Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:54 am
by Bfowler
hey zak, you never elaborate (or at least i never saw) on why CCA is bad.
i get that it has 20% less currant capacity as comparable gauge copper, but if you say in those tolerances, why is it bad?
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 11:23 am
by ttocs
Bfowler wrote:hey zak, you never elaborate (or at least i never saw) on why CCA is bad.
i get that it has 20% less currant capacity as comparable gauge copper, but if you say in those tolerances, why is it bad?
x2
Why CCA is bad
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 11:48 am
by caraudiotech
Actually it's closer to 50% more resistive. The short answer is your better off running the next gauge down in copper wire and saving some money than using a CCA wire of the next gauge up. Copper actually works out to be cheaper and performs better if you take into account the current capability.
I put together a real world test and it's on the stinger site for viewing. you can check it out via the link below.
www.stingerelectronics.com
go to the player on the left of the screen and scroll down to the True spec vs CCA link
I have a high res version uploading and i will insert the link when it's completed if you want to have better quality video to watch.
True Spec vs CCA video links
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:05 pm
by caraudiotech
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:07 pm
by Bfowler
i just watched the whole thing! it was pretty informative, but i dont think it really touched on the claim that instead of using 4g cca, you could spend the same amount 8g copper. do you have any more info on that side, becasue i'm not convinced that 4g cca, has less themal capacity then 8g copper.
i guess to quantify my position more. i always used cca as in between gauges. in situations where i wanted more then 8g, but 4g wasnt necessary either.
like at 60-80 amps, i wouldn't feel safe using 8awg (copper or otherwise). but a $30 kit from knu of 4g cca seemed adequate and a decent savings over a 4g copper kit
i'm open to learn though....
Re: True Spec vs CCA video links
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:07 pm
by oldschoolfan
This is a great test and very informative. Thanks.
Copper wire under load via an infrared camera
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:21 pm
by caraudiotech
Here is Copper wire under load via an infrared camera

CCA wire under load via an infrared camera
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:23 pm
by caraudiotech
CCA wire under load via an infrared camera

Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:31 pm
by stipud
Haha well that's a hell of an answer
Is it just me or does the video on youtube get stuck in the latter half?
Price vs Performance for Copper vs CCA
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:39 pm
by caraudiotech
Check out this excerpt from my training presentation: should make it clear enough.....
www.gr8ideaspro.com/copper%20vs%20cca.pdf
Example:
4Ga Stinger True Spec Copper Wire
$2.24 per foot
good for 150A @ 20FT
$0.026per amp
0ga CCA wire
$2.58 per foot
Good for 180A @ 20FT
$0.028 per amp
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:47 pm
by Bfowler
ok, thats at 100amps, which is above what i would run it anyway.
what about a heat map of 8g hpm vs 4g cca at 70amps?
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:56 pm
by caraudiotech
I don't have that specific spec but 80amps is the most I would trust a 20ft run of 8ga copper 70 on the 4ga CCA. So in your situation your right on the edge of either wire. The true dilemma is when the user thinks they are able to support the same load with either, copper or CCA and they use the normal copper ratings for the application. They think, the amp requires 4ga, it doesn't matter what kind of 4ga right? So expecting a 4ga CCA wire to work with a 1500watt amp drawing 150amps because the CCA is cheap just leads to failure of the wire, amp or charging system. As the amp has to draw more amperage to overcome the resistance, the battery and alternator must produce more power that is wasted to heat, and the amplifier has lower voltages, more heat and runs much more lean than a properly supported install. Because you can't educate everyone or keep people from just getting the cheapest solution, the easier route is just to not suggest CCA in any application. But of course if you know the current limitations, it can be used, but typically it is actually a more expensive solution given the current capability.
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 1:02 pm
by Bfowler
that makes sense. thats exactly what i was trying to confirm.
that said, i rarely run cca. i wanted to make sure the previous installs i did with it weren't in danger.
Final Clarification
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 1:05 pm
by caraudiotech
I wanted to add one thing to be clear. I'm not bashing CCA because I don't want you to buy a competitor’s product. We sell CCA kits under our SoundQuest brand which I am also in charge of. My biggest objective is to inform the users of the differences and if there properly informed, they can use the right product in the right situation. I want the installation to go smoothly and work up to its best potential, regardless of who's products are being used. Our industry can't afford to have people dissatisfied and jumping to some other hobby or interest from something that can be easily avoided.... Ok I just think I fell off my soapbox. I'm done

Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 1:06 pm
by caraudiotech
Cool Bfowler, glad I could clear that up for you!
Love the PG quote by the way!
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:29 pm
by Ride Da Fire
I guess I've found a forum that I've been looking for, believe it for not I've learned some good things about wire, battery and amps. I will post my pix when I get my car done. I truly regretted for buying a RF R500.1. Now I have a mix match. I should've get a ZX500 because the guy at the car audio shop told me that zx500 is a monster, he used to have it and he pushed a 15" JL with it.
'