Smoke detectors: ion vs optical

Boondox · Feb 9, 2005

I've heard the new optical smoke detectors were much better than the old ion chamber type, but can't find any info online. Anybody have any personal experience or suggest any webpages that have info on them? TIA, Pete

NY_Yankees_Fan · Feb 10, 2005

Pete,

Do you mean photo-electric? In a home version I am not aware of an optical type. In the commercial line of fire detection devices they have optical. BUT they start at about $3K EACH and are used as flame detectors.

If it is photoelectric you can get them at any big box store. Best to get is a combo with both photo and ionization in one unit.

ronjhall · Feb 10, 2005

Pete
Here is a site that should answer your question.
How Stuff Works
I just changed out my Smoke & CO detectors.
Depending on where you are placing detectors. Different types should be used.
Here is a link to Kidde that should answer some questions.

boustany · Feb 10, 2005

Apparently, each type is better at detecting one type of fire over another. If memory serves, ionic detectors are better at detecting fast buring 'hot' fires while photo are btter are detecting slow burning fires.

There was a big hullaballoo here a few years ago. So I have both in my house (belt & suspender theory) because, even though I live in a mostly fireproof house made of mostly concrete and steel, I am kinda paranoid for my family.

GerardC · Feb 10, 2005

( ...even though I live in a mostly fireproof house made of mostly concrete and steel......)

That may be true, but one must remember that everything else in the house will probably go up like a match book. Always better safe than sorry. Gerard

texastomtom · Feb 11, 2005

Which is best for determining when supper is ready..

My wife seems to like to use the detector to determine when supper is done...

Personally I think one that acts a little faster would be better.

Which do you guys recommend ?

Just kidding,,, my wife can cook yuMMy good.....

NY_Yankees_Fan · Feb 11, 2005

( mostly fireproof house )

IF your home has an automatic fire sprinkler system installed I would almost agree with you. BUT I can tell you with 25 years in the insurance business, I have yet to find anything fireproof. Even concrete will have damage, fire does a pretty good job of destroying things. Remember it is the smoke that kills not the fire.

boustany · Feb 11, 2005

Uh, yeah, reinforced concrete walls, concrete floors, steel studs, fire rated drywall, fire insulation inside all interior walls. The only flamable components is the roof, and it would take a while for a fire to get there. Basically the only thing that can burn inside the house is the paint on the walls. And I still have smoke detectors in every room, including the basement.

I would think a sprinkler system would be overkill, no? My building inspector (local fireman) thought it would be.

Actually if you've been 25 years in the insurance business can you explain why I don't get a discount on fire coverage and pay the same as a stick built house made out of highly flammable materials.

Have you seen many concrete & steel structures burn to the ground?

Boondox · Feb 11, 2005

Well, we had the sales presentation last night from Master Guard. For two dwellings, their recommended mix of ionic and photoelectric smoke detectors, three heat sensors, a couple of CO detectors, and five fire extinguishers comes to $4700!

Then I went online and found the same mix from different companies comes to about $800. Is MasterGuard that good...or is this another pyramid scheme?

ronjhall · Feb 11, 2005

For two dwellings, their recommended mix of ionic and photoelectric smoke detectors, three heat sensors, a couple of CO detectors, and five fire extinguishers comes to $4700! 
Wow! /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif
There cannot be that much work to install what only cost $800.
When we had our fire and burglar alarms installed a few years ago. Total cost including install was about $1000. I have upgraded it but have not had any problems.