FACEPLATES EXPOSED :)

[g7pkf]

My testing is over here's the out come

FACEPLATES EXPOSED

and heres direct links to some sites


solwise

Austin Taylor

Maplin

adsl nation

would appreciate any comments.

[DorsetBoy]

The Maplin (Commatel) filter is only intended on a standard non filtered plate.

I ran one for 2.5 years before BT changed and moved my master socket to a filtered unit. I saw zero performance loss and never had any issues with it at all.

[Steve]

So double filtering in this situation is no good.

[g7pkf]

The Maplin (Commatel) filter is only intended on a standard non filtered plate.

It was tested on a standard nte5 faceplate NOT A FILTERED PLATE.

[Steve]

So two surge protectors are not better than one when it comes to adsl performance.

[DorsetBoy]

Surge protectors can badly affect adsl throughput, A lot of people would tell you to remove them all.

Certainly the last thing you need is extra joints and connections in your line.

[DorsetBoy]

It was tested on a standard nte5 faceplate NOT A FILTERED PLATE.

Fair enough, maybe the unit you have is faulty, as I said I used one for 2.5 years, it now sits connected in my neighbours house on his gaming rigs.

[g7pkf]

Maybe it is faulty pretty poor show if it is, i suspect it's more to do with the fact that i have a very long line and being an active device it uses some of the power from my line and being a long line it adversly has an impact on the adsl/noise echo etc.

i

[g7pkf]

Oh i have just added another photo of a "real" surge protection device from 20 years ago.

works in a similar way to the maplin one, used to be used on alarm diallers

[Rik]

Nice work, Dean. 

[Tacitus]

Nice work, Dean. 

I agree and although I haven't done the same in-depth testing it does concur with my thoughts.  I used to recommend the ADSL Nation filter but they are the only ones I've known to fail, (both  mine and a neighbour's failed) possibly because they use active components. 

The Austin Taylor one seemed marginally worse than the others, so at present I'm using a Clarity/BT filter, which seems as good as any.  The BT engineer I had recently told me they have moved to a different type but couldn't give me a name or any idea of what they were currently using.

[Rik]

Perhaps he was thinking of the vDSL ones?

[Tacitus]

Perhaps he was thinking of the vDSL ones?

May have been   

[Steve]

Perhaps he was thinking of the vDSL ones?

There's a contradiction there: 'BT engineer' and 'thinking'

[Rik]

True. How silly of me.

[kinmel]

There's a contradiction there: 'BT engineer' and 'thinking'

I wish companies would stop calling their technicians "Engineer", there is a very wide difference between the two

[Rik]

Especially at Sky.

[Tacitus]

I wish companies would stop calling their technicians "Engineer", there is a very wide difference between the two

Sadly, despite being a Chartered Engineer (Civil) I've lapsed into doing it myself 

[Rik]

You, civil, Tac?

[Tacitus]

You, civil, Tac?

Politeness personified ....   

[Rik]

 

[armadillo]

Thanks for an interesting comparison, g7pkf.

I am particularly interested in your findings on the Commatel (Maplins) surge protector, which, as you know had no effect on sync, noise margin or throughput on my line with my Netgear DG834.

However, I have just posted an observation which you may find relevant and you may want to comment.

http://www.idnetters.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=22736.msg546509#msg546509

It describes a situation in which the Commatel filter is more susceptible to noise and perhaps you have noise sources in a corresponding frequency range.

I like the ancient surge protector you have shown too!

My BT master socket may also be an ancient relic. It is at least 30 years old, has just one socket on the front, no sockets behind the faceplate and it is 50mm square. I am not sure if the Commatel adds any strength to whatever surge protection may already be in the original BT socket, if indeed such protection still works at all.