Bump Key Question

[Semi_Dead]

Could bump key's be defeated by simply adding small pins (waffers almost) on top of all existing pins? resulting lock would have more spring pressure but the same key would still work.. and bumping wouldn't right? new to the forum but been pick'n for a while

[btierney]

What you are describing is a master keyed lock. Bumping will still work as the force is still transfered to the drivers. All you have done is created more shear points.

There is a thread discussing defeating bump keys around.

-Brian

[btierney]

By the way.. Welcome to the forum.

-Brian

[melvin2001]

that sounds a lot like almost using master keying to try and defeat bumping. to my knowledge this would almost lessen the security unless the top most pin was of greater mass then the lower 2 pins, and the top most pin was contained completely within the housing of the lock so it will never interact with the sheer line.

im no master of physics (failed too many classes in high school) but it sounds good to me

[Semi_Dead]

the way i mean is not creating a master key. there will be no more combinations. i mean thin wafer pins that sit on top of the current drivers. so these are already above the scheer line. i was just assuming the energy would transfer threw the drivers (blocking the scheer line) and to these waffers on top of them , whitch the springs are resting on...

wouldnt' the real drivers stay in the same place?

[btierney]

I understand what you are saying. It won't work, though, because pins resting on each other in the way you describe will act as a single unit. The impact will simply drive both pins up. That's my thought, anyway. You could prove me wrong.

-Brian

[Shrub]

I know what your saying,

Like Newtons cradle the last pin will be the one that jumps, if this is already above the shear line then the gap produced is of no use,

I dont know if it would work or not but it gives me the impression that it may just turn in the chamber and jam the lock up if your not careful,

Maybe needs trying to say yes or no,

[btierney]

Shrub, it would only work if the mass of the new pin was >= the mass of the pin and driver combined. Think of a pool shot where the second ball hits a tennis ball. Insufficient force due to insufficient mass.

I could still be wrong


-Brian

[Semi_Dead]

i see.. thanks for the super fast responce guys. I guess i don't know enough about newtons laws to determin if they would both drive up or just the last one, so that could be the reason why this simple plan wouldn't work. However i don't think jamming would be a problem because the edition would be between the drivers and springs. And in normal use they would never seperate.

Great forum though. I've been collecting info for probably 2 years on lockpicking (manipulation mostly), lockpicking itself is rather limited. But Again i have to say hurray for this community

[Semi_Dead]

btierney just read your last post u must have wrote while i was responding. Your correct in that, and i now see what you mean. so u would have to drastically enlarge the lock to allow a pin of equal or greater mass to fit above the sheer line ontop of the traditional drivers and this would not be practical.

However if the lock is made of basically inexpencive metal, what about a little very dence waffer up there, made of some other material.. may be possible. But it sure didin't take long to get this figured out.

- Basically Not Pratical

-thanks alot for all your help

[Shrub]

Hmm yes the action equals an equivalent reaction thing,

In the Newtons cradle it does bounce 2 balls when you drop two balls donest it, ive had a long day and didnt consider that,


As for the jamming thing, well you suggest this idea so that instead of the real shear line being created as a gap you meant that the gap would appear between the top pin and the top most wafer pin didnt you?

If thats the case then there is a gap between the wafer pin and the top pin (had it been sound in princible and the above reason didnt exist) in that split second the wafer pin could turn slightly in the gap and jam,

If you didnt mean this to be the reason for the wafer pin i cant understand any other reason for thinkiing it would be of any use unless ive missed somthing,

Either way myth busted lol


The best solution ive seen on locks is the counterbore whereby the top pin doesnt actually rest on the bottom pin,

[Shrub]

Any idea is a good idea whether proven unworkable or useable, at least its an idea and good imput

[btierney]

Yep. I always enjoy a good discussion. How many ways did Edison find not to make a lightbulb? Sometimes you just have to throw something out there and see if it sticks!

You made me think physics after 6:00pm, though. Shame on you.

-Brian

[Shrub]

Well its nearly 1am here so i guess your in a better frame of mind than i to be thinking about such things,

[btierney]

Yeah, I keep forgetting some of you crazy folks are living 6 hours in the future.