Suretest or a GFCI outlet tester?

Originally Posted By: Mike Parks
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



“I now want to invent the ultimate Home Inspector Electrical Tester”


I have it! As a matter of fact I have two of them.

They are called my eyes. LOL.

No really! A well trained (experienced) person can recommend further examination be done by an EC. You will not find every problem but a pair of "trained" eyes are you best tool.

Mike P.


Originally Posted By: dvalley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



? We’ll get together this weekend, ehhh?


I'll feel much better knowing that I've found hidden technical issues that I would have never picked up on with my $9.00 GFCI tester. My customers are very important to me and I want them to be well informed of the condition of the existing electrical wiring in their future home.

I remember one day when I was inspecting an older condo that had 100 Amp aluminum wiring. I was using the 3-light GFCI tester to test the receptacles and was noticing that the tester lights were flickering on & off whenever I plugged into an outlet. I informed my client that all the outlets had loose wiring behind the covers, and recommended an electrician correct these ASAP. I continued onto my next Inspection and noticed that the same light flickering was happening on my tester. I went and retrieved my newer tester and (guess what?)no flickering. The GFCI tester that I had been using had loose connections inside the tester itself. Now I carry three of these testers.

Well, I thank you all so much for your professional opinions. I'm now in the market for a Suretest. Anybody know of any better deals than what Robert has posted?
Basic SureTest: http://www.goodmart.com/products/83257.htm
AFCI SureTest: http://www.goodmart.com/products/229815.htm
I find these to be the cheapest so far.

![](upload://hEtJcNgA0ArthjVeFzI3Yw6AkMb.gif)


--
David Valley
MAB Member

Massachusetts Certified Home Inspections
http://www.masscertified.com

"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go."

Originally Posted By: gbeaumont
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Hi Dave, I’ll show you mine if you show me yours icon_lol.gif icon_lol.gif


but seriously, do you still have the copy of the www.toolexperts.com brochure from the New England nachi meeting, in it they have the ST1 for $99.50, the ST1P for $209.95 and the ST1D for $309.95.

I don't know if they will still honor this pricing as the offer ended to us on Jan 1st but it's worth a shot.

Regards

Gerry


--
Gerry Beaumont
NACHI Education Committee
e-mail : education@nachi.org
NACHI phone 484-429-5466

Inspection Depot Education
gbeaumont@inspectiondepot.com

"Education is a journey, not a destination"

Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



One question about the legalese jive with the sure test. Is it in our SOP to check for voltage drop, line load, etc? Or, is that considered technically exhaustive.


I am not worried about whether the three light tester is something a homeowner can buy, most don't, and they can buy a sure test, fluke or anything else they want.

I know a lawyer (from the firm Dewey, Stikkem and Howe) who would love to tear into that type of a case. If someone was suing because the gas line wouldn't handle the BTU capacity of the house, or the floor wouldn't handle the load, he would tear right into why the standard for electric was exceeded, but not the standard for floor, gas lines, plumbing, etc. The way lawyers work, I fear we would lose on that account, especially in front of the type jury that gives $2 million to an idiot that puts hot coffee in her lap then drives off, spills it and burns herself.

And, I do go above the standard in HVAC by using an amp clamp on the strip heaters. So I can be really torn apart for that by ANY good lawyer.

Just had to take the other side for provocative thought. ![icon_biggrin.gif](upload://iKNGSw3qcRIEmXySa8gItY6Gczg.gif)


Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



… I do try to help where I can. As an instructor I think given enough time and effort, most people can learn just about anything. But things like circuit harmonics are well beyond a home inspection.


Consider the difference between the two types of equipment from one manufacturer, and how they are described:

Receptacle Tester: http://www.goodmart.com/products/83321.htm
Circuit Analyzer: http://www.goodmart.com/products/229815.htm

Gerry ... A lot of those old Suretest models don't really check everything you may want if you are going the high-end analyzer route, and have been superceded by the newer Ideal 61-154/155 Suretest models.

http://www.idealindustries.com/tm/SureTest.nsf

I hate to disappoint you ... ![icon_lol.gif](upload://zEgbBCXRskkCTwEux7Bi20ZySza.gif) ... I didn't want to get into another philosophical debate about testing equipment here. We hashed this out under one of the general topics on equipment. So I just gave both sides, and my opinion.

I tend to agree with Mike that the best "tools" you have do not need to be purchased ...


--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee

I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



P.S. I really wish there was a “Harry Homeowner” grade outlet tester like the GB SureWire that also checked for a false/bootleg ground. Then this one would be a no-brainer.



Robert O’Connor, PE


Eagle Engineering ?


Eagle Eye Inspections ?


NACHI Education Committee


I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: gbeaumont
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.





I agree with your coment about the limitations of the older style suretester, but i still prefer that over the 3 light plug in's. i do want to invest in a more modern circuit analyzer, especialy as AFCI's are becomming more common. I am just waiting to see them proven in the field, as some of the first ones were not that reliable or accurate.

Blaine

No our standard of practice does not require you to check for voltage drop (nor does anyone elses) and I for one would not be reporting voltages drop figures anyway. I use a suretest just to get a better handle on the general state of the branch circuit wiring, so if need be I can recomend that the system be evaluated by a licensed professional. I see it as a tool that helps me make better recomendations and therefore reduces my potential liabilities.

Regards

Gerry


--
Gerry Beaumont
NACHI Education Committee
e-mail : education@nachi.org
NACHI phone 484-429-5466

Inspection Depot Education
gbeaumont@inspectiondepot.com

"Education is a journey, not a destination"

Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Gerry … Let me put it this way. I agree about the $5 “night light” testers. But I think the better grade standard outlet testers will check out just about everything you might want, except something like a bootleg ground which is easy to visually spot check when you see 3-prong outlets on 2-wire systems. Better grade outlet testers like the GB SureWire will check for:


Normal Wiring
Open Hot
Open Neutral
Hot/Neutral Reversed
Hot/Ground Reversed
GFI Opperation
Bad Ground (Resistance)

If you really are so inclined, you can check for poor hot/neutral wires/connectors and other things like voltage drop when combined with a "Harry Homeowner" multi-meter. But just like the circuit analyzer, interpretation of the results requires professional judgement on electrical matters well beyond a home inspection.

So as part of a "limited visual observation that is not technically exhaustive", what then do you really need a circuit analyzer to check for beyond the better grade outlet tester, other than a bootleg ground which is easy to visually spot check?

(You are really sucking me into this one, aren't you ... lol)


--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee

I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: bhendry
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Robert - would you indulge me for a moment?


I was pondering all the possible combinations of wiring error that could occur with a 3-wire receptacle. There are dozens of errors just swapping the conductors around, then swapping them around while leaving some disconnected.

With this scenario, a device like the suretest doesn't tell you much. But it tells you more than other go/no-go testers; there is just more no-go's available with the suretest.

I want to be able to say that any go/no-go tester that plugs into the wall outlet will be visual and not technically exhaustive.

Wouldn't technically exhaustive be more toward identifying arcing that occurs with an unusual temperature, humidity and loads? Or the problems with chemistry of insulation and paint?

I believe Gerry's point of view on the tester issue is most appropriate.

Oops, low beer light.

Bill Hendry
352-242-2278
www.HandyHomeInspections.com


Originally Posted By: jpeck
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



bwiley wrote:
One question about the legalese jive with the sure test. Is it in our SOP to check for voltage drop, line load, etc? Or, is that considered technically exhaustive.


Not considered "technically exhaustive.


Quote:
I know a lawyer (from the firm Dewey, Stikkem and Howe) who would love to tear into that type of a case. If someone was suing because the gas line wouldn't handle the BTU capacity of the house, or the floor wouldn't handle the load, he would tear right into why the standard for electric was exceeded


The standard is not being "exceeded". You CAN'T EXCEED the standards because they allow, do not disallow, going above and beyond what is spelled out, and, thus, nothing "exceeds" the standards, because "it's allowed".

If the sign says "speed limit 55 mph" you can exceed that.

If the sign says "minimum speed 40 mph", then you cannot "exceed" that. It's a "minimum". Now, doing "less than 40 mph" could get you in trouble, just as doing less than the SoP says could.

Any decent attorney could whup up on that attorney by offering even just a smattering of the alternatives available beyond "the minimum" requirements of an SoP.


--
Jerry Peck
South Florida

Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Quote:
Not considered "technically exhaustive.


2.7.II.O: Inspector is not required to "Conduct drop voltage calculations"


Quote:
If the sign says "speed limit 55 mph" you can exceed that.


You can, and you can also get busted. I have. And lemme tellya, the fines add up for every stinking mph over 55. And the insurance goes up.

The first thing any lawyer worth their fee (not that many are) will do is find out if the inspector adhered to the standards. If you exceed the standard in one area (unless you are licensed) you will be asked why standards were not exceeded in other areas. All a lawyer has to do is plant a seed of doubt that you didn't adhere to the standards and your case will be difficult to defend.

I understand that you are a certified electrical inspector, and I have learned many things from your technical posts, but most inspectors weak areas are usually either electric or HVAC. They should not be carrying a piece of equipment that they can't explain all of the functions of, and the meaning of those functions.

Personally, I would like to have as Robert said.

Quote:
I really wish there was a "Harry Homeowner" grade outlet tester like the GB SureWire that also checked for a false/bootleg ground. Then this one would be a no-brainer.



Originally Posted By: jpeck
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Blaine,


You missed what I said.

Quote:


I said:

If the sign says "speed limit 55 mph" you can exceed that.

If the sign says "minimum speed 40 mph", then you cannot "exceed" that. It's a "minimum". Now, doing "less than 40 mph" could get you in trouble, just as doing less than the SoP says could


Now, this is what it means.

"If the sign says "speed limit 55 mph" you can exceed that." That is giving you a maximum, and you can exceed a maximum by even just a little bit (say, 51 mph) or a lot. This relates to that attorney looking for people who "exceed" SoPs. It is only possible to "exceed" an SoP if the SoP is a maximum.

"If the sign says "minimum speed 40 mph", then you cannot "exceed" that. It's a "minimum". " That is giving you a minimum, and you can never exceed a minimum, by any amount. You can do "less than the minimum", but you cannot do "more than the minimum" because the minimum is just the starting place, not an ending place.

You may have to read that a few times to understand the way I am using "but you cannot do "more than the minimum" because it has two meanings, and my meaning it the rarely used one.

I'll try this:

1) You have to go at least from Point A to Point B.

2) You must go from Point A to Point B.

In 1), you go from Point A to Point B and to wherever you want past Point B, but you must to at least to Point B. That's like a minimum SoP, which is what SoP are minimums. That means you can go as far as you want, there is not limit to exceed.

In 2), You can go from Point A to Point B, and you are not allowed to go past Point B. That would be like a maximum limit, one that you can exceed, but should not.

Did any of those clear up what I was saying?


--
Jerry Peck
South Florida

Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Wait! I changed my mind about recommending the Ideal SureTest Analyzers … icon_cool.gif


http://www.nachi.org/bbsystem/usrimages/IdealSpecial.GIF

Jerry ... I follow what you are saying, but you are getting caught up in semantics and missing Blaine's point. If you are spending some $200 more just to have a better grade plug in tester, that's fine and your money to spend. But if you are getting the SureTest to evaluate the home's electrical system and "get a better handle on the general state of the branch circuit wiring" then you could be on a very slippery slope.

If you are going to go above and beyond the SOP on the electrical system, then you had better step up the overall level of your inspection to be consistent. Otherwise lawyers could have a field day with you.

If you are going to evaluate the electrical system (forgetting about the possible violation of state electrical licensing laws), then you had better also get yourself some impact-echo equipment to better evaluate the overall condition of concrete foundations as just one example (again forgetting about state licensing laws on engineering).


--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee

I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Robert,


I'm just going to ad a caveat to my posts in the future that says something like.

This is my opinion and I will stick by it, Unless Robert O'connor says differently!! ![icon_lol.gif](upload://zEgbBCXRskkCTwEux7Bi20ZySza.gif) ![icon_lol.gif](upload://zEgbBCXRskkCTwEux7Bi20ZySza.gif) I just couldn't get my brain engaged to make the point you just made succinctly.

Thanks


Originally Posted By: jpeck
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



roconnor wrote:
If you are going to go above and beyond the SOP on the electrical system, then you had better step up the overall level of your inspection to be consistent. Otherwise lawyers could have a field day with you.


Robert,

No, you apparently did not get my point.

With SoPs being minimums, you cannot exceed the SoP. You are expected to exceed the minimum (you must at least 'meet' it, anything less and you have failed to provide even the minimum) standards as stated in the SoP, it is a MINIMUM, and thus has no built-in upper limit.

Quote:
If you are going to evaluate the electrical system (forgetting about the possible violation of state electrical licensing laws)


You went over the deep end there, Robert.

What are you doing with your three light tester? Attempting to evaluate the electrical system. Guess we'd better go back to using small lamps with two-wire cords and two prong plugs, checking only for "Is it working 'On' and 'Off'?"

Quote:
then you had better also get yourself some impact-echo equipment to better evaluate the overall condition of concrete foundations as just one example (again forgetting about state licensing laws on engineering).


Are you certified for deep sea diving? That's how far over the deep end you just went. ![icon_smile.gif](upload://b6iczyK1ETUUqRUc4PAkX83GF2O.gif)

Here, I'll try this, something we all deal with all the time.

We are inspecting a new house, the code requires GFCI protection for the bathrooms, right?

Okay, based on your logic, you just did a code inspection. (But that was not my point, it follows.)

The builder, in the example above (missing GFCI protection) did not meet minimum code, did they?

Now, a question (I am hoping that this will help on understanding what I am saying): Can the builder exceed the building code?

They put GFCI protection on the bathroom receptacles, they also decided to put GFCI protection on all receptacles. DID the builder EXCEED the code, or did they just meet it (hint, to meet code you must do at least the minimum required.

If you answered 'Yes, the builder EXCEEDED the code', go to the next question, otherwise, you have successfully passed this test.

The code allows for more, so how can it be exceeded? Please explain, in 250 words or less.


--
Jerry Peck
South Florida

Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



jpeck wrote:
What are you doing with your three light tester? Attempting to evaluate the electrical system.

Jerry ... No, that's the point. Evaluating the electrical system is up to a licensed electrical professional.

I think comparing building codes to home inspections is not a good analogy. I like to think of home inspectors being similar to a family doctor. Based on symptoms, overall observations, and a few basic checks they will make an assesment based on general medical knowledge and experience as to what your general condition is and if you need to see a specialist. If they started doing only one type of specialized test and they were wrong, they would be sued so fast it would make your head spin.

But more importantly, no one has offered any specific significant wiring defect within the scope of a home inspection that a high-end circuit analyzer would be used to detect that would not be picked up by a good visual observation, supplemented by a better grade plug in tester and a few outlet spot checks.

We have gone a few rounds on the specialized testing before, and I think we just have different viewpoints. There is no clear agreement with HI's on this issue either. So I will just stick to giving both sides, and my opinion. Plus I was really hoping to suck Gerry in on this one, but he dropped the bomb and then bailed ... ![icon_lol.gif](upload://zEgbBCXRskkCTwEux7Bi20ZySza.gif)

(PS ... yes, I am a certified diver ... skydiver and harley drag racer also, in case you were curious ... )


--
Robert O'Connor, PE
Eagle Engineering ?
Eagle Eye Inspections ?
NACHI Education Committee

I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: roconnor
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Oops … 3-bulb beer light tester is indicating low. Hmmmm … maybe I should do a full breathalyzer to evaluate my BAC prior to any excersion to consume more alcoholic beverages with my companions … naw, I’m just going out for a few buds … icon_wink.gif



Robert O’Connor, PE


Eagle Engineering ?


Eagle Eye Inspections ?


NACHI Education Committee


I am absolutely amazed sometimes by how much thought goes into doing things wrong

Originally Posted By: jpeck
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Richard,


jpeck wrote:
What are you doing with your three light tester? Attempting to evaluate the electrical system.

Jerry ... No, that's the point. Evaluating the electrical system is up to a licensed electrical professional.

If testing the receptacle outlet with a SureTest is "evaluating the electrical system", so it testing the receptacle with a cheap three light tester, you are just doing a lesser "evaluation".

That means "NO TOOLS OR TEST EQUIPMENT" ... for anything.

That logic also means that if you look for one code item (i.e., GFCI protection) then you must be doing a Code Inspection.


--
Jerry Peck
South Florida

Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Jerry, I understand your point. Do we look any more knowledgeable to our buyers or flashier just because we have a piece of equipment that we don’t use many of the functions of, or how many functions are on the SureTest that we wouldn’t normally use?


Just to also play devil's advocate here for a second, our "minimum" standards require us to test and report on the operation (among other things) of GFCI's that are present. The standards say nothing about us telling the client they have to be there, which is what the county code dude would do. So we're not really checking a code item there, right?


Originally Posted By: psabados
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Sorry guys


Jerry's absolutely correct on that one. What it boils down to is that a receptacle tester is an evaluation piece of equipment. The circuit sniffer or idiot light is basically the same thing, only it looks for the hot lead. They're all testing devices. Some provide a little more information then others and none are invasive.

Can't argue that one ![icon_wink.gif](upload://ssT9V5t45yjlgXqiFRXL04eXtqw.gif)

Good point Jerry, I'm with you on that one

Paul