This is a common question among IT / mission critical facility stakeholders.
I’ll try to boil it down to a few key points:
HFC-227ea (commonly known as FM-200)
- Most commonly used agent for halon-replacement applications
- Readily available in most every geography around the world
- Some OEM’s can provide in a delivery methodology allowing nearly direct halon drop-in replacement
- Safe for people, and the assets within the protected space
HFC-125 (commonly known as FE-25)
- Newly available on the market; not quite as easily available for re-fill purposes
- Previously had toxicological interpretation questions, so was generally not used in occupied spaces
- Recent (2000) adoption of certain methodologies to interpret tox. data allows this agent to be used more liberally, thus allowing more freedom for use in occupied spaces
- Generally requires ~15% less agent than FM-200, thus making it generally more economical for the same space
In terms of actual fire suppression performance, the two are virtually identical.
Hope this helps!
Lance D. Harry, P.E.
Director of Sales
Chemetron Fire Systems