JCinPA
Member
I'm beginning to research the next gun safe purchase, which is why I've gotten so interested in safe tech lately. I've decided I do not need a "real" safe as in TL-15 or TL-30, although I will keep my eye out for a used one. A high-end RSC is plenty secure for my purposes, I have no doubts about that. I'm leaning heavily toward the Amsec BF-6636 at the moment, as just about the ideal safe for my needs at the right price point. It is more than I have now in my older Liberty Lincoln, which I will try to sell locally to replace with a slightly larger unit, like the BF-6636.
I am curious, however, about the UL RSC B-rating (if it is a UL rating??) for something like a Summit Everest series with 1/4" plate walls and 1/2" plate door versus the Amsec BF construction. I am persuaded that the Amsec BF wall construction with the cement-like filler adds some security to the steel wall. I don't believe the steel has to be of exactly equal thickness to be exactly equally secure, I do believe the Amsec construction with the cement-like filler adds security, but I don't know how to compare that construction to thicker steel without it, as it becomes apples to oranges. I am open to what the safe experts here think, however, because I sure can't figure it out as a layman.
I don't really care about the relative merits fire safety merits of the dry light fill in the Amsec or the pyro blanket, I've read the threads and frankly, either of them is plenty of fire protection in my mind, arguing about the fire safety differences is pretty silly IMO. Although others my enjoy detailed discussion on the fire protection issue, for purposes of this thread, please assume they are, if not equal to each other in fire protection, they are both completely satisfactory to me, personally, as far as fire protection goes, so I am not swayed by the relative merits there.
I can't afford a Graffunder B-rate, like the Bishop series, but I could probably swing a Summit Everest, and the Amsec is definitely in the right range. Rough numbers (I think, not too precise) is the Summit Everest is about 2X the Amsec price for similar size, and the Graffunder is 2X the Summit price.
Is an RSC with a B-rating meaningfully more secure than an Amsec BF type wall structure? I know that when looking at typical consumer safes there is not a lot of difference in the different gauge numbers manufacturer's tout (physics says there is some, of course, but it may not be definitive from a security standpoint). But I don't know how an Amsec BF--which I consider meaningfully better protection than other safes with wall thickness measured in gauge--stacks up to B-rate construction. The difference would have to be pretty meaningful to justify a near double in the price.
That's why I'm leaning toward the BF. I know I don't really need TL ratings, but I'd like a seriously tough container as far as RSC goes. If the Summit B-rate is a quantum leap in strength, I'd pay up for it. If not, I really like the complete Amsec BF package for home security.
Thanks!
I am curious, however, about the UL RSC B-rating (if it is a UL rating??) for something like a Summit Everest series with 1/4" plate walls and 1/2" plate door versus the Amsec BF construction. I am persuaded that the Amsec BF wall construction with the cement-like filler adds some security to the steel wall. I don't believe the steel has to be of exactly equal thickness to be exactly equally secure, I do believe the Amsec construction with the cement-like filler adds security, but I don't know how to compare that construction to thicker steel without it, as it becomes apples to oranges. I am open to what the safe experts here think, however, because I sure can't figure it out as a layman.
I don't really care about the relative merits fire safety merits of the dry light fill in the Amsec or the pyro blanket, I've read the threads and frankly, either of them is plenty of fire protection in my mind, arguing about the fire safety differences is pretty silly IMO. Although others my enjoy detailed discussion on the fire protection issue, for purposes of this thread, please assume they are, if not equal to each other in fire protection, they are both completely satisfactory to me, personally, as far as fire protection goes, so I am not swayed by the relative merits there.
I can't afford a Graffunder B-rate, like the Bishop series, but I could probably swing a Summit Everest, and the Amsec is definitely in the right range. Rough numbers (I think, not too precise) is the Summit Everest is about 2X the Amsec price for similar size, and the Graffunder is 2X the Summit price.
Is an RSC with a B-rating meaningfully more secure than an Amsec BF type wall structure? I know that when looking at typical consumer safes there is not a lot of difference in the different gauge numbers manufacturer's tout (physics says there is some, of course, but it may not be definitive from a security standpoint). But I don't know how an Amsec BF--which I consider meaningfully better protection than other safes with wall thickness measured in gauge--stacks up to B-rate construction. The difference would have to be pretty meaningful to justify a near double in the price.
That's why I'm leaning toward the BF. I know I don't really need TL ratings, but I'd like a seriously tough container as far as RSC goes. If the Summit B-rate is a quantum leap in strength, I'd pay up for it. If not, I really like the complete Amsec BF package for home security.
Thanks!