oneounceload
member
If it is stuff you don't need to access all the time, a safety deposit box isn't exactly a bad option either - a small one isn't that expensive
Gun Safes: Looking for a recommendation
- Thread starter dehughes
- Start date
- Status
If it is stuff you don't need to access all the time, a safety deposit box isn't exactly a bad option either - a small one isn't that expensive
a1abdj
Member
A direct entry lock is the most basic type of safe lock, where the lock itself has no mechanical function. The wheels line up when dialing your combination, and the boltwork of the safe moves into the portion of the wheels that are cut out.
To see if a safe has a direct entry lock, put pressure on the handle like you are opening it, and then attempt to turn the dial. Direct entry locks will bind when pressure is placed on the handle.
I should have also added that a basic solenoid electronic lock would have similar weaknesses which would prevent the safe from getting an RSC rating. These inexpensive electronic locks can be even less secure, as some of them can be opened quickly with no tools at all.
Mechanical locks propably won't go away anytime soon. We have many customers still using 100 year old safes.
I do welcome the increase of electronic locks on safes though. They produce a steady stream of income due to their higher rate of failure.
This would work. I like the Sentry key locking fire boxes. They have been around for a long time, carry the proper ratings, are inexpensive, and their plastic shell keeps the wet insulation from leaching moisture out.
When I talked to Terry at Sturdy, he said all those cheap fire boxes will not survive a real fire. I mentioned earlier that Sturdy actually tested their fire rated safes in real house fires via training exercises put on by the fire department. They also tested how well those inexpensive fire boxes would survive along side their RSC's. He said they DON'T! He said they do great if they are placed inside a fire rated RSC. He also said they did fine inside a non fire rated RSC. He said that if they are protected from radiant heat, they do great.
I would suggest buying one of the small fire boxes, and keep it inside the gun safe weather it is fire rated or not.
I know everyone wants the UL fire rating on their safes, but in my opinion, they don't mean squat when the safe they are on is filled with basically sheet rock. Again, the guys at Sturdy tried one, two, three layers of gypsum board etc, and all the safes failed in their real world fire tests. They even tried combination's of gypsum and some form of concrete board with the same results.
One of the reasons I really like the 2300 degree U.L. listed ceramic wool, and U.L. listed 1000 degree high temperature glass blankets that sturdy uses for fire insulation is how it cuts down on condensation. There will never be any sudden temp changes inside that RSC which is what causes condensation. I build garages, and shops for a living. If the 28 gauge metal siding and roofing I use does not have 1.5" insulation blanket under it, you will get horrible condensation issues. The Sturdy safes totally eliminate this issue with their style of fire insulation.
Last edited:
a1abdj
Member
If it has a UL fire rating, it will tend to perform exactly as it is rated. Some of them have the rating, others do not. Make sure you buy one with the UL tag (or similar foreign rating).
Extra protection certainly does not hurt.
You may be confusing the UL RSC rating with a UL fire rating. There are no safes that I'm aware of that carry a UL fire rating which use gypsum board for insulation.
The materials may be UL rated, but just like the gypsum board, I am not aware of any UL rated fire safe that uses ceramic wool for insulation either.
Fire rated safes have used the same basic construction (cement filled) for over 100 years. There is a reason for this.
a1abdj
Member
This varies depending on the particular type of fill material the manufacturer is using. Some of it contains moisture which steams off in a fire. Some of the newer composite safes are using a very dry material which is impervious to heat.
UL has some of the toughest safe testing standards in the world, and has been in the safe testing business for a long time. If they've attached their stamp of approval, you know you're dealing with the real deal (except for the whole RSC thing).
Wouldn't that be bad for guns trying to survive a fire? I thought the steam idea was for document safes only.
I have a small Sisco protector fire safe I bought years ago for documents. It has a 2 hour/1700 degree rating. What do you think is being used for the fire insulation? I have often wondered how well it would do in a fire. It's too small for my guns, whicj is why I am looking to buy a RSC.
a1abdj
Member
It would be bad for guns, which is why a lot of these gun safe manufacturers are trying to improvise with other materials. The fill used by AMSEC and Graffunder, tends to be relatively dry.
Your little fire safe would probably do well. Don't forget that heat goes up, so the smaller the safe, the closer it sits to the ground. You do not want to store firearms in these little document safes, as the insulation does tend to have high moisture content.
I'm not on the computer will all of the pics, so I'm going to borrow some from a google search.
This lock is a UL listed mechanical lock. It is an old and proven design that is used by a number of manufacturers. The lock bolt is retracted after the combination is entered. Don't let the simple design fool you.
This is a direct entry lock. You should see the security flaw just by looking at it. These locks are still good for keeping the kids out and casual smash and grab theives. They wouldn't stand much of a chance against an educated brute force attack.
a1abdj , what do you know about Pentagon gun safes? They offer a 1/4" steel body option.
http://www.sportsmansteelsafes.com/
http://www.sportsmansteelsafes.com/
a1abdj
Member
If you do a google search you will find a number of horror stories. Buyer Beware.
Their web site does seem kind of gimmicky. They have some rather outlandish claims.
What about Drake safes?? They also claim 1/4" wall construction. I googled their name, and nothing comes up but their business name and location. I did call them, and talked to the guy. They seem to be another manufacturer like Sturdy, where they build them right there. The guy said they use 1/4" steel all the way around with 5/8 gypsum for their fire rating. I didn't get a real impressed feeling from the guy I talked to.
http://www.dryesgunshop.com/main/featured/drakesafes.html
Also, are TL-15 Gem vaults a good idea for storing guns? Or does the design create a bad environment for guns? I'm looking at some of these RSC prices, and thinking although the gem vaults are smaller, their fire rating and burglar rating are top notch, and they would be cheaper to purchase. For example:http://www.directsafes.com/tl-15-safe.cfm?ProductID=24
I have mainly hand guns I am wanting to keep locked up, so a tall safe is not really necessary.
So if a TL-15 gem vault is a good option for storing hand guns, what would a good one be in the $1,200.00/700 pound range.
Last edited:
I know you have mentioned that the drylight cement product used in the AMSEC RSC's is superior to the ceramic wool/high temperature glass combo used in the Sturdy safes.
I called Graffunder Safe company today and was chatting with them about what they use for fire protection. They described a cement product much like what you say AMSEC uses. Then, they told me something that surprised me. Guess what they use in the doors of their safes(RSC's) for fire protection?? Ceramic batting just like Sturdy uses. They described it to me as the same stuff used in kitchen ovens to insulate them.
I consider Graffunder safes on the high end, upper scale money and quality wise. I assume they would not use this ceramic batting in their doors if it was not comparable to the cement product they use in the walls. Otherwise you end up with a situation where you are only as good as your weakest link. I assume AMSEC has to do something similar since you can't just pour a cement product into the inner workings of the door mechanism?? That's why Graffunder told me they use the ceramic batting in the door. So it does not interfere with the moving parts.
I believe there are two possible reasons for this product combination that Graffunder uses for fire protection in their safes. One possible reason: The cement product is cheap so they use that in the walls instead of the ceramic batting all the way around to keep the price down. Yet they are forced to use a higher priced ceramic batting in the door for the reason I mentioned above.
2nd possible reason: The cement product is superior to the ceramic batting, but they are forced to use the ceramic batting in the door for the reason I mentioned above. In turn, this produces a weak link, and their safe is only as good as the ceramic batting in the door. So the cement product in the walls are for nothing. If my 2nd reason here is true, then that is not a good thing for as much money as Graffunder charges for their RSC's.
Last edited:
a1abdj
Member
The doors are a slightly different story than the body for two reasons. The Graffunders use much heavier plate in their doors (1/2" up to 1 1/2"). Heavy steel plate takes much longer to heat through than thinner steel would. Safe doors also usually have an air gap of 2 to 3 inches. Air is also a good insulator.
AMSEC uses the same "cement" in their door as well. The door is also built with an inner plate which creates a cavity that is then filled.
The problem you have is that none of these safes have UL fire ratings, and the most likely explanation is that none of them would pass. As such, these companies can use whatever they want, and make whatever claims they would like.
AMSEC builds a smaller version of their gun safe which is built using the same fill material. The smaller safes do in fact have a UL fire rating.
These ceramic insulations may very well work. However, until UL starts rating safes using these materials, I'm more comfortable sticking with what I (and UL) knows that works.
Guns and more
member
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,929
I told you these safe threads soon devolve into,"My safe is better than your safe."
Buying a used safe is a good idea. Check the yellow pages. under "safes", go look.
I tried, and in reality, people don't want to move a safe long distances so they sell them back. I found a used safe in perfect condition from my safe salesman. It was, unfortunately, only $100 less than a new one. Then they sold the used one out from under me, so they gave me the new one for the same price. What great people.
There were some small used safes, but not suitable for my needs.
Your guns may not be valuable, but if stolen and used in a crime, you'll wish you had a safe after all.
I have never regretted buying my safe. And it has never failed me, nor have I been attacked by a band of safe cracking Gypsies. I figure the fire rating is better than leaving my stuff in a wooden desk drawer, and it hasn't fallen through my floor. Just boring security. Nice.
Buying a used safe is a good idea. Check the yellow pages. under "safes", go look.
I tried, and in reality, people don't want to move a safe long distances so they sell them back. I found a used safe in perfect condition from my safe salesman. It was, unfortunately, only $100 less than a new one. Then they sold the used one out from under me, so they gave me the new one for the same price. What great people.
There were some small used safes, but not suitable for my needs.
Your guns may not be valuable, but if stolen and used in a crime, you'll wish you had a safe after all.
I have never regretted buying my safe. And it has never failed me, nor have I been attacked by a band of safe cracking Gypsies. I figure the fire rating is better than leaving my stuff in a wooden desk drawer, and it hasn't fallen through my floor. Just boring security. Nice.
I had a comparison question between the Sturdy built safes, and the AMSEC BF series gun safes. Sturdy claims that having these spoked handles located in the middle of the door "is the most impractical place to put the handle. It doesn't allow shaft support, so it has a high chance of the clutch getting loose and wobbleing. Clutches and shear pins are needed for this linkage design".
Sturdy goes on to say that their handle design is superior because there are allot less moving parts. They are so sure of their system, that the whole locking system is warranted for life to be free from defects.
Also, does the dry light insulation in the AMSEC gun safes create any type of moisture issues that require a dehumidifier? Does the dry light degrade and lose it's intended purpose over time?
Sturdy goes on to say that their handle design is superior because there are allot less moving parts. They are so sure of their system, that the whole locking system is warranted for life to be free from defects.
Also, does the dry light insulation in the AMSEC gun safes create any type of moisture issues that require a dehumidifier? Does the dry light degrade and lose it's intended purpose over time?
Last edited:
Cougfan2
Member
Check out Mountain View Safe company in Portland. Here is a link on feedback for them.
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11993&highlight=mountain+view+safe+company?
Charlie has the best prices in town and his safes don't say Liberty on them, but they are made by the same company. He sells off of the back of his truck.
He will be at the Portland, OR gun show Oct 16-18, 2009. I plan on buying a safe from him there.
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11993&highlight=mountain+view+safe+company?
Charlie has the best prices in town and his safes don't say Liberty on them, but they are made by the same company. He sells off of the back of his truck.
He will be at the Portland, OR gun show Oct 16-18, 2009. I plan on buying a safe from him there.
a1abdj
Member
I don't see where the handle placement on any safe would really make much of a difference (assuming the boltwork design was sound). The most common handle placement would probably be level with, and left of the dial. I think gun safes are more prone to have them in the middle of the door for aesthetic puposes.
I sell plenty of safes, and these safes are all slightly different in design and apperance. I can't say any of these safes have had any more problems than another due to handle placement.
As a general rule, the fewer the parts, the fewer problems you will have.
Many gun safe manufacturers warranty their safes for life. This typically includes everything except the lock itself.
The insulation itself should no pose any issues as far as moisture is concerned.
This is a great question. I'm surprised nobody has asked it before.
The answer is maybe. Some professionals think that it does, others think that it doesn't. To my knowledge, nobody has ever tested old material to see if it performs equally as well as new material.
In the commercial safe market, it's not uncommon to sell companies new fire rated safes to replace those that are several years old. This is based on the assumption that the older safes may not perform as well as the newer safes. However, as stated before, this has never been proven.
I've seen plenty of 100 year old safes do better in a fire than brand new safes.
a1abdj
Member
The safe shown on that thread you linked to is not a Liberty. It is a Chinese import. Probably imported by Eagle from Korea. Sold under a ton of brand names here in the US.
Liberty does offer private labeling, but I think you'd have to be a little bigger of a buyer than one who sells off the back of their truck in order to get them. Cabela's is one that comes to mind.
What I get most out of all this is how the safe business in general operates. That department store special that many people rely on with the direct entry lock is pretty much worthless. Marketing gimmicks everywhere and one has be careful.
Perhaps one of these days U.L. might give more detailed tests for RSCs and have intermediate ratings below TL-15. However, it looks like there is no real incentive to do this or it would have been done already.
It's the same way with alarm companies and other security products.
Perhaps one of these days U.L. might give more detailed tests for RSCs and have intermediate ratings below TL-15. However, it looks like there is no real incentive to do this or it would have been done already.
It's the same way with alarm companies and other security products.
a1abdj - Does the little Amsec 5517 have a direct entry lock. I see that they do not say that the combination can be changed, but it can be had with an electronic lock. I know that it is very inexpensive, but I think it is really cute, if a safe can be cute. Thanks, Jim
Hmmmm, that doesn't make me feel good or bad I guess. The reason I asked is because I researched online what they used in the old safes for their "cement" fill. They actually listed all the ingredients in their concoction. They said that it would degrade over time.
Maybe this proves my above comments as being wrong.
Last edited:
I don't think that's the case at all. I think there's been quite a bit of good information said in this thread, w/o devolving into arguing.
- Status
