dealing with SFICs with stack a height violation

[lostlink]

Lostlink said: There are reasons why someone may choose to do a 22 or 24 stack...although I don't agree with them.....


What might those be? Depleted your pin kit? They sell refills in 100 lots. Too tired or busy to pin it up correctly? So you hand over a lock that is wrong & you know it When it was your job to do it correctly?

If you dont use software, your first check is your worksheet, second check is the pin stack flush, third check is to drop the load, spot of your fav lube, press the stack down, load the springs then cover with your thumb and check all applicable keys.

If all is well, seat the spring cap and test again. That would be check #4. SFIC locks equals a $commercial$ client. The lock should be as smooth as butter. If you pin up locks out of spec, your replacement locksmith will certainly find your error and suggest you stick with Kwikset replacements. As well you should.

Well I guess one reason for an over/under stack would be so we could have a post on the most acurate way to calculate the ck bitting for A2. Rakemaster said it first, and I added the way someone else learnt, learnded, or rather showed me how.

Too many will automaticly revert to the minus 13 method would be another reason.

As far as the mis-pinned core that I made.......it was just one of those "had to see for my self" deals. And it worked fine after I douched it WITH LPS............

I usually use a simple program to calculate the pin stacks based on the mfg. numbers that I have. Once I did end up with a 22 stack in one of the chambers...so I did the math on paper, and still a 22. Then I realized the calculations were calling for a #1 pin in the stack......Now we all know Best never made a #1 pin.....or did they?

I did install 5 (KA) Quickset deadbolts for someone last year per their request..........and they were truely delighted........

[maxxx]

Lostlink replied: "I usually use a simple program to calculate the pin stacks based on the mfg. numbers that I have. Once I did end up with a 22 stack in one of the chambers...so I did the math on paper, and still a 22. Then I realized the calculations were calling for a #1 pin in the stack......Now we all know Best never made a #1 pin.....or did they?'

Au contraire . 23 is 23. No matter the software or the pencil. The total is not going to add up to 22 no matter how much LPS or goose grease you squirt in the hole.

See, thats the problem isnt it? The software will do the work for you. Something tangible to blame if the Master key, Change key and Control key no worky. How does this lock work anyway? Somebody been messin with my pin kit? Good try, but you still havent convinced me that you pinned up an A2 with a pin stack of 22 and it works without a drip feed of goosem greasum.

[rakemaster]

You'll cacluclate the need for a #1 pin if you have a 0 cut in the operating or master key and a 9 cut on the control key. It's possible your software barfs under these conditions and doesn't give you the correct pinning.

Avoiding #1 pins is why best says that each cut in the same pin stack on an a2 system has to be odd or even, but not a mix.

[lostlink]

Lostlink replied: "I usually use a simple program to calculate the pin stacks based on the mfg. numbers that I have. Once I did end up with a 22 stack in one of the chambers...so I did the math on paper, and still a 22. Then I realized the calculations were calling for a #1 pin in the stack......Now we all know Best never made a #1 pin.....or did they?'

Au contraire . 23 is 23. No matter the software or the pencil. The total is not going to add up to 22 no matter how much LPS or goose grease you squirt in the hole.

See, thats the problem isnt it? The software will do the work for you. Something tangible to blame if the Master key, Change key and Control key no worky. How does this lock work anyway? Somebody been messin with my pin kit? Good try, but you still havent convinced me that you pinned up an A2 with a pin stack of 22 and it works without a drip feed of goosem greasum.

Like I said.....the experimental core that I made with #1 chamber at 24 and #4 chamber @22 worked fine with all three keys. There was a slight bind during insertion when the key finally reached the first chamber (that be the one at 24). No problem(s) breaking the shear line or rotating the key.

Remember now.....I'm talking about a MASTER KEYED STACK........And it is the TOP PIN (that be the one at the very, very top of the stack) that gets altered............

So I guess it's time to put the 003 wedgie away and pull out the A2 kit and see for yourself..........

[lostlink]

You'll cacluclate the need for a #1 pin if you have a 0 cut in the operating or master key and a 9 cut on the control key. It's possible your software barfs under these conditions and doesn't give you the correct pinning.

Avoiding #1 pins is why best says that each cut in the same pin stack on an a2 system has to be odd or even, but not a mix.

Thanks Rakemaster,I found my old notes and miss spoke when I said the total came out to 22. I made the core August 24,2005 and the chamber in question was to be pinned (Top to bottom) 9,9,1,2,2. According to my notes I used a 10 pin (for the control) and omited the 9 and 1 and all 4 keys worked fine. The key numbers are all o.k.....2 step pairity, even with even, and odd with odd.

Must have been a software barff........I plugged the numbers in on 2 different computers at work today and got the same results..........

I didn't do the paper and pencil thing today as I figure the core has been working fine for over 2 years..

[rakemaster]

You'll cacluclate the need for a #1 pin if you have a 0 cut in the operating or master key and a 9 cut on the control key. It's possible your software barfs under these conditions and doesn't give you the correct pinning.

Avoiding #1 pins is why best says that each cut in the same pin stack on an a2 system has to be odd or even, but not a mix.

Thanks Rakemaster,I found my old notes and miss spoke when I said the total came out to 22. I made the core August 24,2005 and the chamber in question was to be pinned (Top to bottom) 9,9,1,2,2. According to my notes I used a 10 pin (for the control) and omited the 9 and 1 and all 4 keys worked fine. The key numbers are all o.k.....2 step pairity, even with even, and odd with odd.

Must have been a software barff........I plugged the numbers in on 2 different computers at work today and got the same results..........

I didn't do the paper and pencil thing today as I figure the core has been working fine for over 2 years..

According to my calculations, that stack should open with operating cuts of 2,4 and 5 and a control cut of 4. I assume the 5 is unintentional. You probably mean to use a 10 instead of the adjacent 9 and 1.

[maxxx]

Bingo, we have a winner. Good job Rakemaster.