Ethernet coupler or punch down?

[ITGuyNW]

Hi all

 

Doing some network cable runs and I'm looking at using couplers instead of the normal punch downs. Any reason not to? All seems too easy..

[synaesthesia]

For what purpose? Couplers are for temporary fixes only really - signal degradation plus 2 additional points of failure

[aydee]

Do you mean Keystones? is in on the wall plates and in the patch panel?

 

I prefer to use Keystones, way easier to sort out; i can put one on the end of each run in the cabinet, and then clip them into the patch panel one at a time, if i get the order wrong, i can just undo it ad move it around in seconds, rather than minutes.

[Olliedawg]

I'd only use a coupler as a quick fix, much better to do a proper termination. As above its extra points of failure, possible signal degradation / interference

[Davit2005]

If you are talking about putting a RJ45 on the end of solid cable in a patch panel then using keystone couplers I'd defo be looking at punch down instead. Personally find punching down far easier than crimping plugs, my fingers are not designed for the latter :-)

 

Besides, clips can get damaged on the ends of cables leading to failed connections.

 

And you have an extra point of failure as others have mentioned.

[Aprice]

punch downs, however joints should be avoided wherever possible.

[ITGuyNW]

Do you mean Keystones? is in on the wall plates and in the patch panel?

 

I prefer to use Keystones, way easier to sort out; i can put one on the end of each run in the cabinet, and then clip them into the patch panel one at a time, if i get the order wrong, i can just undo it ad move it around in seconds, rather than minutes.

 

Yeah keystones sorry, I always call them couplers

[Chris_Cook]

Its not so much of an issue these days with modern RJ45 connectors, but in the past the IDC style punch down connectors were better suited to solid core cable, and RJ45 to stranded cable. RJ45 plugs on solid core tend to fail over time unless the connection is really well supported.

 

Personally I prefer to use IDC/punch down where-ever possible, and keystones are much quicker although double the cost for the parts). I think the time you save with keystones pays for itself quickly and means panels can be re-organised in the future if needed, or if the endpoint isn't known at install time. Normal modules are ok for the desktop end.

 

Pass-through RJ45s are amazing though. I wouldn't bother with the old style.

 

The couplers that go in panels are more suited to AV racks where there might be a patch cable to the back of a bit of kit deep in the back of the rack and you just want to present it on the front panel.

[ITGuyNW]

So general consensus is punch down yeah? Cheers!

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

Its not so much of an issue these days with modern RJ45 connectors, but in the past the IDC style punch down connectors were better suited to solid core cable, and RJ45 to stranded cable. RJ45 plugs on solid core tend to fail over time unless the connection is really well supported.

 

Personally I prefer to use IDC/punch down where-ever possible, and keystones are much quicker although double the cost for the parts). I think the time you save with keystones pays for itself quickly and means panels can be re-organised in the future if needed, or if the endpoint isn't known at install time. Normal modules are ok for the desktop end.

 

Pass-through RJ45s are amazing though. I wouldn't bother with the old style.

 

The couplers that go in panels are more suited to AV racks where there might be a patch cable to the back of a bit of kit deep in the back of the rack and you just want to present it on the front panel.

 

Passthrough RJ45s changed my life, literally.

[synaesthesia]

 

Passthrough RJ45s changed my life, literally.

 

So many people have it in for them for reasons I neither understand nor care. Like you and many others, they have absolutely revolutionised terminating for me! It's still a PITA, but far less than it was before, especially with aging, slowing and ever-widening fingers!

[DavR]

I bought some of these just recently, as I need to repair a couple of cable runs that have been damaged - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/381501842274

 

Punch down looked the way forward, rather than having those additional points of failure. Glad to see the general consensus agrees!

[DavR]

So many people have it in for them for reasons I neither understand nor care. Like you and many others, they have absolutely revolutionised terminating for me! It's still a PITA, but far less than it was before, especially with aging, slowing and ever-widening fingers!

 

Going off topic, I know, but....

 

I think the argument against pass-thru is that you can leave trailing wires, which can short out, even cause fire in certain applications. Bit of a reach for most applications, but....

 

I'm curious though - what is the benefit you're getting from pass-thrus?

[synaesthesia]

If there's anything trailing from them, there is a lazy user issue coupled with a bad equipment issue The ends would be entirely flush with the connector, risk from shorting them unless they've been left dangling for whatever reason is extremely low. And frankly, there's already exposed copper on the connectors which is as per their design, so the risk is already there. And they're so much easier to fit, as you can leave a longer length of cable which in turn makes it far easier to guide all 8 into the correct slots, slide it down to the cable sheath and bobs you're uncle Edited March 25, 2024 by synaesthesia

[Chris_Cook]

I'm curious though - what is the benefit you're getting from pass-thrus?

 

It saves you from having to cut the inner cables to precisely the right length to get the cable clamp in the right place. This reduces the mechanical stress on the pins.

 

You can also twist the inner wires together (after passing through the plug) so that when you crimp and cut you have one thing to pick up rather than lots of little bits of wire flying everywhere - leaves a much tidier job.

[jthompson]

I seem to remember punching down two cables onto a single ethernet module as another quick and dirty way to extend a cable.

[Aprice]

Personally not a fan of pass thru RJ45s. Once you've done a couple of hundred of the normal ones it just becomes second nature. Also found them to be a bit more reliable, especially if there's any risk of moisture.

 

That said for new starters the pass thru is likely easier. Main pinch point for me is the ends fouling when trying to get the RJ45 into the crimps, closely followed by the ends not cutting close enough to the body of the RJ45

[Olliedawg]

Personally not a fan of pass thru RJ45s. Once you've done a couple of hundred of the normal ones it just becomes second nature. Also found them to be a bit more reliable, especially if there's any risk of moisture.

 

That said for new starters the pass thru is likely easier. Main pinch point for me is the ends fouling when trying to get the RJ45 into the crimps, closely followed by the ends not cutting close enough to the body of the RJ45

 

I prefer the standard RJ45's too. Pass throughs can be nice and easy as long as you have a good crimping tool to cut the ends off with. But like you say, once you've done a load of the normal ones, it becomes a breeze.

 

I have never had an issue with any pass throughs i've done, but they've never been in places which could get wet/moist etc..