Okay so I just passed the f89 test last week after two failed attempts and I'm still kind of processing it. The part that destroyed me the first two times — and based on what I'm seeing in this forum, I'm not alone — was the fire safety regulations and codes section. Specifically the overlap between NFPA 1 and NFPA 101. Those two get tangled together in ways that will make you second-guess every answer you've ever felt confident about.
The problem isn't that the code language is hard to read. It's that the exam loves to test edge cases. Like, you'll know the general rule for egress width or occupancy classification, but then the question adds one little condition — a sprinkler system, an existing building, a change of use — and suddenly the answer shifts. That's where people trip up. You memorize the base rule and forget that half the codes have exceptions that eat the rule alive.
Honestly what finally clicked for me was going through a ton of scenario-based questions instead of just re-reading the material. I used the free f89 fire safety regulations and codes questions and answers resource pretty heavily in my third round of exam prep, and the way the questions are structured actually mirrors what shows up on the real thing better than I expected. Not identical obviously, but the logic is right.
If you're building a practice test rotation, don't sleep on the suppression system chapters either. A lot of people I've talked to burn time on alarm systems because that material feels more familiar, but the suppression stuff — density/area method, hydraulic calculations, sprinkler spacing rules — that's where points quietly disappear. Put more reps into that than you think you need.
Anyway. Three attempts, finally done. If you're in the thick of it right now, the regulations section is a grind but it's learnable. Just stop trying to memorize everything and start learning how to apply the code conditions to a given scenario. That shift in approach made all the difference for me.
Honestly same experience here. I bombed it twice and the regulations overlap was brutal both times. I've been grinding practice tests all month and just hit a 78 on the f89 non fire emergencies 3 set which feels like real progress compared to where I started. Sitting the actual exam again in two weeks so fingers crossed.
What helped me was just doing timed sections back to back instead of full tests. You start seeing the patterns faster that way. Good luck to anyone still in it.
Honestly I almost dropped out after my second fail. The regulations overlap is brutal and I kept convincing myself I just wasn't cut out for it. What finally clicked for me was stopping the cramming and just drilling specific practice sections over and over until the patterns felt automatic. I spent a lot of time on the non-fire side too because I'd been ignoring it, and doing the f89 non fire emergencies 3 practice set helped me realize I had way more gaps there than I thought.
You're not alone in this. The regs section is genuinely hard and two attempts doesn't mean you can't pass it. I think what changed for me was trusting the process instead of panicking every time I got something wrong.
So I'm actually in a similar boat right now -- just hit 76% on the f89 non fire emergencies 3 practice test yesterday which is the highest I've scored yet. Regulations still isn't my strong suit but it's finally clicking a bit more after I stopped trying to memorize everything and just focused on the "why" behind each code.
I'm planning to sit the real exam in about three weeks. Honestly your post made me feel better because I thought I was the only one getting wrecked by that overlap section. Glad to know it's not just me being bad at this.
Failed it once myself and the regulations overlap was exactly what got me too. What I didn't realize on my first attempt was that I was treating NFPA 1 and the IFC like they were basically the same document with different covers — they're not, and the exam absolutely knows you think that. The questions that killed me were the ones where both codes technically apply but the answer hinges on which one takes precedence in a given scenario. I was guessing on probably a third of those and my luck ran out.
What changed for my second attempt: I stopped studying chapter by chapter and started building a comparison sheet. Like literally a two-column table — NFPA 1 on one side, IFC on the other — for the big ticket areas like occupancy classifications, egress requirements, and suppression system thresholds. Tedious as hell but it forced me to actually see where they diverge instead of letting the similarities blur together. I also spent way more time on the definitions sections than I wanted to, because some of the wrong answer choices are just slightly off versions of real code language and if you're fuzzy on the exact wording you'll pick them.
The other thing that helped was doing timed practice sets specifically on the regulations material rather than mixed exams. When you're under pressure those questions take longer to parse and I kept running out of time on my first try. Two failed attempts is rough but honestly the second pass felt like a completely different test once I knew what I was actually being tested on — not memorization, but discrimination between similar codes under specific conditions.
The overlap between NFPA 1 and NFPA 101 was what got me on my first attempt too — you think you know the occupancy classifications and then the question throws a mixed-use scenario at you and suddenly nothing lines up. What actually worked for me was building a side-by-side matrix in a spreadsheet: occupancy type down the rows, then columns for egress requirements, sprinkler thresholds, fire alarm triggers, and any exceptions. Took maybe two hours to build but it forced me to actually compare the codes instead of just reading them separately and assuming I'd connect the dots under pressure.
The other thing I'd add — and this is specific to the regulations section — don't just memorize the rule, memorize *why* the exception exists. The exam loves to test the edge cases, like when a building gets to use an alternative compliance path. If you understand the intent behind the code (life safety vs. property protection vs. both), the exception questions start to feel logical instead of arbitrary. I started writing one-sentence "why does this exist" notes next to anything that felt like a weird carve-out, and that probably saved me on four or five questions.
Two failed attempts before a pass is honestly pretty common for the regulations portion — that section is legitimately harder than the hands-on stuff because the codes contradict each other in ways that aren't obvious until you've been burned by them. You passed it, which means the matrix is already in your head. It just took a couple runs to build it.
Update from me -- I've been grinding through the practice tests and finally hit an 82 on my last run. Regulations still trips me up but it's way less painful than it was a month ago. Honestly the f89 non fire emergencies 3 set helped me realize I was neglecting that whole section, which is kind of embarrassing in hindsight but whatever, I know it now.
Planning to sit the real thing in about three weeks. Nervous but I feel like I'm in a different place than I was on my first two attempts. Good luck to everyone still in the grind, it does get better.
Related Discussions
- A2L exam mistakes I wish someone had warned me about8 replies
- Best free resources for SAC prep — what's actually worth your time8 replies
- Honest breakdown of what actually helped me pass CESCO (and what I wasted money on)8 replies
- Is DPSST certification worth it for career growth? Honest take8 replies
- Is FMCSA certification worth it for career growth? Honest take8 replies