Talk:Category 3 cable

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Telecommunications Mid‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

10mbps[edit]

Can CAT 3 cable support 10mbps LAN for cable lengths upto 60/70mtrs? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.138.47.16 (talk • contribs) 16:56, March 21, 2005 (UTC)

Yes. All standards set for UTP are for 100 meters, this length includes patchcords on both ends. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.189.113.185 (talk • contribs) 16:56, July 30, 2006 (UTC)

Physical characteristics of Cat3[edit]

What are the physical characteristics of Cat 3 cable? Number of conductors, AWG, twists per inch, etc.? Snottywong 17:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I was just wondering the same thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.37.182 (talk) 04:07, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. A pic would be nice, as well. I mean, if you compare this to the size of the Cat5 article... you see where i'm coming from, right? It might just be a matter of personal opinion, but I believe that similar articles should be similarly structured. By that logic, this article needs a structure more like the Cat5 article -- 84.172.25.164 (talk) 11:06, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike CAT5 through 7 cables, CAT3 can have as few as 2 pairs to beyond 100 pairs. 4 & 25 pairs are the most commonly available. 2 pair cable, while still around, isn't as popular as it once was. Pictures of CAT3 cable can be found on the websites of manufacturers like Commscope/Systimax, General Cable & Superior Essex. As with CAT5E through 7, CAT3 cables can be either Riser or Plenum rated. 64.208.159.230 (talk) 18:57, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The category rating is about electrical performance. Things like crosstalk, frequency response, impedance. The higher categories have better performance. It is not about the number of pairs. The most common cables have 4 pairs. Larger cables are available for different category ratings. --Kvng (talk) 16:29, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wire gauge? (thickness of each conductor?) dhollm (talk) 22:50, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

VoIP[edit]

The article states that Cat 3 can be used for VoIP. VoIP is usually Ethernet. I'm sue there are some 10 Mb VoIP phones but my understanding is that most are now at least 100 Mb. These phones would not work on Cat 3 unless you manually configured network equipment to run at 10 Mb. Doesn't seem like a wise thing to do. Is VoIP over Cat 3 a common practice? --Kvng (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed these dubious statements. --Kvng (talk) 18:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CAT3 cable is fine for analog & digital phones. For VoIP, the best bet is to check the system documentation. 64.208.159.230 (talk) 19:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cat5e+ Bias[edit]

I find the focus/bias on the "Cat5e or better" cabling dubious. If you are doing e.g. bleeding-edge modern smart home installations - in 2021 - then you use for cabling 1MBit CAN bus using shielded TP cable and (shielded) RJ11 connectors. All these connectors and cables are specified for Cat3. These are much more EMI resilient installations with real-time properties (contrary to ethernet) and also faster installations than the old KNX standard (9600 baud). Clearly, this article exhibits an Ethernet cognitive bias. LinguistManiac (talk) 07:10, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]