OK. Let’s start with the fact that I am well aware of all the ways this is not up to code. I don’t need that lecture- I didn’t do this, and it’s been this way for literally decades.
What I have:
Separate electric cooktop and oven. In the cabinet below the cooktop is a subpanel with three breakers, one 2 phase for cooktop, one for oven, and one single phase for dishwasher. The feed from the early 2000s cooktop (armored cable) makes a direct run to the subpanel. I haven’t opened it yet, but I’ll bet you $50 the feed from the cooktop (supplied by the manufacturer and permanently attached to it) goes right into the breaker.
What happened:
Said cooktop exploded when someone dumped a Metric Shitload of water on it.
What I need to do:
Replace it
Now, I’ve put in more than one of these in my nice, ca 1985 house that was wired right, modern, and all that. But this house is… special. Built around 1940 a lot of creative things have been done. And we’re planning to gut the kitchen in the next year, so I’m really not interested in major surgery at this point. I bought an el cheapo 30" top and just want to make the best of it.
SO: Given it’s managed this way since the early 2000s (we bought the place in 2018), anyone have and suggestions on the best way to make the most of this situation? Should I run a few inches of conduit to a junction box and tie into that? Simply replace what they did? It’s a decent sized sub physically, so I could probably wire nut a junction INSIDE the sub, and have the armor cable properly fastened to that (incidentally, whomever did this just has the cable tucked through a knockout).
Again, I’m happy for discussions about code and why it matters- I generally follow it. But I have to make the most of the mess I have.
Ask and ye shall receive. And I misspoke. They didn’t tuck the armor cable through a knockout. They used a clamp on the wires after they exited the armor. I mean, I’m not an electrician but I certainly know better. And who knew that way back in 1940 they added a service loop of wire tucked into the corner of the cabinet with its completely illegal sub panel*
*Yes, I know it wasn’t illegal back then
*Based on the delightful Murray logo, I’m guessing this was added late 50s early 60s
I actually knew that, which is why I was thinking it might be the easiest way, since I’m pretty sure I can’t just put the whip (thanks for teaching me the name) directly into the breaker, which as I said, I’m 90% sure they did.
I suspect there is a restriction as to the wire type (insulation). Flexible stranded cable is probably not allowed, only solid THHN or THWN. But, I don’t have a code book with me.
So I dug into it today and sure enough, the old stranded wire from the whip went straight into the breaker.
Unless someone tells me I’m nuts, I’m going to proceed (no rush, I got the old one out and I’ll need to get to the store for the proper clamps for the armored cable to the box, since all I have around is regular romex ones)
But it looks like it’s going to be pretty straightforward just to reproduce what was there.
If one of the experts thinks I’d be better off bringing a couple inches of THHN off the breaker lugs and wire nutting them to the whip leads, I’ll do that- there is in fact a ton of room in the box.
Thanks!
ETA: Perhaps one of the nastiest places on earth is the space between a cooktop and the counter after two decades.
All done and uneventful. The wiring is direct to the breaker, and I was careful to make sure I had a nice tight loop around the screw with no flyaways. I suppose that with the clamp on the armorflex and not on the wires themselves I managed at least one upgrade.
Of course, I always have to chime in AFTER a successful bit of work. It is very likely that an electrical inspector would fail this installation if a permit and inspection was required. The subpanel is not “readily accessible” and does not have the required working space (NEC Art. 100). And a thorough pre-sale inspection would probably include a comment to this effect.
The panel could, of course, be considered supplementary overcurrent protection, but it seems unlikely to me. Supplementary overcurrent protection does NOT need to be readily accessible.
As I mentioned in the OP, I’m well aware this is not up to code. I have what I inherited, and now is not the time to run new wires from the basement to the kitchen, find a new place to put the sub, and then run lines from there to three different appliances. It’s managed for 50 years, it should manage for a couple more.
I do my work to code, but sometimes you make do with what you got.
As for permits, I’m in Mass and they can go to hell. They don’t want to let homeowners do almost any work. I have a fundamental problem with that (it is literally illegal for me to replace my own kitchen faucet). Hold me to the standard, but don’t tell me what I can and can’t do in my own house.
Totally understood. I’m fortunate to live in a jurisdiction that will allow an owner to do virtually anything electrical, though a permit is required for substantial work.
It was more my intention to help educate some others about accessibility and working space issues for panels, in addition to the sort of dodgy level of work you had to address.
People never believe me. This state is out of control. The thing is, the enforcement is spotty. My town is really nasty about anything permit related. This, from the state website:
The local plumbing inspector must issue a permit before any plumbing can be installed, altered, removed, replaced, or repaired. Permits for performing plumbing work are issued only to licensed plumbers.
A permit is not required for minor repairs such as fixing a leaky faucet, valve or other working part of a plumbing fixture, or for clearing a blocked drain.
However, these minor repairs do not include replacing or relocating a faucet, valve or other working part of a plumbing fixture, or water supply, sewer, drainage, soil, waste, vent or similar piping, or any work which may affect the public health.
So I have to pay a licensed plumber to replace the kitchen faucet in my sink. Absolutely infuriates me. And, it gives the town an excuse to enter my home and get a look around when they inspect the work.
@LSLGuy made the argument that this is driven by insurance companies, who want an insured professional to go after when someone file a claim. Seems believable to me.
