Re: Any drawbacks to X-10 Pro XPCR?

["Jeff Volp" <JeffVolp@xxxxxxx>]

The older Leviton repeater was the 6201.  I have two sitting on the shelf
today.  One was used at our last house, and it did better than a .1uF
capacitor.  However, due to its transformerless supply, the amount of power
it can deliver is limited, and it can't compete with the many "signal
suckers" found in the average home today.  As Bruce said, it also had issues
with X10 codes that deviated from the fixed 22-bit format.  Leviton replaced
that model with the HCA02, but there were still reports that dimming didn't
work properly.

Dimming is one thing I took pains with in the XTB-IIR.  After the first dim
(which is repeated like all other X10 commands), every sequential dim is
also repeated.  Extended commands are not "repeated" to avoid the
possibility of collisions.  However, they are transmitted and received in
their entirety through either the digital I/O port or the X10 Input
receptacle.  An earlier version of the firmware did repeat the "standard
format" portion of an extended command, but even that had to be eliminated
because of conflicts with certain Leviton devices.

Jeff

"BruceR" <razrbruce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:483628b6$0$30168$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> The XPCR is the older and more costly version of Leviton's repeater. If
> this were 1989 I'd say go for it but it's not and there are far superior
> devices available now. The XPCR will not handle dims properly, or extended
> codes or even Leviton's HC line of X10 devices. There are other
> repeaters/boosters/couplers that have become available and over the years
> I have tried them all.  There is ONLY one that stands far and above the
> others and really solves virtually all X10 signal problems. It is the
> XTB-IIR from Jeff Volp.  Don't bother wasting your money on anything else.
> You can buy one directly from Jeff Volp at
> http://jeffvolp.home.att.net/xtb_files.htm
>
> Stu Alden wrote:
>> They are available on eBay now for a fraction of their price a few
>> years ago.  I was just wondering if they have any drawbacks -- e.g.,
>> do they handle extended codes correctly?  Thanks.
>
>