Re: oye

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Oct 1, 2:21?pm, "Just Looking" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have always thought of Napco wireless as one of the worst. In my
> experience it had the largest transmitter and battery versus range to
> receiver. On many installations I had to go back and install a second
> receiver to stop random fail to report trouble signals, even when the
> placement test said it was at least 4 or better. The wireless trouble signal
> never identified the guilty transmitter, it only gave some generic module
> failure signal and one had to upload the event buffer to find the actual
> wireless transmitter unit with the trouble. A real pain in the ass as far as
> I am concerned.
>
Although .... when I DO use wireless, it's in residential, I've
actually pulled out an Ademco 5800 wireless system that was always
giving signal loss signals and installed a Napco wireless which is
still working reliably to this day. I don't do much commercial anymore
but wouldn't use wireless there anyway. I do wireless installs ( I
think ) different than most people. I do a pre-test on location of all
transmitters and receiver(s) before anything is permanently mounted.
And I don't accept anything less than a field strength of 6.
Occasionally, ( two/three times) I've had to move the receiver from my
first choice location and start over again, but not usually.
Sometimes, in a large house, a second receiver has to be added but
I've never had to use more than two, even with a house that had over
60 transmitters. Actually, now that I think of it, that house had
plaster over wire lath .... at least in some of the walls .... too.


 I find that most people install wireless system and hope for the best
and accept any field strength that happens. If I get a low reading,
either the transmitter or the receiver is moved for a better reading
or a second receiver is added.

 I don't ever have a problem with a wireless installation. Once it's
in, the only way one knows it's a wireless ( other than the presence
of the transmitters) is that the batteries have to be changed. And
I've used Napco since the 90's ( I think that's when it was
introduced ?)

The difference that my method makes is that a wireless system takes
almost as long as a wired system and it cost more to the end user. But
installing a wireless system is usually the choice of the end user
anyway. As long as they're willing to pay for it, I'll install it. But
it's going to be as closely reliable as a wired system, as I can make
it.