Electric strikes suit framed doors with compatible latch hardware, while magnetic locks suit glass, storefront, and surface-mounted openings where frame preparation is impractical [S2][S3].
The decision hinges on 4 variables: power-loss behavior, free egress, door and frame compatibility, and the security required when access control fails [S3][S5].
How the two powered lock types work
An electric strike replaces or modifies the frame-side strike plate and controls whether the latchbolt can pass through the frame. The door latch or deadbolt remains the locking component, and a valid credential releases the strike [S3][S4].
A magnetic lock uses an electromagnet on the frame or header and a metal armature plate on the door. Energizing the magnet holds the door closed; removing power releases the armature and unlocks the opening [S2][S6].
That mechanical difference determines the basic choice. Electric strikes manage an existing latch at the frame, while magnetic locks add holding force across the complete opening. The 2 devices can also be combined when different doors require different outage behavior [S2].
Power loss and egress change the selection
Magnetic locks are generally fail-safe because loss of operating power releases the door, making them suitable for egress routes and main entrances where free departure is required [S1][S2]. Electric strikes can be selected as fail-safe or fail-secure, subject to the model, wiring, and governing code requirements [S3][S5].
Fail-safe means the device unlocks when power is removed. Fail-secure means it remains locked when power is removed. These terms describe the electrical response, not whether the entire door assembly provides code-compliant egress [S4].
For magnetic locks, loss of power can release the electromagnetic lock, but a mechanical lock or deadbolt may still secure the building during an outage. Electric strikes commonly preserve mechanical egress from the inside when paired with the correct latch or panic hardware [S2][S4].
Request-to-exit devices are often required with magnetic locks to provide a deliberate means of release. A power-failure condition can unlock the magnet without creating the deliberate release function expected by the authority having jurisdiction, so the full access-control sequence needs review [S2][S3].
Door compatibility determines retrofit feasibility
Electric strikes are generally the practical default for hollow-metal, solid-core wood, and conventional framed doors that already have suitable latch or deadbolt hardware. They can work with cylindrical locks, mortise locks, rim exits, and compatible frames, subject to the actual door schedule and hardware [S2][S3].
Magnetic locks are the stronger choice for glass storefronts, aluminum frames, gates, tall lobby doors, and outswing openings where cutting or modifying the frame is undesirable. Surface mounting and cable routing are common, but door or header alignment still affects operation [S2][S3].
The retrofit comparison is direct: an electric strike may require strike-plate replacement, frame cutting, and preparation, while a magnetic lock commonly requires surface-mounted hardware, armature alignment, and a route for low-voltage cable [S3]. Neither option should be selected from a product page before the door type, frame dimensions, latch geometry, and opening direction are verified.
Fire-rated doors, stairwells, schools, healthcare spaces, and mission-critical rooms need opening-by-opening review. Rated frames can be difficult to modify, and pairing a strike with hardware that does not deadlatch correctly can compromise operation [S2][S3].
Security, cost, and maintenance tradeoffs
Electric strikes offer controlled entry and automatic relocking when the door closes, while leaving the inside egress path mechanically independent when installed with suitable hardware [S2][S4]. Their security depends on latch engagement, frame condition, strike rating, deadlatching, and installation quality [S3].
Magnetic locks offer an inherent holding force rather than depending on a latch remaining engaged. Their security depends on holding force, mounting rigidity, alignment, release controls, door-position monitoring, and power design [S3].
Across 4 decision criteria, electric strikes score better for low-cost retrofit of compatible framed doors, fail-mode flexibility, and preservation of normal mechanical egress. Magnetic locks score better for glass compatibility, surface mounting, and continuous holding of a complete opening. Maintenance shifts accordingly: electric strikes need checks for alignment, latch wear, preload, and wiring, while magnetic locks require inspection of sensors, release devices, alignment, power, and relay operation [S3].
For a high-traffic main entrance, a magnetic lock is often the better fit, subject to code-compliant release and a mechanical securing plan. For an office suite with a compatible latched door, an electric strike is usually the more economical and less invasive choice [S2][S3].
Use cases, failures, and implementation requirements
Electric strikes are widely used on office suite doors, employee entrances, stock rooms, server spaces, and delivery points where credential-based remote release and audit logging matter. They can be configured fail-secure for spaces that must remain locked, or fail-safe where an exit path requires release during an outage [S2][S5].
Magnetic locks are widely used on glass storefronts, aluminum entrance doors, gates, perimeter doors, and heavy lobby doors that would be difficult to secure with a frame-mounted strike [S2][S3]. They are not a complete standalone security strategy during a prolonged power failure unless a mechanical lock provides a secondary barrier [S2].
Common failure modes are physical rather than electronic. Electric strikes can bind because of poor alignment, latch wear, incorrect preload, or a deadlatch that does not seat consistently. Magnetic locks can release unintentionally if power is interrupted, suffer reduced holding performance when the armature is not properly aligned, or remain locked if a wired release sequence fails [S3].
Both types use low-voltage power, and common electronic lock supply ratings include 12V at 2A and 24V at 1A. The selected power supply, controller relay, lock input, wiring path, and release sequence must be matched rather than selected by voltage alone [S5].
Specification checklist for access-control design
The correct device follows the opening, not the catalog. Record 6 items before selecting hardware: door material, frame type, opening direction, latch or deadbolt model, required fail state, and applicable authority-having-jurisdiction requirements [S2][S3].
For a framed office door with compatible mechanical egress, specify an electric strike and confirm latch engagement, deadlatching, frame preparation, and whether fail-safe or fail-secure behavior is permitted [S3]. For a glass entrance, specify a magnetic lock and coordinate the release device, door contacts, power supply, armature position, and mechanical backup [S2].
The access-control hardware selection should be coordinated with the complete door assembly rather than treated as an isolated lock purchase. The architectural hardware schedule must also account for frame preparation, door hardware compatibility, egress hardware, and any fire-rated assembly listing.
After installation, test each state rather than only normal reader release: credential unlock, mechanical egress, power loss, manual release, door closure and relocking, alarm or forced-entry indication, and controlled restoration after service. Record 5 test results for each opening: authorized release, free egress, outage state, mechanical backup, and alarm or door-position indication [S3].
Two trackable signals determine the next specification step: the door schedule must identify each lock opening, and the approved access-control sequence must state the required power-loss state. Any opening that cannot satisfy both documents should remain a design exception rather than a field substitution.