Is there a reasonably easy way to test Honeywell 5853 glass break sensors?
The answer to this question depends entirely on whether or not you are interested in cleaning up glass.
In all seriousness, certain other glass breaks can be coaxed into causing an alarm with a cheap facsimile of the sound because they do not have as much false alarm protection built in. They are effective, and easy to test and verify that they will protect the areas you need them to, but they can be more easily set off in error. Combine a foot tap and a jingle of keys and you can set off a 2Gig Glass break.
The Honeywell 5853, being made with false alarm prevention in mind, is a lot more stubborn.
A tool like this, the FG-701, (which is named specifically in the 5853 manual) is what you would ideally want to use. The required sound is not just a shatter however, so keep in mind that even with the FG-701, you will be smacking the glass with a cushioned tool of some sort to generate the necessary flex sound, which in turn causes the 701 to respond with the shatter noise.
There are ways of replicating this with a sound clip of shattering glass if you combine it with a quick rap on the window, or possibly a stomp. This is probably your best bet if you don’t want to spring for the tester. Even keys can do the trick but it is exceptionally more difficult to do than with 2Gig Glass Breaks. Keep in mind that ideally, you want to test them from the location of the protected glass.
it sounds as if the honeywell is much less prone to false alarm.
does this mean then, on the other hand, that the honeywell might be more likely to NOT detect an actual intrusion, compared to the 2gig? and if this is not the case, i.e., they are equally capable of detecting intrusion, is there any way in which the 2gig might be considered better than the honeywell? note, no pets involved here.
does this mean then, on the other hand, that the honeywell might be more likely to NOT detect an actual intrusion, compared to the 2gig?
No, all things equal, though the Honeywell 5853 has an adjustable sensitivity so if set lower than it should be for the distance it must cover, you could see failed activation. Make sure to follow manufacturer instructions regarding placement.
if this is not the case, i.e., they are equally capable of detecting intrusion, is there any way in which the 2gig might be considered better than the honeywell?
They are equally capable of detecting actual intrusion. The 2GIG Glass Break is less expensive.