luminaire (fixture) unless the luminaire is identified for through wiring”, would limit the type of luminaries that you could wire in this manner. NEC Article 90.1 (B) “Adequacy” uses the phrase …”not necessarily efficient”. I was taught that this also applies to construction methods. So saving of a few feet of copper at the expense of a safer installation would not be the best wiring method. In general, and especially in residential, I try to avoid creating any switched circuit at any location other than the junction box or panel (control point) containing the switch. There are many situations where it is perfectly acceptable and in some situations (3 and 4 way switches and in multi-wire circuits) it would be impractical not to have voltage pass through a junction boxes providing connections for switched receptacles or luminaries. But if it isn’t necessary why do it? The quality of my work should be worth the expense.
Re: Feed @ the light/recpt. or not?#43055 10/04/0405:35 PM10/04/0405:35 PM
Wireman: My relatively uneducated take on this... 1) the amount of romex used by routing from switch to fixture is really a negligible amount, 2) If Harry Homeowner wants to add one of those "combination" switch/outlet devices after the fact, there is a better chance he will use the neutral rather than the ground and 3) it makes it simpler to keep colors together - all blacks, all whites, etc. without having to re-ID anything.
Wirenut: running a 3 cond. from the switch to the fixture box is a nice touch
[This message has been edited by mamills (edited 10-05-2004).]