Armory Sponsor
Posted: 5/31/2013 5:10:13 PM EDT
|
Since we have a new AMSEC Engineer on the board I wanted to ask a couple questions. On the Amvaults, when you go from a CE TL-15 to a CF TL-30, is there any differences in the body and the cast fill, obviously the door is different but how about the body? Same on both?
When you go to the CFX line TL-30X6, is the body on the CFX the same as the door on the Amvault CF TL-30's? If not, what are you gaining on the CFX line in terms of engineering? Thank you for sharing! |
|
Quoted:
Since we have a new AMSEC Engineer on the board I wanted to ask a couple questions. On the Amvaults, when you go from a CE TL-15 to a CF TL-30, is there any differences in the body and the cast fill, obviously the door is different but how about the body? Same on both? When you go to the CFX line TL-30X6, is the body on the CFX the same as the door on the Amvault CF TL-30's? If not, what are you gaining on the CFX line in terms of engineering? Thank you for sharing! Wow, good questions. Not many get this stuff. Okay, the truth exposed... Underwriters Lab is the governing reason for all that happens in rated safes like this. The rulebook is the UL687 Standard. This Standard has some bizarre inconsistencies. The one here that makes no sense is that the body qualification is the same for the TL15 and the TL30. So, when we qualify a composite body, one size fits all. So, the TL15 and TL30 composite bodies share the same construction. Bottom line is you get a better TL15 since the body testing is executed with a TL30 tool complement.. The CFX Body is "similar" to the CF Door. There are differences I can't discuss here, but hey are related to protecting boltwork and locks. The biggest difference between a CF and a CFX is in the test methods. The Door of the CF is close the same design of the body of the CFX. However, there is a hitch that make things a bit more substantial. When you qualify a TL30, the boltwork attack is only thru the door. In the CFX TL30X6, as a six-sided safe, the boltwork is also subject to side attack, unlike the TL30. So, there is a few key features that are added to contend with that additional challenge. |
|
WOW, thanks for sharing and I know I will ask questions that should not be answered to protect the security of the product. I knew the TL-30 was attacked with better tools, I did not know the TL-15 got the benefits in the body as you explained. I also did not know about the CFX door design based upon side attack. This is fascinating, at least to me and most likely the ARF members on this forum.
A lot of individuals do not recognize there is not much of a difference between 4 gauge, 5, 7, 10 gauge steel sides when attacked with something like a carbide disc cutter. Real security starts when you get into some type of plate steel. I know the construction standards on the TL-15 specify a body equivalent to one inch open hearth 50,000 psi steel. Put another way an upgraded 4 gauge is about 1/4 inch vs. one inch, there is a clear advantage (and yes moving & weight are issues). Here is an excerpt from an old thread discussing cutting a TL-15/30 AMSEC: "Keep in mind the UL guys have the safe schematics and know exactly how to defeat the safe. IMO, for anything but professional safe crackers the difference between TL15 and TL30 isn't relevant. It takes me the same time to cut through the side of either one in general. Usually well over an hour of hard cutting. Until you get to the X6 ratings (and corresponding weight!) there isn't a big difference in time for a brute-force attack which is what 99.9% of thieves are going to do. I've only cut a handful of real TL rated jobs and they are total whores. The Amsec TL-30 with the composite filler with their cursed carbide "nuggets" is a nightmare. Material cost for abrasive cutting equipment is very high for such jobs." Do you have any comments to add, thank you again, I am sure more questions will be forthcoming. |
|
Quoted:... A lot of individuals do not recognize there is not much of a difference between 4 gauge, 5, 7, 10 gauge steel sides when attacked with something like a carbide disc cutter. Real security starts when you get into some type of plate steel. I know the construction standards on the TL-15 specify a body equivalent to one inch open hearth 50,000 psi steel. Put another way an upgraded 4 gauge is about 1/4 inch vs. one inch, there is a clear advantage (and yes moving & weight are issues).
There is wisdom in those words. When you look at UL class burglary resistance, you normalize the attack methods and tools. Those boys are good... damn good. Better than any hack burglar anywhere. They get to practice all the time, and bill dearly for it! The abrasive wheel is the devil in the box. They use an excellent Milwaukee worm drive hand saw that has big power. They blow your mind by mounting the thinnest blade possible, which is 3/16 thick. They can effectively cut 2-5/8" deep with that toy, and there is nearly nothing that will stop it in the hands of a skilled man. Technique is everything. I have tested enough to learn that technique. It's about feel, bite, spark spray, sound and load. Get that thing in the sweet-spot and it will dig like crazy thru any metal. The difference in a cut thru 1/2 100,000 psi steel and 50,000 psi steel is insignificant. Cutting AR-500 hard plate, it's like butter, The heat generated anneals the steel and makes it barely stronger than mild steel. Your note about the various gauges, and their value, spot on. The time it takes to cut 10 gauge vs 7 gauge, barely a few ticks on the clock. Here is an excerpt from an old thread discussing cutting a TL-15/30 AMSEC:
"Keep in mind the UL guys have the safe schematics and know exactly how to defeat the safe. IMO, for anything but professional safe crackers the difference between TL15 and TL30 isn't relevant. It takes me the same time to cut through the side of either one in general. Usually well over an hour of hard cutting. Until you get to the X6 ratings (and corresponding weight!) there isn't a big difference in time for a brute-force attack which is what 99.9% of thieves are going to do. I've only cut a handful of real TL rated jobs and they are total whores. The Amsec TL-30 with the composite filler with their cursed carbide "nuggets" is a nightmare. Material cost for abrasive cutting equipment is very high for such jobs." Do you have any comments to add, thank you again, I am sure more questions will be forthcoming. That quote came from a good source, and is completely correct... |
|
"There is wisdom in those words. When you look at UL class burglary resistance, you normalize the attack methods and tools. Those boys are good... damn good. Better than any hack burglar anywhere. They get to practice all the time, and bill dearly for it! The abrasive wheel is the devil in the box. They use an excellent Milwaukee worm drive hand saw that has big power. They blow your mind by mounting the thinnest blade possible, which is 3/16 thick. They can effectively cut 2-5/8" deep with that toy, and there is nearly nothing that will stop it in the hands of a skilled man. Technique is everything. I have tested enough to learn that technique. It's about feel, bite, spark spray, sound and load. Get that thing in the sweet-spot and it will dig like crazy thru any metal. The difference in a cut thru 1/2 100,000 psi steel and 50,000 psi steel is insignificant. Cutting AR-500 hard plate, it's like butter, The heat generated anneals the steel and makes it barely stronger than mild steel. Your note about the various gauges, and their value, spot on. The time it takes to cut 10 gauge vs 7 gauge, barely a few ticks on the clock."
So, When you get into a TL-30X6, you have some serious security to keep someone out 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:... A lot of individuals do not recognize there is not much of a difference between 4 gauge, 5, 7, 10 gauge steel sides when attacked with something like a carbide disc cutter. Real security starts when you get into some type of plate steel. I know the construction standards on the TL-15 specify a body equivalent to one inch open hearth 50,000 psi steel. Put another way an upgraded 4 gauge is about 1/4 inch vs. one inch, there is a clear advantage (and yes moving & weight are issues).
There is wisdom in those words. When you look at UL class burglary resistance, you normalize the attack methods and tools. Those boys are good... damn good. Better than any hack burglar anywhere. They get to practice all the time, and bill dearly for it! The abrasive wheel is the devil in the box. They use an excellent Milwaukee worm drive hand saw that has big power. They blow your mind by mounting the thinnest blade possible, which is 3/16 thick. They can effectively cut 2-5/8" deep with that toy, and there is nearly nothing that will stop it in the hands of a skilled man. Technique is everything. I have tested enough to learn that technique. It's about feel, bite, spark spray, sound and load. Get that thing in the sweet-spot and it will dig like crazy thru any metal. The difference in a cut thru 1/2 100,000 psi steel and 50,000 psi steel is insignificant. Cutting AR-500 hard plate, it's like butter, The heat generated anneals the steel and makes it barely stronger than mild steel. Your note about the various gauges, and their value, spot on. The time it takes to cut 10 gauge vs 7 gauge, barely a few ticks on the clock. Here is an excerpt from an old thread discussing cutting a TL-15/30 AMSEC:
"Keep in mind the UL guys have the safe schematics and know exactly how to defeat the safe. IMO, for anything but professional safe crackers the difference between TL15 and TL30 isn't relevant. It takes me the same time to cut through the side of either one in general. Usually well over an hour of hard cutting. Until you get to the X6 ratings (and corresponding weight!) there isn't a big difference in time for a brute-force attack which is what 99.9% of thieves are going to do. I've only cut a handful of real TL rated jobs and they are total whores. The Amsec TL-30 with the composite filler with their cursed carbide "nuggets" is a nightmare. Material cost for abrasive cutting equipment is very high for such jobs." Do you have any comments to add, thank you again, I am sure more questions will be forthcoming. That quote came from a good source, and is completely correct... IMO, for anything but professional safe crackers the difference between TL15 and TL30 isn't relevant. It takes me the same time to cut through the side of either one in general. Usually well over an hour of hard cutting. So, this being the case, why would a CE Amvault not be classified as a TL-15 X6 which as I understand is a real, but rarely seen, designation. Is it the cost to submit and test at U.L.? If it takes on average an hour of hard cutting achieving 15 minutes should not be an issue. |
|
Quoted:... IMO, for anything but professional safe crackers the difference between TL15 and TL30 isn't relevant. It takes me the same time to cut through the side of either one in general. Usually well over an hour of hard cutting..
So, this being the case, why would a CE Amvault not be classified as a TL-15 X6 which as I understand is a real, but rarely seen, designation. Is it the cost to submit and test at U.L.? If it takes on average an hour of hard cutting achieving 15 minutes should not be an issue. Ahh, good question Grasshoppah... First thing to know, the UL Standards are a moving target. They change by the tools and techniques used. UL687 products are on a 7-year retest cycle. Every cycle, the testing is measurably much harder. It is rare to see a design that passed the last cycle survive another. If you read the standard carefully, you pick up on a subtle clause about the bodies of TL15 and TL30 safes. The key term is "Equivalent", specifically to 1" think 50ksi steel. The secret is that the standard does not tell all the details, there are "practices" that come from interpretative. So, here is the kicker... another truth revealed.... the Body of the TL safes (except X6 types) are tested on an Equivalency measure relative to the supposed penetration time for 1" steel. It was an 8-minute test until the last retest cycle, where it was reduced to 5 minutes! Therefore, the TL30 and TL15 safe bodies only need to survive the 6-sqaure test using TL30 tool for 5 minutes now. Shocker, huh? The reality is that that the abrasive wheel and the Sawzall have made plain steel plate a poor performer. I have opened a 6-square-inch opening in 1" plate in under 3 minutes with the abrasive wheel. The UL guys are better than me, a lot better. So, the UL standard says that you can make your non-X6 safe with a 1" steel body. That means it never get's tested if you build that way. If you want to do anything else, you test. That test is now a 5-minute equivalency test. |
|
Quoted:So, this being the case, why would a CE Amvault not be classified as a TL-15 X6 which as I understand is a real, but rarely seen, designation. Is it the cost to submit and test at U.L.? If it takes on average an hour of hard cutting achieving 15 minutes should not be an issue.
It's all about Insurance coverage. There is a general insurance coverage allowance for a given rating. the difference between a TL15 and a TL15X6 is trivial, and the TL30 is generally higher the the TL15X6. The value equation does not add up. The TL30 ends up covering more value than a TL15X6 for a lower safe cost. The TL15X6 has no place in the market. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:... IMO, for anything but professional safe crackers the difference between TL15 and TL30 isn't relevant. It takes me the same time to cut through the side of either one in general. Usually well over an hour of hard cutting..
So, this being the case, why would a CE Amvault not be classified as a TL-15 X6 which as I understand is a real, but rarely seen, designation. Is it the cost to submit and test at U.L.? If it takes on average an hour of hard cutting achieving 15 minutes should not be an issue. Ahh, good question Grasshoppah... First thing to know, the UL Standards are a moving target. They change by the tools and techniques used. UL687 products are on a 7-year retest cycle. Every cycle, the testing is measurably much harder. It is rare to see a design that passed the last cycle survive another. If you read the standard carefully, you pick up on a subtle clause about the bodies of TL15 and TL30 safes. The key term is "Equivalent", specifically to 1" think 50ksi steel. The secret is that the standard does not tell all the details, there are "practices" that come from interpretative. So, here is the kicker... another truth revealed.... the Body of the TL safes (except X6 types) are tested on an Equivalency measure relative to the supposed penetration time for 1" steel. It was an 8-minute test until the last retest cycle, where it was reduced to 5 minutes! Therefore, the TL30 and TL15 safe bodies only need to survive the 6-sqaure test using TL30 tool for 5 minutes now. Shocker, huh? The reality is that that the abrasive wheel and the Sawzall have made plain steel plate a poor performer. I have opened a 6-square-inch opening in 1" plate in under 3 minutes with the abrasive wheel. The UL guys are better than me, a lot better. So, the UL standard says that you can make your non-X6 safe with a 1" steel body. That means it never get's tested if you build that way. If you want to do anything else, you test. That test is now a 5-minute equivalency test. Fascinating, thank you, I posted something a while back about the 8 minute test which was found on a Mfgs website (Hayman possibly)and no one had a clear answer, this explains a lot. 5 minutes to breech a side, wow! I did not know about the 7 year cycle. So a 2010 Amvault would be better then a 2001, vs, 1993, etc (relatively speaking based on previous test cycle year). So, I had another question I was going to post about new safe construction and if anything has really changed in the last 20 - 30 years and investing in R&D. The 7 year cycle pretty much makes this mandatory as I see it. EDIT: Found this on the Hayman Safe site, The TL-30 rating is based on a net working time of 30 minutes using a wide variety of high powered tools against the door. In addition, it includes an additional 8 minutes of net working time on the body. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:... IMO, for anything but professional safe crackers the difference between TL15 and TL30 isn't relevant. It takes me the same time to cut through the side of either one in general. Usually well over an hour of hard cutting..
So, this being the case, why would a CE Amvault not be classified as a TL-15 X6 which as I understand is a real, but rarely seen, designation. Is it the cost to submit and test at U.L.? If it takes on average an hour of hard cutting achieving 15 minutes should not be an issue. Ahh, good question Grasshoppah... First thing to know, the UL Standards are a moving target. They change by the tools and techniques used. UL687 products are on a 7-year retest cycle. Every cycle, the testing is measurably much harder. It is rare to see a design that passed the last cycle survive another. If you read the standard carefully, you pick up on a subtle clause about the bodies of TL15 and TL30 safes. The key term is "Equivalent", specifically to 1" think 50ksi steel. The secret is that the standard does not tell all the details, there are "practices" that come from interpretative. So, here is the kicker... another truth revealed.... the Body of the TL safes (except X6 types) are tested on an Equivalency measure relative to the supposed penetration time for 1" steel. It was an 8-minute test until the last retest cycle, where it was reduced to 5 minutes! Therefore, the TL30 and TL15 safe bodies only need to survive the 6-sqaure test using TL30 tool for 5 minutes now. Shocker, huh? The reality is that that the abrasive wheel and the Sawzall have made plain steel plate a poor performer. I have opened a 6-square-inch opening in 1" plate in under 3 minutes with the abrasive wheel. The UL guys are better than me, a lot better. So, the UL standard says that you can make your non-X6 safe with a 1" steel body. That means it never get's tested if you build that way. If you want to do anything else, you test. That test is now a 5-minute equivalency test. What were you using to cut the steel plate in order to get through in 3 min?? |
|
Quoted:
What were you using to cut the steel plate in order to get through in 3 min?? Sounds like a question a would-be safecraker would ask, LOL. I used the Abrasive Wheel on the worm-drive Milwaukee Circular Saw. It's a brutally effective cutter.Once you get the feed rate dialed in, you can punch right straight in a plunge cut. A triangle cut pattern is ideal. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
What were you using to cut the steel plate in order to get through in 3 min?? Sounds like a question a would-be safecraker would ask, LOL. I used the Abrasive Wheel on the worm-drive Milwaukee Circular Saw. It's a brutally effective cutter.Once you get the feed rate dialed in, you can punch right straight in a plunge cut. A triangle cut pattern is ideal. I just cut mine a month ago, the wheels I was using must have been incorrect. They may have lasted 10-15 min tops. May I ask what wheels ya'll use? Edit...sorry for hijacking your thread. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What were you using to cut the steel plate in order to get through in 3 min?? Sounds like a question a would-be safecraker would ask, LOL. I used the Abrasive Wheel on the worm-drive Milwaukee Circular Saw. It's a brutally effective cutter.Once you get the feed rate dialed in, you can punch right straight in a plunge cut. A triangle cut pattern is ideal. I just cut mine a month ago, the wheels I was using must have been incorrect. They may have lasted 10-15 min tops. May I ask what wheels ya'll use? Edit...sorry for hijacking your thread. Not a problem at all! It is all good information and I remember your thread! Cutting Headache Linky |
|
Quoted:
I just cut mine a month ago, the wheels I was using must have been incorrect. They may have lasted 10-15 min tops. May I ask what wheels ya'll use? Edit...sorry for hijacking your thread. I don't remember the brand off hand, but I think they came from McMaster Carr.It's the thinnest one you can buy, 3/32" I think. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Does that qualify for a free replacement?  Do you think? Sorry to say, but the Tornado is not in the warranty policy. But, I'm sure we'll help a survivor out one way or another. We're big on support. He didn't play enough poker with that picture. He should have withheld it until he had a refurb deal in place. |
| The guy was just happy to see his customer didn't lose their valuables. He shared the photo with one of our distributors, and they sent it over to our sales team. We get photos and testimonials all the time like this. It's an ingredient in our R&D efforts. We usually contact these guys and gather more detailed information about the damages, look at more photos and ask a lot of questions. |
|
Thank you, that does mean a lot. We pride ourselves on playing a humble and fair game. Many of our competitors play dirty, lie to the public, make outrageous claims, and use negative marketing techniques to win market share. For AMSEC, the Gunsafe business is a segment of our overall market, around 20% of our sales. We are not the cheapest, and not the most beautiful, but we sell value and bring a wealth of security and fire endurance expertise to the table. I'm sure we would hold better spot in the market if we spent more time on advertising and education.
BTW, thank you for your service. I have the greatest respect for those that sacrifice to serve our country. |
Well, here is another question from the fringe... If I put a small safe inside a large safe, how much more difficult does that make getting into the small safe?
I think a much larger than 6x6 hole would have to be cut to get at a second safe, or am I really just spending money for no purpose? Also, where is the power coming from for the thieves' tools? Should an alarm automatically disable all the electrical outlets in a house? |
|
Quoted:
Well, here is another question from the fringe... If I put a small safe inside a large safe, how much more difficult does that make getting into the small safe?
I think a much larger than 6x6 hole would have to be cut to get at a second safe, or am I really just spending money for no purpose? Also, where is the power coming from for the thieves' tools? Should an alarm automatically disable all the electrical outlets in a house? Bottom line, safes are delay devices. They can ALL be opened given enough time and the right tools. Your choice should be based on your risk and value of contents. If you live in a rural area with meth cookers all around, you take every measure to protect your valuables. If you live next to the sheriff's office, an alarm and a shoebox is probably adequate. Sure, a safe in a safe is an awesome way to beat a burglary. the bad guy will never suspect such a surprise, and the discovery of another safe will slow him down considerably, and probably discourage him altogether. Most burglaries and safe attacks are executed with the tools found on the premises. Disabling power would definitely help, but you probably supplied a drop cord and a live outlet somewhere in the home. If you can effectively eliminate power access, you gain a good edge. However, many of the attacks I see are less high tech, using sledge hammers, wedges and picks. The lack of power is of no consequence there. Again, measure your risk and secure accordingly. The best security is not becoming a target. Don't flaunt your collection or your wealth. Make your neighbor an easier target. Install a good security system and use it. Install good lighting all around your home, and use it. We just discovered solar powered flood lights (good ones that burn all night) at Lowe's for around $50 each. Free light, that fits my budget nicely. Do things to confuse would-be burglars with lights on timers when you are not home. Motion detector lights (also solar powered for around $70 at Lowes) can scare a crook off real fast. |
|
For those who have the luxury of extra safe space (rare as it is) I would also recommend locking up those DIY tools that may be used to attack your safe. This in addition to ammo storage is a perfect reason to keep a second safe.
For those without the room to store whole tools locking up key components may be a good idea. The retaining rings for grinders & circular saws take almost zero space and the tools are useless without them. Blades for the reciprocating saw easily fit in a crowded safe. Have a gas powered demolition saw - stash the sparkplugs in the safe. etc etc etc |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, here is another question from the fringe... If I put a small safe inside a large safe, how much more difficult does that make getting into the small safe?
I think a much larger than 6x6 hole would have to be cut to get at a second safe, or am I really just spending money for no purpose? Also, where is the power coming from for the thieves' tools? Should an alarm automatically disable all the electrical outlets in a house? Bottom line, safes are delay devices. They can ALL be opened given enough time and the right tools. Your choice should be based on your risk and value of contents. If you live in a rural area with meth cookers all around, you take every measure to protect your valuables. If you live next to the sheriff's office, an alarm and a shoebox is probably adequate. Sure, a safe in a safe is an awesome way to beat a burglary. the bad guy will never suspect such a surprise, and the discovery of another safe will slow him down considerably, and probably discourage him altogether. Most burglaries and safe attacks are executed with the tools found on the premises. Disabling power would definitely help, but you probably supplied a drop cord and a live outlet somewhere in the home. If you can effectively eliminate power access, you gain a good edge. However, many of the attacks I see are less high tech, using sledge hammers, wedges and picks. The lack of power is of no consequence there. Again, measure your risk and secure accordingly. The best security is not becoming a target. Don't flaunt your collection or your wealth. Make your neighbor an easier target. Install a good security system and use it. Install good lighting all around your home, and use it. We just discovered solar powered flood lights (good ones that burn all night) at Lowe's for around $50 each. Free light, that fits my budget nicely. Do things to confuse would-be burglars with lights on timers when you are not home. Motion detector lights (also solar powered for around $70 at Lowes) can scare a crook off real fast. For those who have the luxury of extra safe space (rare as it is) I would also recommend locking up those DIY tools that may be used to attack your safe. This in addition to ammo storage is a perfect reason to keep a second safe. For those without the room to store whole tools locking up key components may be a good idea. The retaining rings for grinders & circular saws take almost zero space and the tools are useless without them. Blades for the reciprocating saw easily fit in a crowded safe. Have a gas powered demolition saw - stash the sparkplugs in the safe. etc etc etc THANKS! THESE ARE A LOT OF GREAT IDEAS. |
|
This poor guy doesn't have a house anymore, but when he rebuilds he'll have a new, upgraded Amsec safe in it: Link to Article The article included: "H&H Shooting Sports, where Ben purchased the safe, and who delivered and bolted down the American Security Safe, will be replacing his safe for an upgraded American Security model. Ben’s original safe is still in working order and will be installed into the H&H Safe Department so that everyone can see how the American Security Safe stands up to an EF5 Tornado in person".
[http://hhshootingsports.com/WireShots/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/IMG_5316-e1370009036662-682x1024.jpg |
|
Quoted:
This poor guy doesn't have a house anymore, but when he rebuilds he'll have a new, upgraded Amsec safe in it: Link to Article The article included: "H&H Shooting Sports, where Ben purchased the safe, and who delivered and bolted down the American Security Safe, will be replacing his safe for an upgraded American Security model. Ben’s original safe is still in working order and will be installed into the H&H Safe Department so that everyone can see how the American Security Safe stands up to an EF5 Tornado in person". [http://hhshootingsports.com/WireShots/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/IMG_5316-e1370009036662-682x1024.jpg Oh, you missed it... he has a c-clamp too.
|
|
That is one of the problems I have with manufacturers and their marketing, AMSEC included. When you say a safe survived a tornado, it sounds very impressive. So impressive, that they are going to put it on display.
However, the reality is that the peg board behind the safe is also barely damaged. Pretty good evidence that the safe itself was not subjected to any serious event. I would prefer that the companies doing their marketing would stick to real examples of survival, instead of the examples that the public would perceive to be real survival when they are not. I believe I saw another photo floating around of an AMSEC BF series on a slab with the house around it blown away. That would be a much better example to use. |
|
Quoted:
That is one of the problems I have with manufacturers and their marketing, AMSEC included. When you say a safe survived a tornado, it sounds very impressive. So impressive, that they are going to put it on display. However, the reality is that the peg board behind the safe is also barely damaged. Pretty good evidence that the safe itself was not subjected to any serious event. I would prefer that the companies doing their marketing would stick to real examples of survival, instead of the examples that the public would perceive to be real survival when they are not. I believe I saw another photo floating around of an AMSEC BF series on a slab with the house around it blown away. That would be a much better example to use. Hence the reason I didn't post this photo. This was circulating right after the tornado. The one that put up this news byte was a dealer in the area, not AMSEC. |
|
Quoted:
That is one of the problems I have with manufacturers and their marketing, AMSEC included. When you say a safe survived a tornado, it sounds very impressive. So impressive, that they are going to put it on display. However, the reality is that the peg board behind the safe is also barely damaged. Pretty good evidence that the safe itself was not subjected to any serious event. I would prefer that the companies doing their marketing would stick to real examples of survival, instead of the examples that the public would perceive to be real survival when they are not. I believe I saw another photo floating around of an AMSEC BF series on a slab with the house around it blown away. That would be a much better example to use. I stumbled across that web posting which was created by a sporting goods dealer, not the manufacturer (as explained by TheSafeGuy). I posted it in part for the dark humor (irony) of this item in the midst of the terrible disaster, and because despite that stores motives (self-promotion), it is nice that they will be giving the victim a new safe for his new house. |
|
Quoted:
That is one of the problems I have with manufacturers and their marketing, AMSEC included. When you say a safe survived a tornado, it sounds very impressive. So impressive, that they are going to put it on display. However, the reality is that the peg board behind the safe is also barely damaged. Pretty good evidence that the safe itself was not subjected to any serious event. I would prefer that the companies doing their marketing would stick to real examples of survival, instead of the examples that the public would perceive to be real survival when they are not. I believe I saw another photo floating around of an AMSEC BF series on a slab with the house around it blown away. That would be a much better example to use. I don't think its terribly impressive that a safe survived a tornado. I think its on par with a brick mailbox. I know it COULD fail, but its just a dense hunk of steel and concrete that should be at the highest end of wind/debris resistance. |
|
Quoted:
I don't think its terribly impressive that a safe survived a tornado. I think its on par with a brick mailbox. I know it COULD fail, but its just a dense hunk of steel and concrete that should be at the highest end of wind/debris resistance. You are right that it's not amazing that a safe survive a tornado, but a F5 is a pretty huge deal. Clearly this house was not in central path. If it were, there would be no walls. However, have you seen the methods used to test shelters? They fire a 2x4 out of a canon, and the point impact is shocking. In a real tornado, it's all a matter of chance. But when you see a picture like this one you can see it must have taken a beating... there is nothing standing in the area except a stripped tree inthe background.... ( 
|
Armory Sponsor