K & T wiring

Anecdotal evidence, which is all you ever come up with, proves nothing. Anecdotal evidence shows astrology and homeopathy work.

If K&T is as dangerous as you say where is the actuarial data?

About your only source I remember is from a group that replaced some K&T, left most of it, and insulated over what was left. And that was in your own state.

Your hysteria doesn't count, on K&T or anything else.

The house my grandfather owned has a pair of light switches inside the front door. They still work fine after nearly 90 years. By coincidence my other grandfather, 1,000 miles away, invented those switches.

I might want to replace the K&T to the two ceiling lights but not to the switches. (It's an exterior wall, and anyway I don't want to tamper with the switches.)

Using "loom" to run K&T into a j-box could be just the thing for me. I imagine the material shouldn't crumble or support a flame. Where could I find loom material?

On 6/4/2010 11:07 AM J Burns spake thus:

Damn good question. Me, I collect loom from places where I tear out old K&T--knobs and tubes, too. So far I haven't found any use for the knobs, but the tubes make a dandy way to connect K&T wire to junction boxes: cut them short and insert them into NM clamps. I consider this an even better way to connect than using loom, which is softer and easier to break.

Strangely, on jobs where I've removed K&T wiring, the loom is in terrible shape, completely dried out and brittle, unlike the wire which in most cases, is in near perfect condition. As Bud mentions, it's usually only bad where it's been installed in or near fixtures that got very hot.

=BDBy coincidence

Well ultimately everyone here will find out which way things go at home resale time. and certinally no one should ever buy a new vehicle to get a safer one. who needs seat belts? air bags? etc?

my friends that tried to sell? one decided to remain in the home, the balance either paid to have a rewire before the sale completed, or gave a big discount to pay the buyer for the upgrade.

the trouble with waiting???

what you do before you put home on market is your business, once its for sale its registered bonded electricians plumbers etc.

if you do a good job on a rewire beforee sale you can save a ton of bucks.

things have changed dramatically in the last 5 years, homeowner companies aqre super risk adverse

If you're not a s***ty driver, buying a new car just to get a safer one is a spectacularly bad deal. Most of the best bang-for-your-buck safety improvements were made mandatory long before most of the cars still on the road today were built - I'm talking late 60's, early 70's here.

That said, I'd still feel way safer in, say, an 80's Mercedes-Benz or Porsche than I would in a new tin can. There's a big difference in quality...

nate

Again, just not true.

yeah despite posters reporting this here....... not me.

for people just reading this call a agent not your own and ask.

or wander in and ask any agency.

this reminds me of a peanuts cartoon when the adults are talking. All i hear is "blah blah blah blah"

On Jun 4, 10:42

did you see the planned crash of a 60 bel air, and a 2009 malibu.

the malibu driver would of walked away the old belair driver would of died several times over. building new vehiclews to crush and absorb the impact is really great engineering

remember any K&T install today is likely over a 100 years old. so it missed all the advances along the way......

It was a '59, and yes. What a waste, I've driven cars that looked worse than the one they destroyed.

Sure, but a car only ten years newer would have had three point belts, a collapsible steering column, dual circuit brakes, side marker lights, etc. etc. etc... and a '69 is way on the thin end of the bell curve as far as cars that are likely to still be used as daily drivers today. A '79, still on the thin end of the bell curve, would have side impact door beams in addition to all the other stuff.

My personal vehicles are a '55, and '88, and a '93 and I don't feel particularly unsafe in any of them, although the '55 does require a certain amount of respect. Proper maintenance and repair at the first sign of trouble is far more important than worrying about safety features that God willing will never be used. Likewise, I'd consider good tires, good shocks/struts, and properly maintained base brakes to be more fundamental to safety than ABS or ESC, although a lot of people seem not to think of that.

I'm not arguing the point that the best way to deal with K&T is to replace it at the first sign of trouble. I'm just saying that buying a "new car for increased safety" is likely a bad deal, unless you're

nate

Well a new car tends to be safer more conveient and more reliable. Just like replaced K&T

Discussing this is like trying to explain to a friend why he needed to replace all his galvanized water lines. the flow was terrible he proclaimed he was patient.

leaks esclated over time, he finally gave up and replumbed after 18 patches, there was little galvanized remaing by that time.

he still claims it was better than copper.

he is now in the same situation with cast iron drain pipes.

he applies epoxy and clamps over patches claiming all is fine. his house smells of sewer.

but his roof is 35 years old he tars leaks every spring and fall

Almost as pointless as getting some folks to punctuate, spell, and capitalize properly.

I have not found this to be the case. If anything, when something goes wrong with an older car I usually know exactly what it is, how to fix it, and have the tools to do the job right. Not so much with a newer car.

nate

de quoted text -

You ever tried getting parts for a 50 or 100 year old car?

quoted text -

Not the latter, but I do the former all the time.

Which is, of course, not what we're talking about. Most "old" cars still in daily use are only 15-20 years old at most.

nate

Ihave a 50+ year old truck and i really don't remember the last time it NEEDED a part. Hmmmmm.....

steve

my best friend has a 66 jeep and 68 impala. he cant take either vehicle more than 100 miles from home free towing because parts and service arent easily available.

truly older vehicles broke more, but were far easier to fix

Last year my 91 Stang was t-boned by a 97 Chevy Blazer (the other ran the red at a high speed). The Stang only came equipped with one driver's side air bag in the steering wheel. The airbag did not deploying as the impact was from the side. As a result of the accident I had to be extricated from the car and suffered three fractures to my pelvis, two broken ribs, a haemothorax on my left lung, and all the soft tissue damage that goes along with those injuries.

If my vehicle had side air bags I probably would have suffered less major injuries.

This accident had nothing to do with my driving skills only bad luck/ timing.