This experimental research evaluates the radiant ignitability of New Zealand upholstered furniture composites using the ISO Ignitability Test (ISO5657). It is a part of a larger research project on the combustion of domestic upholstered furniture at the University of Canterbury. The project aims to predict the ignition time of New Zealand upholstered furniture composites. Fourteen fabrics, one of which was fire retardant cotton, were chosen for testing according to their compositions and content. They represented the most common used fabrics in the manufacture of upholstered furniture in New Zealand. One foam was chosen as it is the most commonly used foam for domestic and commercial furniture. In total, the study tested fourteen types of fabric-foam combination composites, of which there were 750 specimens in this project. The time-to-ignition data are presented in a statistical way with mean, maximum, minimum, standard deviation and included the ratio of standard deviation to mean. The Flux Time Product concept and linearized thermal ignition model were applied to predict the time-to-ignition, the critical heat flux for ignition and the ignition temperature for the fabric foam composites. Predicting the ignition of upholstery composites by applying the thermally thin theory obtains a reasonably good comparison to the measured ignition data. Therefore, it is applicable to apply the thermally thin theory in engineering calculations and design. The prediction by the thermally thick theory is not as accurate as that by the thermally thin theory. In this research, it was found that Flux Time Product index is smaller than 1.0 for melting fabrics and greater than 1.0 for charring fabrics, when the best-fit linear correlation is achieved. There needs to be further research to justify these values for the FTP index for the fabric-foam composites. The ignition data obtained by the ISO Ignitability Apparatus in this study was compared with that obtained from previous research in the Cone Calorimeter. The comparison shows that the two test methods have a good agreement.