cartridge or ato fuses?

OK, the debate is which of the two fuses is better for all relative applications is the use of either cartridge or ato fuses?.

Say the applications overlap to each others natural uses or the type of fuse is more suitable to use or preferred.

I'm sure it has a simple answer but Im leaning more for cartridge than a customary ago and just don't have the experience to make the career decision ,so I ask you.....( please choose the best)

Thanks.

No difference in practical terms, I prefer maxi type Litelfuses.

-------------
Amateurs assume, don't test and have problems; pros test first. I am not a free install service.
Read the installation manual, do a search here or online for your vehicle wiring before posting.

Hello, we meet again!, this time it's a job on 'leisure' battery power/accessories. Making a power board to switch between alternator, car and 24v outside line. Got everything ready and the only decision left was fuses and blow me down if I couldn't think which ones would be ....suitable, oh and the power distribution between battery's and 24v become lame of products to choose from.

I'd lean to the maxis too but the holders are darn expensive, but then if cylinders have been around a while then they would have more going for them!?.

So I've got ships of them all coming in before I commit, heaps of them cheap.

Spent the last week searching and lined up a boat switch box cheap on auction just to have someone bid alot, whipping it out from under me and over pricing the item..just unreal. I'm able to put together twice as much for the same price with new parts now.

That was the trickiest thing, getting around the order of rechargeable lead offs whilst using a battery, with minimal available parts. Not much in the way of circuit boards that handle EVERYTHING..ha.

IMO cartridge have had their day; ATO and modern 'single piece' constructions with firm mounting is the way.

Automotive wise, I found my 1960 cars' glass cartridge fuses far superior to the ceramic alternatives.
Then came the ATO style - more compact, more rugged and more reliable.
Cartridge mounts suffer degradation over time (contamination; loss of spring) and the 2 joints in 3 conductor-piece cartridges are prone to fail - especially over the past decade or 2 where substandard products have become common.


I have been using ATO else their mini & micro for recent works. I'd like to use low profile mini ATOs in the future.
For currents above 20A & 30A I like the plastic flinks (fuse links) aka J-case etc but am wary that IMO at 40A & above their terminals should be bolted else inspected and cleaned often.

The latter brings me to various bolt in types like Litelfuse Mega etc.
I do not like MAXI fuses because IMO they are too big, and bases expensive etc.


Of course for some circuits like headlights or critical battery charger (alternator) and dual-battery interlinks I suggest self resetting circuit breakers up to 5A, else generous fuses for higher currents - ie, allow for initial battery charge currents of many tens of Amps.


But for general LV DC - especially where vibration and corrosion is an issue (eg, boating) - IMO cartridge type fuses are definitely NOT the choice.

So 'aesthetically' there's not a considerably better one than another and availability is a defining influence...

Hmmmm

I don't know the available edgel thermals in cartridge....I might mix them up.
I wonder if quality could help decide.

Thanks I'll try get the mini's, use the regulars and choose cartridges on odd jobs...sorted.

None of us have discussed aesthetics.

Like I said, IMO one-piece like ATS, Mega (and even Maxi).

The only time I'd consider cartridge is specialist stuff like very big current; spark free; slow blow etc - none of which apply to auto (in general).

This comment sums up the thread:-
IMO cartridge have had their day; ATO and modern 'single piece' constructions with firm mounting is the way.
Why do you think all motor manufacturers use variations on blade fuses with solidly enclosed filaments.
RR/Bentley used cartridge bt Bulgin until 1981 with the Spirit/Mulsanne, that's when they changed to Litelfuse product.

-------------
Amateurs assume, don't test and have problems; pros test first. I am not a free install service.
Read the installation manual, do a search here or online for your vehicle wiring before posting.

Sorry my bad grammar, I meant on face value or without binding's an unbound boundary.

I just wasn't sure technologically as ato might just be cheaper to make and the cartridge held a quality, 'un-necessarily' costs to build yet could be of better quality..

Cheers

As Howard said - 'No difference in practical terms' - tho that does assume equivalent quality.

But cartridges have 2 joints prone to failure; blades etc have none else 2, but those 2 are far more rugged (easier to access etc).

And IMO the latter is demonstrable - even in ye olde good glass etc fuse days there were far more intermittents than these days with (far more) blade & ATS types.
RARELY have I seen or heard of ATS intermittents whereas for cartridges ROTATION is always a part of problem solving.
Bad contacts can plague both but again, far less for the ATS etc types.

ATS & blade types win hands down. That's for reliability, (manufacturing & resource) costs, real estate, and IMO bling.

Totally X 2 with Oldspark here.

-------------
Amateurs assume, don't test and have problems; pros test first. I am not a free install service.
Read the installation manual, do a search here or online for your vehicle wiring before posting.

Oh-Ho make that three, I like secure and safe too!

If it's an automotive installation, I endeavor to use the same type of fuse that is already in use in other circuits. If it's an old car with AGC's, I use inline AGC's. Newer car with ATC or ATO's, they make fuse holders for those too.

Makes it simpler for the owner when procuring or carrying spares. Also increases the opportunities for substitution if the need arises in the field.

Yep, concurrency is important, With all the made to install jobs to get finished a trend for a 'good construction' of all my new improvements would be the motivation. Instead of changing the formula in each job and rethinking it all out just to cater to minor differences or unpopular methods/equipment ,I'll just keep concurrency and get the same spares for it.

Of course if the job is with already made parts, in the planning you must keep that in mind, its only sensible.