I find it difficult to accept the premise that the current safes ’ain’t what they used to be’.
‘What they used to be’ were often made to the clients special requirements and circumstances ranging from the 10″ ABP Chatwood CB’s in the 1930s for the old Commercial Bank of Scotland to the Tann Diamond, made to the precise demands of the Diamond Corporation (De Beers) in the 1960’s.
‘What they are now’ are a range of tested and certified products which have been subjected to the expertise of highly experienced safe engineers using a range of tools which now include explosives and the core drill and all to exactly the same level of imaginative penetration. Tests can never replicate the weird attacks that happen from time to time but they do allow the specifier and underwriter to make the best judgement possible although we do raise our eyebrows sometimes at the the amount of cash cover now being granted. This is nothing new of course and largely contributed to the demise of the British safe industry starting in the 70’s.
Apart from the two above mentioned top qualities and perhaps even the Sovereign, I tend towards the belief that others such as the Gem were largely acts of commercial vanity. Marketing should be based on demand and supply, not the other way round. Despite some strange underwriting practices, insurers still adhere to the theory of not having all your eggs in one basket. Two medium quality safes are preferable to one mammoth. All the more so when consideration is given to the security, or lack of it, given to the actual keys or combinations and lack of timelocks. (see Bank of America 1976 and Shettleston Bank Robbery 1959, Lloyd’s Bank Holborn Circus 1982, on which there is scant information save the fact that the Safe Deposit was robbed with one renter suing Chubbs’ and Lloyds’ for $1,250.000.
I think I am correct in translating KB as Core Bit.
