Sturdy Fire-liner (not what you think)

[xtmman]

Hey everyone, I wanted to ask a question about Sturdy's fire liner. For this thread, I am only concerned with how Sturdy's compares to sheet rock used by many manufacturers...lets pretend "cement-like" composite safes dont exist for a moment, as I've read and come to my own conclusion on those countless threads.

I believe there are data safes that pass U.L. fire standards that use a similar material (or at least thats what I've read). But it is also my understanding that to achieve this they are using a quite a significant amount more material to do so (again, this is what I've come to understand at least).

So is their liner significantly better than plain ole sheetrock, aka fireboard? Or, is their choice of liner at least a better option than sheetrock. Again, I understand there are no "typical" home fires. But if a Sturdy safe and say a mid-priced Liberty (like a Franklin) safe were both put in a testing oven, which would you have your money on?

 

[billdeserthills]

I sell safes & I think you should base your research on UL Labs. Fire proof gun safes I see are 20 minutes, 1 hour & 2 hour rated. I like Amsec safes but I have opened other manufacturers products as well.

 

[xtmman]

I understand that UL is the industry standard, however very few manufacturers have anything UL rated that is marketed as a gun safe nor am I assuming either of these safes could pass it. Just simply wondering if the ceramic wool/high temp glass combo would provide better protection than sheet rock/fireboard.

 

[billdeserthills]

Yep, that's one thing I like about Amsec. They aren't afraid to pay UL to test their products, plus as a locksmith I get to see the insides of this kinda stuff and Amsec is good stuff, at least the US made is, I can't comment about their import line. Amsec has a nice cabinet thst fits at the end of your bed and conceals a gun safe that is lying on it's back, turns it into a bench seat kinda, it is interesting but not very secure I think it has a 20 min fire rating. I have however seen older amsec stuff with the 20 min fire rating & it had a piece of drywall inside the door--not very impressive...

 

[icecold1]

being in construction for the last 20 or so years i would say that mineral /ceramic glass combo is better than Sheetrock when it comes to a fire.we often times pack mineral wool in holes then use firecaulking to get a 1hr fire rating.i too like the sturdy safe package and am thinking i might just order one up soon.
pete

 

[a1abdj]

I have only been pointed to one data cabinet, and found a second one on my own, that carries a UL label and uses only ceramic insulations. I have no idea how much they use, or what type, compared to what Sturdy is using. I have never seen either cabinet in person, nor have I seen a safe with a UL label using gypsum board or ceramic as its sole insulation.

I have seen safes using cast fills that are very similar to the gypsum board, but seemless and thicker. The safes with UL labels which you see with ceramics are using it as a secondary insulator behind the cast fill of the safes.

The best way to determine how effective it works is to see it after real life testing or disaster. The problem is nobody is using it, at least on the scale where you would see examples of them after a fire. I think the fact that it's not in common usage says something.

 

[78tsubaki]

Here is my take on the wool/glass combo. Sturdy uses a lot of this material in their safes. The material that they use is not cheap, it is very high quality.

Sturdy also uses some pretty thick steel to build their gun safes. Thick steel is tougher to break into, but it also weighs a lot. The fire liner that Sturdy uses makes it possible to have a strong box while saving a little weight.

A side benefit might be that the wool glass combo does not attract and hold moisture. My safe stays dry and my stuff does not rust. I keep a can of desiccant in the safe and I cook it out once a year just for GP. No need for a golden rod and I live on the wet side of Washington State.

Please correct me if I am wrong but I thought that I had read somewhere that Graffunder uses a similar material in their safe doors to reduce weight.

 

[xtmman]

Well, I'd have to agree with you on the moisture part for sure. My only reserve with the material is that its not widely used, and I would naturally question why? And I just keep getting a hunch that it might not be the best option. Dont get me wrong Im not knocking the safe or the company, I actually quite like their lineup and am really considering Sturdy as well as a select few others (which I will admit, both are a cast or cement fill).

As for Graffunder, I have read the same as well. Although I thought that it was used in combination with a cast fill and not to mention that sexy 1/2" (min.) plate door. I could be completely wrong though.

 

[a1abdj]

Please correct me if I am wrong but I thought that I had read somewhere that Graffunder uses a similar material in their safe doors to reduce weight

It is true, but it has nothing to do with weight. Getting a cast material into a safe body is fairly tricky, and even more so on a door. I have never asked, but I am assuming that the reason they are using it in the door is because it is a lot easier to use.

The bodies are cast filled.

 

[TXdefender]

It is true, but it has nothing to do with weight. Getting a cast material into a safe body is fairly tricky, and even more so on a door. I have never asked, but I am assuming that the reason they are using it in the door is because it is a lot easier to use.

The bodies are cast filled.

+1. My Graffunder is using ceramic type insulation in the door. At 5400lbs I don't think it's about the weight.

 

[78tsubaki]

TXdefender,
I would agree that at 5400 lbs your Graffunder's use of ceramic type insulation is not about weight reduction. Thanks for clearing that up.
Knowing that ceramic wool is good enough for Graffunder (one of our countries finest manufacturers) makes me even less concerned about the use of the material in my Sturdy.

 

[heeler]

Just understand Graffunder is using it only in the door and nowhere else.
Quick question to those in the know about Graffunder.
Does Graffunder use also a cast cement material at the back of the door along with the blanket of ceramic in the door??
Also understand that as far as I know Graffunder has not submitted these types of safes for U.L. testing.
It would be interesting to see if it would be able to get certified at the one hour or two mark in U.L. fire testing using this material.

 

[a1abdj]

Knowing that ceramic wool is good enough for Graffunder (one of our countries finest manufacturers) makes me even less concerned about the use of the material in my Sturdy.

There is a lot more to making a safe fire resistant than just the materials used. Keep in mind that although Graffunder is using it in the door only, that door is also built of much heavier steel than Sturdy is using. The thicker the steel, the longer it takes to heat up. I would imagine if the Graffunder thought the ceramic material was better than the cast fill, they would use it throughout the safe, and not just behind those heavy steel doors.

Does Graffunder use also a cast cement material at the back of the door along with the blanket of ceramic in the door??

I believe it's just the ceramic.

It would be interesting to see if it would be able to get certified at the one hour or two mark in U.L. fire testing using this material.

I don't think you'd see many current gun safes passing the UL testing. Gun safes tend to be built and tested on the bare minimum side, whereas UL is testing at the worst case scenario side. UL testing is usually at least 500 degrees hotter than what the gun safe manufacturers are testing, and their test continues throughout the cool off period whereas the gun safe manufacturers simply stop the clock.

 

[TXdefender]

Just ceramic in the door, no cast.

 

[Keizer]

There is a lot more to making a safe fire resistant than just the materials used. Keep in mind that although Graffunder is using it in the door only, that door is also built of much heavier steel than Sturdy is using. The thicker the steel, the longer it takes to heat up. I would imagine if the Graffunder thought the ceramic material was better than the cast fill, they would use it throughout the safe, and not just behind those heavy steel doors.

I would assume the old saying "You're only as good as your weakest link" comes into play here. Graffunder obviously thinks that using the ceramic material in the door is equal to whatever they are using in the walls, other wise the safe would fail right out of the gate in a fire because of the inferior ceramic material in the door.

 

[Lee Roder]

Which insulating material has the lower thermal conductivity, cement or ceramic?

This is a physical property of the material itself and can be objectively measured without reference to manufacturer "hype".

There must be a reason NASA uses one over the other to protect its astronauts on reentry into our atmosphere.

 

[BIGGBAY90]

The way i see/hear it from this site, It don't seem to be any good gun safe out there and i'v been looking for years.

 

[a1abdj]

There must be a reason NASA uses one over the other to protect its astronauts on reentry into our atmosphere.

Which is the same reason I use to justify my opinion that it's not that great for use in safes. If it were, it would be in common usage, and not just found in a few (mostly gun safe) examples.

There are probably other reasons as well, but the vast majority of every real fire safe with an actual UL rating that you will see are cast filled.