The fire risk assessment model CRISP2 was applied to a 4‐storey apartment building. The case building was an actual 4‐storey timber‐framed building. Partly predetermined design alternatives were used in sequential simulations. CRISP2 cannot take into account the frame‐material of the building in a satisfactory way, because the wall thickness, structural fire resistance or lining materials in the fire room cannot be modelled. It was found that adding smoke alarms almost halved the risk level. The risk levels 1–2×10−5 obtained are not far from comparable levels of fire death statistics from Finland, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Norway.