Question about Cat 7 cable

[reellifetv@hotmail.com]

I'm about to wire up my house, and have decided to run Ethernet cable
pretty much everywhere, using it for both data and audio.

Was originally going to use cat 5, but have instead settled on Cat 7
(which in the UK only appears to be available from Canford). It will
cost quite a lot more, but it's not often I have all my floorboards
up, and I'd like to future-proof as much as I can!

My plan was to run the cat 7 to deep single- and double-gang metal
boxes, to which I'd attach Canford connector plates with holes that
will take either XLR, BNC, phono or BNC sockets. This way I have
flexibility over what to feed to different locations.


One concern is that Cat 7 uses solid core rather than stranded
conductors - will this create problems in connecting to the various
sockets? I've seen reference to needing to connect using a punchdown
block, and I'm not sure how this would work in the setup I'm
envisaging.

This is a bit of a leap into the dark for me, representing quite a big
investment plus a real headache if I put it all in, replaster my walls
and lay the floors, only to find it doesn't work, so I'd be very
keen for any thoughts.

Many thanks,

Chris

[SQLit]

<reellifetv@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107284712.904123.71910@c13g2000cwb.googlegro ups.com...
> I'm about to wire up my house, and have decided to run Ethernet cable
> pretty much everywhere, using it for both data and audio.
>
> Was originally going to use cat 5, but have instead settled on Cat 7
> (which in the UK only appears to be available from Canford). It will
> cost quite a lot more, but it's not often I have all my floorboards
> up, and I'd like to future-proof as much as I can!
>
> My plan was to run the cat 7 to deep single- and double-gang metal
> boxes, to which I'd attach Canford connector plates with holes that
> will take either XLR, BNC, phono or BNC sockets. This way I have
> flexibility over what to feed to different locations.
>
>
> One concern is that Cat 7 uses solid core rather than stranded
> conductors - will this create problems in connecting to the various
> sockets? I've seen reference to needing to connect using a punchdown
> block, and I'm not sure how this would work in the setup I'm
> envisaging.
>
> This is a bit of a leap into the dark for me, representing quite a big
> investment plus a real headache if I put it all in, replaster my walls
> and lay the floors, only to find it doesn't work, so I'd be very
> keen for any thoughts.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Chris

The performance differences between 5-7 in a home would be marginal at best.
IMO
The last class I completed from FLUKE the testing on CAT 6 has not been
completely decided on.
If your interested in future proofing then run conduit.
Only having one manufacture would be enough for me to run to the hills.
For CAT 7 your probably going to need matched cable, plugs, and connectors.
With out testing the completed cables your never going to know if you meet
the CAT 5 standards.

[John O]

> One concern is that Cat 7 uses solid core rather than stranded
> conductors -

Maybe it exists, but I've never seen stranded Cat-rated cable. I'd wager
that Cat7 will use punchdowns exclusively, so get used to them. What you're
going to have trouble with is connectors. Cat7 is not going to use RJ-59
connectors, but every networking device sold today does. So, if you run Cat7
wire, then use Cat6 rated connectors, you might be able to swap them out in
six/seven years when consumer devices start using Cat7.

Leave enough cable in the walls to hande replacing the connectors. FWIW, the
companies that installed Cat5 (instead of the common Cat3) back in the mid
90's were pretty happy when 100BaseT became common. :-)

-John O

[BruceR]

What is RJ-59? I'm only familiar with RJ-45 for ethernet connections.

Cat 7 cable, if it even exists as a standard, is not widely available or
well defined and is not likely to benefit a residential environment.
Best advice I can give is to use that money to have a properly trained
and equipped low voltage contractor do the installation. If you don't
know what you're doing and don't know how, when and why to use punchdown
tools you shouldn't be doing it yourself any more than you'd attempt to
install your own plumbing. It's easy to make mistakes that aren't easily
corrected later.


From:John O
johno@#no^spam&heathkit.com

>> One concern is that Cat 7 uses solid core rather than stranded
>> conductors -
>
> Maybe it exists, but I've never seen stranded Cat-rated cable. I'd
> wager that Cat7 will use punchdowns exclusively, so get used to them.
> What you're going to have trouble with is connectors. Cat7 is not
> going to use RJ-59 connectors, but every networking device sold today
> does. So, if you run Cat7 wire, then use Cat6 rated connectors, you
> might be able to swap them out in six/seven years when consumer
> devices start using Cat7.
> Leave enough cable in the walls to hande replacing the connectors.
> FWIW, the companies that installed Cat5 (instead of the common Cat3)
> back in the mid 90's were pretty happy when 100BaseT became common.
> :-)
> -John O

[John O]

> What is RJ-59? I'm only familiar with RJ-45 for ethernet connections.

Beats me. I don't know what I was thinking. RJ-45 (obviously) is correct.

Sure, the stuff Chris wants to install can't be certified, but that's just
today. Five years from now, he reconnectorizes, and he's blowing us all away
with his petabit Ethernet system. :-)

-John O

[RM]

"John O" <johno@#no^spam&heathkit.com> wrote in message
news:2p5Md.18163$Vj3.10802@newssvr17.news.prodigy. com...
> > What is RJ-59? I'm only familiar with RJ-45 for ethernet connections.
>
> Beats me. I don't know what I was thinking. RJ-45 (obviously) is correct.
>
> Sure, the stuff Chris wants to install can't be certified, but that's just
> today. Five years from now, he reconnectorizes, and he's blowing us all
away
> with his petabit Ethernet system. :-)
>
> -John O
>
Yeah, because we all know those 'smart' toasters are going to need some mega
bandwidth ;-p

Robert

[Mark]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 14:25:02 GMT, "John O" <johno@#no^spam&heathkit.com>
wrote:

>> What is RJ-59? I'm only familiar with RJ-45 for ethernet connections.
>
>Beats me. I don't know what I was thinking. RJ-45 (obviously) is correct.

RG-59 is thin coax with, I believe, 75ohm impedance. Perhaps you were getting
the two confused?

[wkearney99]

> One concern is that Cat 7 uses solid core rather than stranded
> conductors

I've never seen any Cat-5 using stranded for *in-wall* cabling. Station
cables, sure, but never for the in-wall wiring.

Given the limited distances in most residences it seems like wasted money to
install anything more than CAT-5. Even Gig-E will run over it. It's highly
unlikely anything in a residential environment will need anything more than
that sort of bandwidth. It's also likely that any as-yet-developed
technologies will be engineered to work with it. You're certainly free to
install it but the added cost really seems like a waste.

Also, is this being professionally installed? If so then make sure they
give you final testing reports. If you're going to shell out extra for
CAT-7 then you'd be foolish to not have it TESTED to be sure.

> I've seen reference to needing to connect using a punchdown
> block, and I'm not sure how this would work in the setup I'm
> envisaging.

Perhaps you should explain what you're thinking of installing.

I find it's always a good plan to terminate the wire at the central location
into a fixed location. Either as a patch panel with 110 on the back and
RJ45 on the front or to 66 blocks and then cross-connect to RJ45 panels.
This guarantees no wiring changes done at the central location will EVER
need to move or otherwise risk damage to the in-wall wiring. While added
punch down or other blocks may add cost, they're a heckuva lot cheaper than
having to re-run wire.

Some folks think "they'll never move the equipment" and try running the wire
straight out of the wall into the various bits of hardware. As they replace
failed or obsolete equipment or rearrange things for better performance the
handling of the cable ends up breaking or otherwise degrading the
connection. This is a pain in the ass to debug and even worse to have to
replace.

At the wall socket side I generally like to leave *at least* 18" of spare
cable inside the wall cavity. This to allow for the inevitable replacement
of a socket. Leaving extra length allows trimming it back for reattaching
new connectors. Again, this is usually a lot cheaper than re-running cable.

When you do run wire be sure to leave a string between the openings and the
top/bottom of the stud walls and other chases. No sense in making it harder
on yourself WHEN you need to install more wire. Pushing fish tape into a
place that already has cables risks damaging the existing wires, pulling a
string is usually a lot easier.

For really tricky installs with lots of turns and such it's usually a good
idea to consider using conduit and access panels. You don't "have" to do it
but if you ever need to run more wire you may regret not leaving easy ways
to get at the tricky spots.

-Bill Kearney

[reellifetv@hotmail.com]

Thanks everybody for your thoughts.

After much consideration (and researching the additional cost of CAT7,
termination and cable), I've decided on Cat 6 instead, with a few
dormant runs of Cat 7 'just in case'.

Regards,

Chris

[BruceR]

Since Cat7 specs are not finalized you might be better served with
flexible conduit runs with pull strings. By the time you need it you may
end up wanting something even newer or even fiber.

From:reellifetv@hotmail.com
reellifetv@hotmail.com

> Thanks everybody for your thoughts.
>
> After much consideration (and researching the additional cost of
> CAT7, termination and cable), I've decided on Cat 6 instead, with a
> few dormant runs of Cat 7 'just in case'.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris

[wkearney99]

"BruceR" <brNOSPAM@hawaii.com> wrote in message
news:3twMd.7217$e11.2319@twister.socal.rr.com...
> Since Cat7 specs are not finalized you might be better served with
> flexible conduit runs with pull strings. By the time you need it you may
> end up wanting something even newer or even fiber.

Given the costs of fiber interfaces it's highly unlikely most residential
situations will ever need to bother with it. The costs for connectors,
wall-plates and distribution points are outrageously overpriced compared to
copper. Fiber 'seems' like a cool idea but in practice it's often a
complete waste of time and money in a room-to-room residential situation.
The only time I'd ever suggest someone use fiber is for runs to
outbuildings. Fiber being non-conductive makes for a much safer way to
network between buildings (no lightning strikes or phase problems). That
and the cost of media conversion from fiber to copper is only necessary at
each end (not at individual workstation points). If you use VOIP for telco
service it's even better since you won't need to run copper pairs for
phones.

I agree with the other point, when possible it's always a great idea to run
conduit. But even without conduit leaving spare pull strings should ALWAYS
be considered.