"mleuck" wrote in message news:fef0cce7-8387-43d4-a00b-

stuff snipped

I wouldn't call $159 per unit "gouging" for such a specialized product

It just depends on your perspective I guess. What are the technical and
manufacturing differences between the mass-produced $20 smoke detector and
one of these "specialized" low-frequency units?

I don't want to deny anyone a living, but the problem seems to be that the
mass-manufacturers are making the wrong product. It doesn't work for
perhaps as many as 1 in 5 Americans.

As for costing out the differences, the worst price difference I can see is
that it might take some AA batteries instead of 9V one to create as loud a
sound at the lower frequency. I just don't see where it should cost over
10X the cost of a Wal-mart or Target special. At $159 each, it's not likely
that a lot of elderly people will be able to properly cover their house with
them.

I believe I read somewhere that 9V batteries are very high on the list of
items shop-lifted by the elderly. That's no surprise to me when I read
about the living conditions of some of the older people in America. I've
been shocked at how much they're charging for 9V's ($4!!!!) lately so maybe
the switch to AA based alarms, if that's what it takes to make a loud enough
noise with them, is a blessing, too. AA's seem to be available at more
reasonable prices than 9V cells in general.

Considering that those needing such alarms are most likely to be the same
elderly adults asked to bail out Wall St.'s Richie Richkids with their
million dollar bonuses, I think what you get for $159 v. $20 is a valid
question. If 70 million people can't hear these units well enough to be
awakened by them, there was a BIG basic mistake in the selection and
approval of the frequencies used. That's what Mr. Morgan's URL attested to.
Fire experts are beginning to look at the statistics and have realized the
high frequencies originally chosen as attention-getters doesn't work as well
at rousing people as lower tones, especially when natural old-age hearing
attrition becomes a factor.

In fact, because some of the sites I looked at said that bed shakers are the
best at awakening people, I am thinking about taking the very loud bass unit
from a pair of Creative PC speakers I have lying around and hooking it into
my home alarm system to "shake the bed" with something like a recording from
a disaster movie. The literature I've been reading is that every second
counts in escaping a fire and that a combination tone and a bedshaker alarm
would give us the best possible warning and be very affordable as well since
I already have an alarm panel in the house.

As for being "specialized" I think the whole point here is that
low-frequency tone alarms shouldn't be considered something special. From
what Mr. Morgan's referral said, they won't be a high dollar, specialized
product with a few years as the new rules come into play.

There's very little design or cost difference between an alarm with a low
frequency sounder than one with a high frequency. High frequency was the
wrong choice, now that's getting fixed. I guess someone in the CPSC was
standing next to someone elderly and noticed what I did. Finally. Everbody
msistakes mkes. (-:

Oops, was that a rant? I guess so. Sorry. It just amazes me that this
problem has existed for so long without anyone doing a damn thing about it.
Who needs death panels when we have Underwriter's Laboratory approving smoke
alarms that elderly and hard of hearing people can't hear? Maybe they need
to change their name to "Undertaker's Labs."

Thanks for your input!

--
Bobby G.