Ski

and if it didn't work, why have some many people raved over the kit? One is sitting in my garage, when the engine swap happens, it will go in.

Dave951

The real testament to welding cable working fine as a battery cable is how many people have used Icesharks/Robbys kits over the years with nothing but excellent reviews. Can't wait until I install mine.

billthe3

The only thing I can see being an issue with the welding cable (as I'm having this problem) is that the welding cable doesn't have any EMI shielding and can screw with the signals in other wires nearby. In particular the stereo - I'm having to move my stereo wires like 10" away from the battery cable to get there to be no EMI.

Bri Bro

Sounds like you have a noisy alternator.

mtnman82

Correct me if I'm wrong (please), but I don't believe the stock battery cables have EMI shielding (i.e. a braided shield wire around the positive cables).

Bri Bro

It doesn't...I have never seen a shielded battery cable.

CPR

Here is the "official", by the book, try not to go to sleep, ask me how I know,yes I do this for a living response. My real take is at the bottom. Hope this clears it up

There are two primary reasons that the cables cannot be "officially" recommended for use:

#1. Newer welding cables typically have an insulation class of EPDM (Ethylene-propylene-diene elastomer). Pursuant to the ANSI, NEC and Regulating NFPA Article(s) 310.8 (C)(2)(3), 310.9, 310.13(A)-thru-Table 310.13(E), 310.13fpn, Article 400, Article 630 and Underwriters Laboratory Standards of Submittance this cable is not approved for use in the OP's application.

#2.The degradation rate of exposed fine strand is more pronounced than in a heavier gauge, say 19 strand/14awg. The potential for corrosion to exist and expand at an exposed termination or at a compromised insulation entry point and thus accelerate the conductors inability to properly carry and contain said load. Conductors of this state would present a potential for fire and/or shock hazard, component damage and/or malfunction.

#3. Conductors that are utilised and installed in any application that they are not specifically listed and identified for shall be deemed a negligent and willful act of the owner, contractor, mechanic or other.

Clarifications for #1:
While the cable is accpetable for limited corrosive environments as outlined in Article 310.9, it is not approved for continuous (whether through potential or execution) corrosive conditions that would exist through definition AND potential under the hood of an automobile. The cable is also not approved for use in a wet location as defined in Article 100 and again in Article 310.8 (C)(2). Excessive exposure to moisture coupled with the expansion and contraction principles of continuous or intermittent heating and cooling of said cable could cause the insulation to become, in time, brittle and deteriorate. The cable is however listed for "moisture resistance".

Clarifications for #2:
Small, finite strands sometimes have a tendency to "escape" their termination point. This can be a result of a bad crimp, unequal strand lengths, bad connector, etc..The resulting "free" conductor(s) will have a typically faster corrosion rate. Whether it be by arc proximity/execution, environmental or induced. Ultimately transposing itself, usually through a means of dielectric corrosion to the residual conductor.

Clarifications #3:
The governing concern here is that IF and accident occured, and it was found that suspect wiring was to blame, AND the wiring, cables or conductors were not properly suited (listed and identified) for that purpose the insurance company, courts or otherwise could rule negligence on the owner. Obviously the potential of a denied claim or worse, lawsuit could be catastrophic.

With that said, I think the ICESHARK kit is a very well put together kit, exuding true craftsmanship and professionalism. The results and reviews that I have read here, have been nothing short of stellar. The designer has done an absolute terrific job of putting together a very good replacement part together for a otherwise issue prone area.

Tom M'Guinn

Patrick, thanks for all that. I guess time will tell if corrosion becomes an issue for these cables. I agree with everyone here, that these are well built high quality cables -- I have had them in my car for several years and mine still seem new. The factory cables certainly did not look so good after 16 some odd years in the car. Somehow, I suspect these will last at least that long.

I did read somewhere else that welding wire insulation is more combustable compared to auto cables, though I don't know if there is any truth to that?

As for negligence, since these cables were sold to large numbers of people for specifically this purpose (and since is it not reasonable for joe-consumer to study the ANSI standards before buying car parts), I think it would be quite difficult to show that it is unreasonable to use these cables. Just my opinion, your jury may differ.

CPR

Tom,
I wasn't trying to imply that negligence would come into play. I think this is a great kit and that there was an extreme amount of planning and detail when they were made.

EPDM insulation is not more combustible, just smokes like crazy when ignited. The cross-polymer used to fabricate the insulation has a great temperature rating (155 to -55c) and is extremely pliable. All in all it is a good cable, as is the kit.

I was just trying to provide an inticate amount of detail as to why a TV show can "officially" endorse it for this use.

Tom M'Guinn

Thanks, appreciate your post. I get your point about TV shows not endorsing parts not meeting official standards. Overall, that quote just struck me as curious/odd. I imagine it was aimed at much lesser attempts to make battery cables out of welding wire. I'm keeping mine.

Bri Bro

There are lots of mil and UL standards that were developed to deal with different environments. The true test is if the product will met the standards of the environment it works in. The next test is if there are external regulations that it needs to met.

My two cents:
On the first part, the cables do met the working endowments, they are rated at 105C at load and the data sheet state an application of battery cables. The cables we have are a LARGER wire diameter so they are similar to the replacement cables, there are other P/N that have more strands or small wires. As stated, these are not good for corrosive applications.

When I pulled my cables off the insulation just cracked off when bent, maybe I should try a law suit against Porsche for this. I hope all will agree that replacing 20 year old cables is a very good idea.

CPR, I hear what you are stating. Maybe Robby should be moving to Silicon based insulation from the EPDM cables. But, what is out there is good stuff, much better then the fire hazard of old cables. I have been running the *** out of my car for three years with these cables and they are as good as the day I installed them.

Regulations are fickle, Kaptan was the insulation requirement until a ship fire proved it wasn't what the military wanted. Most military regulations and procedures are written in blood, they don't apply well to commercial applications.

Animus

We use welding cables to test high voltage circuit breakers in substations that we've been installing for wind farms. We use them for very high voltage (5kV) and high current (200A). Its a different size cable, but not that much larger diameter. CPR is right based on the NEC, and many of these are extra security, engineering precautions. I haven't looked into the details on type of conductor and insulation, but I highly suspect its suited for the application. In terms of the many strands, they can causing tiny arcing between the strands, which can corrode a wire faster than one with less strands. I don't think anyone has to worry about this with the Ice Shark kit. Also a copper conductor is rated for a certain temperature, voltage and amperage depending on its size and insulation. If you're going to be running it continuously, the conductor is derated to 80% of its normal rated value. I don't have the wire, but if anyone gives me the specification, I'll see what I can find. keep this in mind: #6 wire which is smaller than the size of my pinky is rated for 60A and 600V with not much insulation...my 2 cents. i had to contribute since what I know about electricty can rattle around in a thimble.

CPR

Alright, I'll try again...

I think it is a great kit I would use it had I not done one in house already...I would, without reserve, recommend the ICESHARK kit.

*Brian Brod, FWIW, the EPDM insulation was designed to be a replacement/improvement over the silicon insulation. Lab tests have proved that they both have their plus and minus, with no clear cut winner. The EPDM insulation is less culpable than silicon at "splitting" near the splice/termination point, which may, in time, prove to be a marked improvement in automobile use.

Bri Bro

CPR: I think your post just came across stronger then you wanted... at least it did to me.

The info on silicon is very interesting, I did a little digging on the web and most of the cable that is sold as battery cable is silicon insulation. Since EPDM is its replacement, its interesting silicon is still used but I guess it depends on what the buyer wants.

billthe3

Just to clarify, the reason I've got EMI issues with my stereo is because I've got the battery in the back of the car now, and have the amps (and wiring) mounted somewhat close to the battery/battery cable.