IP66 vs IP07
Head-to-head comparison of two IEC 60529 ingress protection ratings.
IP66 and IP07 are both IEC 60529 ingress protection codes, but they differ in solid-object protection (level 6 vs 0) and liquid protection (level 6 vs 7). IP66 is rated for dust-tight and powerful water jets (12.5 mm nozzle), while IP07 provides no protection and temporary immersion (up to 1 m).
IP66 is dust-tight and resists powerful water jets (12.5 mm nozzle, 100 kPa). A robust outdoor rating for equipment exposed to heavy rain, storms, or directed high-pressure hosing (but not high-pressure washdown).
IP07 is an ingress protection code that ensures no protection against solid objects and protection against the effects of temporary immersion in water. Ingress of water in quantities causing harmful effects shall not be possible.. It is an IEC 60529 ingress protection code combining first-digit (solid) level 0 with second-digit (liquid) level 7.
Detailed comparison
The stronger rating on each row is highlighted in emerald.
Solid protection (first digit)
IP66
6 — Dust-Tight
IP07
0 — No Protection
Liquid protection (second digit)
IP66
6 — Powerful Water Jets (12.5 mm nozzle)
IP07
7 — Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)
Dust-tight
IP66
Yes
IP07
No
Water-jet resistant
IP66
Yes
IP07
Yes
Submersible
IP66
No
IP07
Yes
Outdoor suitable
IP66
Yes
IP07
Yes
The exact difference (IP66 vs IP07)
Solid protection
IP66
Level 6 — Dust-Tight
IP07
Level 0 — No Protection
IP66 provides "Dust-Tight" (level 6), while IP07 provides "No Protection" (level 0). IP66 is 6 levels higher.
Liquid protection
IP66
Level 6 — Powerful Water Jets (12.5 mm nozzle)
IP07
Level 7 — Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)
IP66 handles 100 kPa (Powerful Water Jets (12.5 mm nozzle)), while IP07 handles Hydrostatic ~10 kPa at 1 m (Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)). IP07 provides 1 level more liquid protection.
NEMA equivalents
No direct NEMA equivalent.
Recommendation
IP66 offers higher overall protection than IP07. Choose IP66 for harsher environments; IP07 may suffice for milder conditions and can be more cost-effective.