A cheap plug-in protector did save my TV from a nasty surge that wiped out some other unprotected stuff. It fried solid and stank, but it stopped the surge.
IOW that surge was so small as to not harm the TV, but vaporized the protector? Or the protector earthed that surge destructively through appliances on the other side of the room or house. Or other appliances earthed enough surge that the TV's internal protection was sufficient. But the surge was still large enough to destroy the scam protector.
What have you done? Recommend a protector that did nothing useful. Assumed by not learning the science and by using only observation. Observation not tempered by fundamental knowledge is classic junk science reasoning.
You don't know anything without tracing the surge's path. My posts come from decades of doing just that.
Observation without specific technical details and no numbers is classic junk science. First paragraph includes possibilities that were ignored. TV not damaged means the protector did something? So why was the dishwasher, bathroom GFCI, clock radio, doorbell, etc no damaged? Why did you analysis ignore other facts? What protected them? Invisible surge protectors?
Your reasoning must also say why other appliances also were not damage. Otherwise, the conclusion is junk science - the same logic that also proved childhood leukemia was created by electric wires. Ignoring other data (ie other undamaged appliances without protectors) to make a conclusion is junk science.
My surge protector sacrificed itself to save my TV. Reality. If the protector fried, then TV's internal protection saved that TV. How many other appliances performed as earthed protectors for that TV?
Finally - protection is always about where energy dissipates. Energy was permitted inside the building. Therefore no effective protection existed. It is that simple - even proven 100 years ago. Either a surge current is dissipated harmlessly in earth. Or interior damage is directly traceable to human failure.
Effective protector costs about $1 per protected appliance. How much was the 'so called' cheap protector? $20? Then it was twenty times more expensive - and you still had appliance damage. Either energy is dissipated harmlessly in earth - or effective protection does not exist. That cheap power strip had no earth ground. Did exactly what its manufacturer claimed - ineffective protection.
No way around this fundamental principle: A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. Why do I post reality - and then another post promotes the same scam? Effective protection (that costs so much less money) means no surge energy inside the building. Based upon so many posts in this thread, one can conclude they were smarter 100 years ago.
A protector is only as effective as its earth ground. How many more scam protectors without earthing will be promoted only on hearsay or observation?
Since you're looking for a recommendation. Panamax, problem solved.
panamax.com
Where is a manufacturer numeric spec that claims any protection? Panamax makes no such claim. Exampled: another post promotes Panamax - and does not even say why. Classic example of a scam: recommendation without even one technical fact.
Panamax does not claim protection. How to identify the Panamax (ie Furman) as ineffective? 1) No dedicated wire for that short connection to earth. 2) Manufacturer will not even discuss earthing.
Will you spend $25 or $100+ for Panamax products that do not even claim that protection? Or spend $1 per protected appliance for the solution that is effective? That Panamax is same as the Monster Cable. May even earth a surge destructively through appliances in that room. Or create scary pictures - potential fire.
Panamax has no earthing and a massive profit margin. But again, he posted only what he was told to believe. Never even learned this science: A protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
Respectfully, I said that EVERY major brand has a warranty and said nothing about specific manufacturers' warranties or warranty amounts (I don't even know what they are). The gist of my recommendations, however, is I'd consider a power-saving surge protector if you're going to buy a new one. It's better for your wallet and the environment. ...
Calm down and first learn the facts. Rants about protectors that do not even claim protection accomplish nothing.
Show us these big buck warranties on Polyphaser protectors. Polyphaser has been an industry benchmark probably longer than PCs existed. Where are the big buck warranties on every Polyphaser product?
Listed were manufacturers of effective protectors. You claim every one has a big buck warranty. Well here again is the list. According to you, every 'whole house' protector has a big buck warranty: General Electric, Siemens, Square D, Cutler-Hammer, Intermatic, Clipsal, Leviton, or Keison.
Only warranty is equivalent to what comes with a car battery. Warranty says nothing about the product's quality or usefulness. Since protection is the discussion, then why equate a warranty with protection? Ineffective protectors have the largest warranty. Free market experience says the worst protectors provide no technical specifications and promote a big buck (rarely honored) warranty. Circuits equivalents to Monster Cable include Panamax, APC, Tripplite, and Belkin.
Install one 'whole house' protector so that even direct lightning strikes cause no appliance damage. One 'whole house' protector does what 100 plug-in protectors (one on every appliance) cannot accomplish. The superior solution means even lesser surges (or falling trees) also cause no damage.
A 'whole house' protector is only secondary protection. Too often not known by plug-in protector 'promoters' is primary surge protection. Informed homeowners waste no money on ineffective protector AND inspect the primary protection system:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html
Best power saving device does same without any protector components - for significantly less money. Better power saving device is an appliance that includes power factor compensation and meets (and exceeds) California Energy Commission requirements. (Obvously others who leave it on due to reliability myths need not consider any such solution.)