Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Page / 50
Link Posted: 11/6/2017 12:08:01 AM EST
[Last Edit: 11/6/2017 6:21:59 PM EST by PWR]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:
Not dead, just a temporary break...

Wow, I don't recall any of the BF Gunsafes were made with the brown as a standard color. They were always Granite, Black or Sandstone. That would have been an option color as I recall, so there are probably very few made that color.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:
Originally Posted By PWR:
Thanks for all the great info, I hope this thread isn't dead!

TSG, do you know how many textured Chocolate Brown BF's have been sold, it seems like the vast majority are Sandstone and Granite?
Not dead, just a temporary break...

Wow, I don't recall any of the BF Gunsafes were made with the brown as a standard color. They were always Granite, Black or Sandstone. That would have been an option color as I recall, so there are probably very few made that color.
Glad you're better!

Recently purchased a chocolate brown BF7240 with brass trim, left-hand hinges and an ESL10XL lock. Man, this a beautifully unit and the electronic lock is very nice! Thanks for all your time spent on this post, I'm pretty sure I would have bought something else had I not seen it!

p.s. Frank Zykan was a real pleasure to work with too.
Link Posted: 12/8/2017 11:46:04 AM EST
Hi TSG, hope all the old parts are healing and you are doing better.

Waaay back you posted a list of MFG making a UL rated X6 product, it was a pretty short list as I recall, is this a new Chinese MFG to the trade?

Link Posted: 12/8/2017 3:19:50 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/8/2017 3:20:18 PM EST by TheSafeGuy]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BGENE:
Hi TSG, hope all the old parts are healing and you are doing better.

Waaay back you posted a list of MFG making a UL rated X6 product, it was a pretty short list as I recall, is this a new Chinese MFG to the trade?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Qvr3joITSc
View Quote
Yea, I am doing pretty good now. It's been a madhouse getting caught up again after my recovery from hip replacement in October. Thanks for asking!

This company has been around for quite a while, selling under different names. Many Chinese companies manufacture under changing names and do most of their business under private labels. The COMFO brand is one of those new name, old company things to re-brand in an attempt to penetrate US markets. If you search the directories at MyHome@UL, the name CAMFO does not exist. There are at least two "distributors" I know of in the US that import these safes with their own label and pose as manufacturers, a practice that is becoming very commonplace. The company used to be an AMSEC customer out of Taiwan before they started sourcing from China. I visited them the first time way back in 1998 as I recall, when they were starting to sell our high-security safes in the Taiwan market.
Link Posted: 12/8/2017 5:43:18 PM EST
Interesting stuff and thanks for the U.L. link!
Link Posted: 12/31/2017 8:47:35 PM EST
MERRY CHRISTMASS And HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Wow. I almost had a heart attack looking for this thread. Was about to post "where is the TSG Thread?!?!"

It should be pinned.

Anyway, hope you are continuing to heal and having a good Holliday season. Thanks for all the information and help you have given us.

Best wishes from us all.
Link Posted: 12/31/2017 10:59:56 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Plattekill:
MERRY CHRISTMASS And HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Wow. I almost had a heart attack looking for this thread. Was about to post "where is the TSG Thread?!?!"

It should be pinned.

Anyway, hope you are continuing to heal and having a good Holliday season. Thanks for all the information and help you have given us.

Best wishes from us all.
View Quote
Happy new year to all. We have a surprise for those that come to SHOT this year.... pretty exciting.
Link Posted: 1/1/2018 11:33:31 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Plattekill:
MERRY CHRISTMASS And HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Wow. I almost had a heart attack looking for this thread. Was about to post "where is the TSG Thread?!?!"

It should be pinned.

Anyway, hope you are continuing to heal and having a good Holliday season. Thanks for all the information and help you have given us.

Best wishes from us all.
View Quote
HAPPY NEW YEAR!

It should be pinned. I am going to add to title and see.
Link Posted: 1/12/2018 4:52:38 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/12/2018 5:40:01 PM EST by TheSafeGuy]
Guess we can let you guys in on the news...

It came very quietly.... UL has split the Residential Security Container (RSC) rating into three (3) Levels.

Level I is the same as the old RSC, with small hand tools, five minute test and 1-man working.

Level II is now a much higher rating. The tools include all the TL-15 Tool Complement, 10-minute test, and it runs with a 2-man team.

Level III is... well, doesn't make much sense. It's basically equivalent to a TL30x6 with a 10 minute attack time. The full TL30 tool complement, 2-man team. This rating easily exceeds a TL-15 rating. Debates and revisions will resolve this problem.

All of the testing is run with the same group that do the TL high security stuff...

So... the news? We are the first to get the Level II RSC Rating at UL. We will be debuting the new BFII safe line at the SHOT Show..
Link Posted: 1/12/2018 5:11:51 PM EST
Thanks for posting, very interesting.

Multiple ratings (or levels/tiers, whatever you want to call them) seems long overdue to me for RSC's.
Link Posted: 1/12/2018 8:33:02 PM EST
How does the BF HD stack up? Still a level 1?
Link Posted: 1/12/2018 11:03:45 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DocBach:
How does the BF HD stack up? Still a level 1?
View Quote
Link Posted: 1/13/2018 1:39:14 AM EST
TSG,

Is there a fire rating included in these new RSC levels?
Link Posted: 1/13/2018 2:09:52 AM EST
Thats interesting, looking forward to the BFII.
Link Posted: 1/13/2018 7:36:29 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:
Guess we can let you guys in on the news...

It came very quietly.... UL has split the Residential Security Container (RSC) rating into three (3) Levels.

Level I is the same as the old RSC, with small hand tools, five minute test and 1-man working.

Level II is now a much higher rating. The tools include all the TL-15 Tool Complement, 10-minute test, and it runs with a 2-man team.

Level III is... well, doesn't make much sense. It's basically equivalent to a TL30x6 with a 10 minute attack time. The full TL30 tool complement, 2-man team. This rating easily exceeds a TL-15 rating. Debates and revisions will resolve this problem.

All of the testing is run with the same group that do the TL high security stuff...

So... the news? We are the first to get the Level II RSC Rating at UL. We will be debuting the new BFII safe line at the SHOT Show..
View Quote
1. When will the BFII be available from dealers?

2. What will pricing look like for the BFII compared to the current BF series?

3. What will the sizes look like (same as the current BF options)?

4. Will the BFII have the redundant boltwork option?
Link Posted: 1/13/2018 8:26:28 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/13/2018 8:27:54 AM EST by DocBach]
Looks like the BFII is already listed on some vendors (safeandvaultstore.com has them already). Price looks comparable to the HD models, and it says "formally BF HD".

NEW for 2018

UNSURPASSED SECURITY

1/2" steel plate door combined with 1" DryLight insulation.
Combined steel thickness of 1/2" in body construction. The inner steel has a 12 gauge formed liner plus a 4 gauge plate liner.
NEW RSC Level II test - Utilizes same tool complement as a TL-15 test. This is a two-man, 10-minute test.
AMSEC's patented active hardplate.
TL-15 boltwork - Same bolt pattern as the AMVAULT TL-15's, 5 active and 5 dead. No top or bottom bolts.
New ultra smooth cam driven locking mechanism with increased handle rotation.
Commercial grade, adjustable ball bearing hinges.
Available with Left Swing or Right Swing door.
U.L. listed Group II lock with massive hard plate and two relocking devices.

OPTIMAL FIRE PROTECTION

NEW Intertek laboratory testing confirms that the BFII6030 has superior fire protection for two hours at 1,200 degrees F.
AMSEC's BFII Gun Safes use a proprietary fill material called DryLight, which offers exceptional fire protection without adding excess weight.
This superior fire protection was confirmed at Intertek, the industry's leading independent laboratory for gun safe fire testing.
When analyzing the fire performance of competitive safes, be sure to weigh reports from independent laboratories against unverified factory testing.
During fire testing, Intertek kept the BF Gun Safe in the test oven for two hours.
Within 8 minutes, the furnace temperature was raised to 1200 degrees F, and that temperature was maintained for the remainder of the two-hour test.
This method is consistent with the UL-72 fire test curve.
Typical house fires only reach temperatures of 1100 degrees F.
A safe is considered to have failed this test if temperatures exceed 350 degrees F anywhere in the safe.
This safe passed the test as internal temperatures never exceeded 325 degrees F during the two hours of testing.
Paper typically starts to ignite at 450 degrees F.
View Quote
Link Posted: 1/14/2018 12:03:39 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/14/2018 12:26:05 AM EST by TheSafeGuy]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DocBach:
How does the BF HD stack up? Still a level 1?
View Quote

The BFII is more safe than the BF-HD. The primary difference is boltwork. We put our TL15/TL30 Boltwork on the safe, so it's no slouch for security. There are a few other little tricks in the bag, but this is essentially a TL10x6, labeled officially as Level II RSC.

The BF and the BF-HD are both listed as Level I RSC safes
Link Posted: 1/14/2018 12:07:04 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mitsuman47:
TSG,

Is there a fire rating included in these new RSC levels?
View Quote
No, these are strictly burglary ratings.But the safe still holds the best fire rating in the Gunsafe industry by a large margin. We ran some more fire tests recently, and threw is a couple more competitor safes. Again, they fell WAY short of their claims.
Link Posted: 1/14/2018 12:09:07 AM EST
You guys are 95% of the way to dominating another market that you're probably not even thinking of. For a 2% royalty in perpetuity I'll take you the rest of the way there.
Link Posted: 1/14/2018 12:12:56 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BMad316:

1. When will the BFII be available from dealers?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BMad316:

1. When will the BFII be available from dealers?
I believe this will be a make-to-order initially. I'm not sure there are too many dealers that will stock these, but I could be wrong...

2. What will pricing look like for the BFII compared to the current BF series?
Download the latest price list from the website, it has been added.

3. What will the sizes look like (same as the current BF options)?

Yes, , same sizes as the standard BF lineup.

4. Will the BFII have the redundant boltwork option?

No, not likely that will be an option. If the demand builds, we will consider it, but it's a big investment to test at UL. We have to sell a lot of safes with RLB to invest $20k in testing costs.
Link Posted: 1/14/2018 12:17:04 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By a1abdj:
You guys are 95% of the way to dominating another market that you're probably not even thinking of. For a 2% royalty in perpetuity I'll take you the rest of the way there.
View Quote
Yea Frank, I'm sure you have ideas... the Marijuana market is already buying BF gunsafes like crazy.
Link Posted: 1/14/2018 12:18:20 AM EST
It's amazing how many gun safes are bought by those in the marijuana business (both legally and illegally). Not where I was going with it though.
Link Posted: 1/14/2018 6:05:28 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:

Yea Frank, I'm sure you have ideas... the Marijuana market is already buying BF gunsafes like crazy.
View Quote
Knute from Rogue Safes was telling me the local marijuana businesses are some of his biggest customers. When I bought my RFX, he had like five other ones delivered at the same time for local growers/dispensaries.
Link Posted: 1/14/2018 11:46:25 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/15/2018 8:01:29 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:
Guess we can let you guys in on the news...

It came very quietly.... UL has split the Residential Security Container (RSC) rating into three (3) Levels.

Level I is the same as the old RSC, with small hand tools, five minute test and 1-man working.

Level II is now a much higher rating. The tools include all the TL-15 Tool Complement, 10-minute test, and it runs with a 2-man team.

Level III is... well, doesn't make much sense. It's basically equivalent to a TL30x6 with a 10 minute attack time. The full TL30 tool complement, 2-man team. This rating easily exceeds a TL-15 rating. Debates and revisions will resolve this problem.

All of the testing is run with the same group that do the TL high security stuff...

So... the news? We are the first to get the Level II RSC Rating at UL. We will be debuting the new BFII safe line at the SHOT Show..
View Quote
Is this update expected to affect the pricing or availability of any existing models? (meaning, for example, is this expects to in any way impact the pricing of the BF line?)
Link Posted: 1/15/2018 10:39:33 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By D_J:
I got the message guys. I restored the title and will tack this.
View Quote
Awesome, thank you.
Link Posted: 1/15/2018 10:54:17 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/15/2018 10:56:59 AM EST by Conju]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BGENE:

Awesome, thank you.
View Quote
Hey @BGENE, can you embed TSGs independent fire testing comparison picture on Page 19 in the OP? I find myself wanting to reference it now and then...

Edit: not pg 19.
Here’s the url
Attachment Attached File
Link Posted: 1/15/2018 1:02:19 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/15/2018 2:34:50 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/15/2018 2:35:13 PM EST by TheSafeGuy]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Conju:

Hey @BGENE, can you embed TSGs independent fire testing comparison picture on Page 19 in the OP? I find myself wanting to reference it now and then...

Edit: not pg 19.
Here’s the url
https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/353883/FireTests2_JPG-298821.jpg
View Quote
I have an updated graph adding two more competitor test results.

Link Posted: 1/15/2018 4:14:58 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/15/2018 4:15:48 PM EST by vet2007]
Thanks for the updated graph. I'm sure glad I spent the extra money and got the RF6528. I know it will work as advertised. I don't know if you can tell us, but why all the failures at 8-15 min range? I assume it's probably because the door didn't seal correctly? I know you've mentioned the expanding seals in the doors before.
Link Posted: 1/15/2018 6:33:29 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By vet2007:
Thanks for the updated graph. I'm sure glad I spent the extra money and got the RF6528. I know it will work as advertised. I don't know if you can tell us, but why all the failures at 8-15 min range? I assume it's probably because the door didn't seal correctly? I know you've mentioned the expanding seals in the doors before.
View Quote
Generally speaking, yes a door seal malfunction (or poor design) will result in a fast early rise and failure. Fundamentally, there are two key ingredients necessary to achieve good fire performance; Door Sealing and Insulation Steam Capacity. In reality it's not that simple, but if you get all the other nagging details right, those are the big deal-breakers. The steam barrier, which is the point where you start to release the primary steam from Calcination (decomposition of the insulation), takes time to develop. While that insulating material is heating up to the Calcination temperature threshold, you have to keep the super-heated furnace gasses out of the safe. In a 1200ºF fire test, that Calcination takes 8-12 minutes to get rolling.

If you're letting the hot air in too much, the interior temperature passes 350ºF before you get the cooling/stability from the steam. It's actually much more complex, because you also have conducted heat coming in from all directions thru the door and walls. The "conduction factor" can also cause, or add to, an early failure. All that steel is a huge heat sink, sucking up energy. If there are "short and significant" heat conduction paths to the interior space, they act like radiators pouring IR and Convection energy into the internal spaces too. It takes a lot of testing and engineering to minimize all the energy transfer attributes of a safe. It's actually quite complex, and very difficult to model.

But, when testing competing safes, we don't spend a lot of time analyzing their construction, we just test them. So, it may not be fair to say these early failures are all door seal problems. The root cause can be a combination of issues. However, it's pretty easy to predict an early failure when you can see poor door seal designs.
Link Posted: 1/20/2018 7:55:26 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:

Level I is the same as the old RSC, with small hand tools, five minute test and 1-man working.

Level II is now a much higher rating. The tools include all the TL-15 Tool Complement, 10-minute test, and it runs with a 2-man team.

Level III is... well, doesn't make much sense. It's basically equivalent to a TL30x6 with a 10 minute attack time. The full TL30 tool complement, 2-man team. This rating easily exceeds a TL-15 rating.
View Quote
Are the test attacks still focused on the door and jamb? If not, what is tested on the body of the safe?

TIA!
Link Posted: 1/20/2018 6:44:12 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:
Guess we can let you guys in on the news...

It came very quietly.... UL has split the Residential Security Container (RSC) rating into three (3) Levels.

Level I is the same as the old RSC, with small hand tools, five minute test and 1-man working.

Level II is now a much higher rating. The tools include all the TL-15 Tool Complement, 10-minute test, and it runs with a 2-man team.

Level III is... well, doesn't make much sense. It's basically equivalent to a TL30x6 with a 10 minute attack time. The full TL30 tool complement, 2-man team. This rating easily exceeds a TL-15 rating. Debates and revisions will resolve this problem.

All of the testing is run with the same group that do the TL high security stuff...

So... the news? We are the first to get the Level II RSC Rating at UL. We will be debuting the new BFII safe line at the SHOT Show..
View Quote
So what is the practical threshold this advances to for protection between old BF/BF-HD series? I get the UL listing label improves, but it doesn’t seem to translate easily to what real-world power tools/methods you’re neutralizing (mostly talking side attack). Will $100 commonly available grinders, sawzalls, etc. at Lowe’s rip straight through BFII’s just the same as RSC but difference is 10min instead of 5 min? I saw deep in this thread that even the difference between older BF 16ga inner liner and HD 4ga wasn’t really material to cause an upgrade in cutting tool. The cost/weight jump to RF/RFX is substantial, so trying to figure of the ‘how much for how much’ regarding attack tools/time.

Thanks!
Link Posted: 1/21/2018 6:16:27 PM EST
Thanks to TheSafeGuy and all of the knowledge/help he's brought to all of us here. Finally was able to purchase a BF 7240 and was hoping for a recommendation on what's everyone using for their documents. Thanks in advance.
Link Posted: 1/21/2018 9:41:17 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RichardDo:
Thanks to TheSafeGuy and all of the knowledge/help he's brought to all of us here. Finally was able to purchase a BF 7240 and was hoping for a recommendation on what's everyone using for their documents. Thanks in advance.
View Quote
I use one of these in my BF6030 on a shelf. Very heavy and PIA but holds a fair amount of important papers:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004IPR22C/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Link Posted: 1/21/2018 10:14:10 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CMPEBRFAN:
I use one of these in my BF6030 on a shelf. Very heavy and PIA but holds a fair amount of important papers:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004IPR22C/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CMPEBRFAN:
Originally Posted By RichardDo:
Thanks to TheSafeGuy and all of the knowledge/help he's brought to all of us here. Finally was able to purchase a BF 7240 and was hoping for a recommendation on what's everyone using for their documents. Thanks in advance.
I use one of these in my BF6030 on a shelf. Very heavy and PIA but holds a fair amount of important papers:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004IPR22C/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Same here.
Link Posted: 1/22/2018 7:05:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/22/2018 7:32:47 PM EST by TheSafeGuy]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Melvin_Johnson:

Are the test attacks still focused on the door and jamb? If not, what is tested on the body of the safe?

TIA!
View Quote

Yes. The RSC Level II is a 6-sided attack, so this is effectively a TL10X6 rating. That means they can go at the jambs, boltwork, body, door and any other avenue they wish to explore. They can run as many tests on the safe as they like, and even require that we bring more than one sample if they feel the testing will be destructive enough that it may compromise another attack option they want to try. They can use any combination of tools they choose. In the case of the body attack in our test, they had both guys using two drills at the same time to perforate a break-line in the steel. It was a brutal test.

Link Posted: 1/22/2018 7:13:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/22/2018 7:52:10 PM EST by TheSafeGuy]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TXDS:

So what is the practical threshold this advances to for protection between old BF/BF-HD series? I get the UL listing label improves, but it doesn’t seem to translate easily to what real-world power tools/methods you’re neutralizing (mostly talking side attack). Will $100 commonly available grinders, sawzalls, etc. at Lowe’s rip straight through BFII’s just the same as RSC but difference is 10min instead of 5 min? I saw deep in this thread that even the difference between older BF 16ga inner liner and HD 4ga wasn’t really material to cause an upgrade in cutting tool. The cost/weight jump to RF/RFX is substantial, so trying to figure of the ‘how much for how much’ regarding attack tools/time.

Thanks!
View Quote

The best way to differentiate is with the tools used, and remembering the Level II is a two-man team, whereas the regular RSC is a one-man attack.

The tools on the left represent the basic tool complement for the RSC test. The tools on the right represent some of the tools used in a TL15 attack, which are also used on the new Level II RSC testing. Sometimes a picture say a thousand words... The tools shown are the most common used when they test, and don't represent all of the tools they could use.




The reality is that when you introduce the big power cutting tools, you step over a crucial line that steps up security to TL30 levels, at a much higher cost. The tools you mention are not used on TL15. So, frankly speaking, if you are facing a real risk of big power tools, a BFII or TL15 is not your safe. It's all about "real" risk assessment here. In a residential setting, it is really very rare to have safes attacked with big power tools. It happens, but at such a small incidence level that I honestly can say, "almost never"...
Link Posted: 1/22/2018 8:45:37 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:


Yes. The RSC Level II is a 6-sided attack, so this is effectively a TL10X6 rating. That means they can go at the jambs, boltwork, body, door and any other avenue they wish to explore. They can run as many tests on the safe as they like, and even require that we bring more than one sample if they feel the testing will be destructive enough that it may compromise another attack option they want to try. They can use any combination of tools they choose. In the case of the body attack in our test, they had both guys using two drills at the same time to perforate a break-line in the steel. It was a brutal test.

View Quote
Sounds like we might actually get a "gun safe" as the result.

But at what cost? Will the RSCII safes be significantly more expensive ?
Link Posted: 1/22/2018 9:24:13 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Melvin_Johnson:

Sounds like we might actually get a "gun safe" as the result.

But at what cost? Will the RSCII safes be significantly more expensive ?
View Quote
looked to be similar in price to the BF HDs
Link Posted: 1/23/2018 12:11:32 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/23/2018 12:15:44 AM EST by TheSafeGuy]
Pasted from a dialog in another thread. Thought it would be good to deposit that here...

The RSC history is like this...

One day in 1998-ish, a new up-start company in the Gunsafe industry decided that the way to make a splash and get attention was to go to UL and "negotiate" a new burglary safe rating. Since the player had a relationship with UL from "previous employment", he found the attention necessary to open a dialog. UL, a "non-profit" organization, employs something like 10,000 employees, so they are always up for a new revenue stream. A new listing brings in clients and money to test in the labs, and busy the expensive follow-up services that keeps the army in the field working. So, they are always open to new listing ideas that may exercise their resources.

The caliber of this listing was thought to be too low to fall into the regular UL687 TL safe family, and they grabbed the only other standard that fit, Theft Deterrent Devices, UL1037. The bar was low, and "calibrated" to the safes of the time with the appropriate test criteria. Hence, a new burglary rating was born. The UL1037 standard was not under the purview of the Burglary Safe's Industry Advisor Council (IAC), so the "safe makers" that were engaged in managing the TL safe ratings under UL687 had no opportunity to shape the new Standard. That was intentional.

Once the Standard was drafted, represented by a single paragraph buried inside a Standard that covered all kinds of unrelated products like car alarms and door locks, it was off to the races. It took a few years for most "players" to engage and go get listings as retail market pressure started to force the issue.

The change to split the RSC Rating was also a result of a closed process where safe companies, safe dealers and distributors, and consumers were left out. The successor to the IAC is the Standards Technical Panels (STP), which is now the organized process where the public has an opportunity to weigh in on Standards development. Again, without a single safe company, related market re-seller or consumer interest was consulted, the UL staff chose to split the levels out for the RSC rating. It's still not clear how this originated, and we found out from a dealer late last year that heard about it and inquired. We were never notified in any way, even though we have an active RSC rating.

The Levels don't all make much sense. Without saying anything bad about the UL organization, the authors didn't do much homework in building the new Levels. The existing RSC safes automatically earn the Level I rating. The Level II rating does fit in that void between the RSC and TL15, although inconsistent because the RSC LevII is a true six-sided rating and the TL15 is not. The Level III is, well... crazy out of place. The Level III Standard allows the TL-30 tool complement, and 6-sided performance for 10 minutes. That basically means the RSC Level III is WAY beyond a TL15X6 rating. The tool complement of the TL30 is robust with an array of badass power tools that can defeat 1" steel in under 3 minutes. Most, if not all TL15 safes would go down under such a test requirement...

So, now we have a Theft Deterrent Standard in direct contradiction, and competition, with the UL687 Burglary Safe Standard. I'm sure the authors never intended that result, but not a single member of the governing STP for UL1037 came from the safe industry, safe marketplace, or safe consumer population. So, it's no surprise there is an overlap and conflict.

Needless to say, this needs to be resolved. Last year I joined the STP for the UL1037 standard, and have made proposals to move the RSC rating into the UL687 Standard, and normalize the RSC levels to fit the existing ratings with continuity. Lot's of positive response within UL, but the wheels turn very slowly. I'll let you all know how this all tuns out.

Oh, and BTW... the RSC ratings will start a regular cyclic "re-test program" in 2019. So, not only will the cheaters get called out, but the physical security bar will rise considerably for Level I.
View Quote
Link Posted: 1/23/2018 1:30:13 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:


The best way to differentiate is with the tools used, and remembering the Level II is a two-man team, whereas the regular RSC is a one-man attack.

The tools on the left represent the basic tool complement for the RSC test. The tools on the right represent some of the tools used in a TL15 attack, which are also used on the new Level II RSC testing. Sometimes a picture say a thousand words... The tools shown are the most common used when they test, and don't represent all of the tools they could use.


https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/353883/RSC_vs_RSC-LevII_Tools-428436.jpg

The reality is that when you introduce the big power cutting tools, you step over a crucial line that steps up security to TL30 levels, at a much higher cost. The tools you mention are not used on TL15. So, frankly speaking, if you are facing a real risk of big power tools, a BFII or TL15 is not your safe. It's all about "real" risk assessment here. In a residential setting, it is really very rare to have safes attacked with big power tools. It happens, but at such a small incidence level that I honestly can say, "almost never"...
View Quote
My apologies for not being more specific; the links below are the common tools (more common than a fire ax or mining pick) easily found in a guy’s garage or fit into a small tool bag someone willing to break into our house could easily have in their vehicle. Are you advising that I’ve got to step up to TL-30x6 for these? Thanks for all your help on this thread.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/DEWALT-20-Volt-Max-Lithium-Ion-Cordless-Reciprocating-Saw-Tool-Only-DCS380B/203164237

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Milwaukee-11-Amp-Corded-4-1-2-in-Small-Angle-Grinder-with-Lock-On-Paddle-Switch-6142-30/300476867

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Skil-15-Amp-Corded-Electric-7-1-4-in-Circular-Saw-with-24-Tooth-SKILSAW-Carbide-Blade-SPT67WE-01/206688619
Link Posted: 1/23/2018 1:40:37 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/23/2018 3:38:06 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/26/2018 11:06:25 AM EST by TheSafeGuy]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TXDS:

My apologies for not being more specific; the links below are the common tools (more common than a fire ax or mining pick) easily found in a guy’s garage or fit into a small tool bag someone willing to break into our house could easily have in their vehicle. Are you advising that I’ve got to step up to TL-30x6 for these? Thanks for all your help on this thread.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/DEWALT-20-Volt-Max-Lithium-Ion-Cordless-Reciprocating-Saw-Tool-Only-DCS380B/203164237

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Milwaukee-11-Amp-Corded-4-1-2-in-Small-Angle-Grinder-with-Lock-On-Paddle-Switch-6142-30/300476867

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Skil-15-Amp-Corded-Electric-7-1-4-in-Circular-Saw-with-24-Tooth-SKILSAW-Carbide-Blade-SPT67WE-01/206688619
View Quote
I'm afraid that is exactly what I am saying. If you have a "real" threat of burglary with tools of the "TL30 Caliber", which represents all of the tools you linked, you'll need a TL30 safe. Any one of those tools can make an RSC yield in a few minutes with a moderate skill level.

Greater security costs more. When you buy a safe, you hopefully make a conscious and informed choice of how much money you are willing to spend and weigh that against the risk you feel is appropriate. If you live in a rural area, where a noisy attack would not be heard and reported, and there is a history of aggressive safe openings, then measure the value of your collection to be higher than what normal insurance can replace, it likely warrants the investment in the appropriate level of security. Security can be distributed with other measures that cost less up front, but carry monitoring costs. LEO response time in remote areas makes electronic security impotent, so you then need to consider a rider on your insurance if the safe investment is too great, again adding an ongoing cost of security.

No safe is impervious. Given enough time and effort, coupled with effective tools, any safe will get opened, even with the highest burglary ratings. Safes are "delay mechanisms", nothing more. You hope the the delay is significant enough to hold until the bad guy gives up or is scared off. Not to downplay the value of physical security, but a Homeowner's Insurance Rider is likely the most cost effective way to protect high value items, assuming they can be replaced. A typical Rider costs around $35-$50 per year for every $10,000 of coverage. Read the fine print, and make sure that all the valuables you plan to insure are covered completely. There are a lot of hidden restrictions that will piss you off when/if you make a claim.

Now the good news... this shit doens't happen often at all. In fact, I have not heard about a "professional" residential attack on a safe in a few years. It may happen, but they are not reporting it to us. Then, there is the "rating' vs reality. When we talk about a 5-minute rating on an RSC, one has to question the value of that and feel that is pretty ridiculous. However, the test times are terribly deceptive. The 10-minute test we just finished for the Level II safe took over 3 hours. They can attack as many times as they like, in different places, with a different approach using variations on tool selections. Moreover, the time is only ticking on the clock when tools are on the safe. So, all of the pre-test planning, inspecting progress, sharpening implements, changing blades and bits, discussion on technique and strategy , etc. are all "off the clock". They literally stop the clock every few second in some instances. The test guys take breaks when they get tired, and they do the whole test program in spurts of super-human aggression that can't be sustained for more than a minute at a time. In the real world, a 5-minute attack at a single point takes at least 15 minutes in reality.

For what it'$ worth...

Link Posted: 1/23/2018 3:56:04 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:
When we talk about a 5-minute rating on an RSC, one has to question the value of that and feel that is pretty ridiculous. However, the test times are terribly deceptive. The 10-minute test we just finished for the Level II safe took over 3 hours. They can attack as many times as they like, in different places, with a different approach using variations on tool selections. Moreover, the time is only ticking on the clock when tools are on the safe. So, all of the pre-test the planning, inspecting progress, sharpening implements, changing blades and bit, discussion on technique and strategy , etc. are all "off the clock". They literally stop the clock every few second in some instances. The test guys take breaks when they get tired, and they do the whole test program in spurts of super-human aggression that can't be sustained fro more than a minute at a time. In the real world, a 5-minute attack at a single point takes at least 15 minutes in reality.

[/b]
View Quote
We probably all would have been pleased to see the U/L come out with something like an RSC5X6 rating. Something that takes the safe's body into account rather than just the door and the jamb area of the safe.

The body has always been a "sore spot" with me. Many inexpensive imported RSC's (and maybe inexpensive US RSC's too) use stitch welds in the body and fill the weld gaps with Bondo. Yuck!
Link Posted: 1/27/2018 6:28:09 PM EST
SafeGuy,
There’s some hard truth in there for cost and protection. If I was to gamble on police response time for monitored system, that puts me in the BFII line of Amsec, it appears. So since the construction isn’t necessarily apples to apples, can you draw some lines of comparison of real-world protection difference between BFII line and the Graffunder B-series,since they’re not actually UL listed?
Thanks!
Link Posted: 1/28/2018 1:37:20 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/28/2018 6:23:57 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By D_J:
Since this is a tacked thread, could you please include the source of that quote.

@TheSafeGuy
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By D_J:
Originally Posted By TheSafeGuy:
Pasted from a dialog in another thread. Thought it would be good to deposit that here...

The RSC history is like this...

One day in 1998-ish, a new up-start company in the Gunsafe industry decided that the way to make a splash and get attention was to go to UL and "negotiate" a new burglary safe rating. Since the player had a relationship with UL from "previous employment", he found the attention necessary to open a dialog. UL, a "non-profit" organization, employs something like 10,000 employees, so they are always up for a new revenue stream. A new listing brings in clients and money to test in the labs, and busy the expensive follow-up services that keeps the army in the field working. So, they are always open to new listing ideas that may exercise their resources.

The caliber of this listing was thought to be too low to fall into the regular UL687 TL safe family, and they grabbed the only other standard that fit, Theft Deterrent Devices, UL1037. The bar was low, and "calibrated" to the safes of the time with the appropriate test criteria. Hence, a new burglary rating was born. The UL1037 standard was not under the purview of the Burglary Safe's Industry Advisor Council (IAC), so the "safe makers" that were engaged in managing the TL safe ratings under UL687 had no opportunity to shape the new Standard. That was intentional.

Once the Standard was drafted, represented by a single paragraph buried inside a Standard that covered all kinds of unrelated products like car alarms and door locks, it was off to the races. It took a few years for most "players" to engage and go get listings as retail market pressure started to force the issue.

The change to split the RSC Rating was also a result of a closed process where safe companies, safe dealers and distributors, and consumers were left out. The successor to the IAC is the Standards Technical Panels (STP), which is now the organized process where the public has an opportunity to weigh in on Standards development. Again, without a single safe company, related market re-seller or consumer interest was consulted, the UL staff chose to split the levels out for the RSC rating. It's still not clear how this originated, and we found out from a dealer late last year that heard about it and inquired. We were never notified in any way, even though we have an active RSC rating.

The Levels don't all make much sense. Without saying anything bad about the UL organization, the authors didn't do much homework in building the new Levels. The existing RSC safes automatically earn the Level I rating. The Level II rating does fit in that void between the RSC and TL15, although inconsistent because the RSC LevII is a true six-sided rating and the TL15 is not. The Level III is, well... crazy out of place. The Level III Standard allows the TL-30 tool complement, and 6-sided performance for 10 minutes. That basically means the RSC Level III is WAY beyond a TL15X6 rating. The tool complement of the TL30 is robust with an array of badass power tools that can defeat 1" steel in under 3 minutes. Most, if not all TL15 safes would go down under such a test requirement...

So, now we have a Theft Deterrent Standard in direct contradiction, and competition, with the UL687 Burglary Safe Standard. I'm sure the authors never intended that result, but not a single member of the governing STP for UL1037 came from the safe industry, safe marketplace, or safe consumer population. So, it's no surprise there is an overlap and conflict.

Needless to say, this needs to be resolved. Last year I joined the STP for the UL1037 standard, and have made proposals to move the RSC rating into the UL687 Standard, and normalize the RSC levels to fit the existing ratings with continuity. Lot's of positive response within UL, but the wheels turn very slowly. I'll let you all know how this all tuns out.

Oh, and BTW... the RSC ratings will start a regular cyclic "re-test program" in 2019. So, not only will the cheaters get called out, but the physical security bar will rise considerably for Level I.
Since this is a tacked thread, could you please include the source of that quote.

@TheSafeGuy
https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/U-L-Updates-RSC-Standards-Creates-Additional-Ratings/46-485818/
Link Posted: 1/28/2018 5:41:57 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By D_J:

Since this is a tacked thread, could you please include the source of that quote.

@TheSafeGuy
View Quote
https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/U-L-Updates-RSC-Standards-Creates-Additional-Ratings/46-485818/&page=1&fc=1#i4904589
Link Posted: 1/29/2018 8:59:44 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/29/2018 2:18:21 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By D_J:

Ah, okay. I didn't realize you were quoting yourself. Thanks for clarifying - just wanted to make sure everyone was aware of the source.
View Quote
Yea, I hope that is okay. I frequently answer questions in other threads that have substance enough to copy here as a repository for information and save myself repeating the dialog over and over in new threads that pop up later.
Page / 50
Top Top