Ethernet cable

[#1]

I have recently bought 25m of ethernet cable.  It is marked "Pluscom Cat5e UTP 4 Pairs 24 AWG Patch Cable".

To my surprise, the wires do not appear to be "Twisted Pairs".  They are staright or appear to be.  I thought that twisted pairs are essential to avoid cross-talk. Have things moved on with Cat5 e from the old days in this respect ?  I also assumed that UTP stands for 'Un-Shielded Twisted Pairs' but maybe it means 'Un-Twisted Pairs'.

Before I start installing the able, I would greatly appreciate any comments because I do not want to have to pull it out.   it is necessary to run the last 5 meters in a conduit shared with a 240 ring main cable - almost impossible to avoid it.  Wil this make any difference.  The remainder of the run will / can be completely isolated from other electrical impulses, although it would be convenient (but not necessary) to bind the ethernet cable to an existing power cable using cable ties for convenience only - I could re-route that part but would prefer not to have to do so.

[#2]

they should be twisted.
how do you know they aren't twisted? have you inspected the whole length of the cable?

also, if you bought unshielded then it might not be wise to run it close to main electrical cable, especially not bound to it.

[#3 · Accepted solution]

Mr Google has a few posts  where "Pluscom Cat5e UTP 4 Pairs 24 AWG Patch Cable".  is a Fake

if you are unsure about the cable i wouldnt use it

[#4]

Thanks.  How very interesting !  The vendor has replied

"Please note that you won't face any problem using this cable, we know the cable is not twisted but it won't create any signal problem."

But of course it does cause a problem, assuming you call not working a problem !  I have now carefully laid out 50m of the roll in a straight line (outside) to ensure that there was no question of cross-talk due to coiling, and connected one end to the router and the other end to a computer.  Nothing, zilch, not a glimmer, not even as much as Cameron got out of Junker !

I also have a network cable tester which checks the end-to-end connection for all 8 wires, and there is no connection fault.

Having read Mr. Google's comments, it is clear that this cable does not advertise what it claims to be.  It is noteworthy that the description on the cable uses the word "patch".  In other words, it might work on short runs of a meter or so, but that is all at best.

Despite the inconvenience, I will be sending it back !

[#5]

---

@shermans wrote:

I have recently bought 25m of ethernet cable. 

---

---

@shermans wrote:

I have now carefully laid out 50m of the roll in a straight line 

---

 How? 

[#6]

I need in fact only 25m but it came in a 50m roll which I have not cut into yet (nor do I now intend to do so).  The cable advertisement specifically stated it was suitable for an ethernet run up to 150 feet which is approximately 50m.  So the test I undertook should be representative.

[#7]

Thanks for the explanation ... I was just curious as to how you could lay out 50m if you only purchased 25m! 

Edit:  PS  Definitely return it as it's not worth the air it's coiled on!

[#8]

---

@shermans wrote:
not even as much as Cameron got out of Junker !

 

---

[#9]

The funny thing about this is that Cat5 and Cat5e are often the same cable, it's just that cat5e has to be tested to a higher spec (ie the older Cat 5 probably MET the new spec, it just wasn't TESTED as such, so no guarantees! That's why many older bits of Cat5 work fine at higher speeds).

So, if Cat5e has a pretty high spec, I wonder how your bit of "dodgy cable" met that spec.... I suspect it was never tested!

[#10]

Interesting.

I have since ordered a new cable from a reputable source.  It works superbly without any issues.  The vendor that sold me the original one has agreed to a full refund including return postage.  Once the refund has been received, I will check their advertisement to see if it is still claiming to be Cat5, and if so, i will report them to Trading Standards !