pin setting order question

[Bozyo]

If the pins in a lock set in one order (ie. back-to-front) when tension is applied counterclockwise, will they set in the opposite order when picking with clockwise tension?

[mcm757207]

You are not supposed to pick in any order (IE back to front, front to back), you have to pick them in order that they bind, which is random. For example, you may have to pick them in the following order: 25134

[Bozyo]

Yes, but... I'm picking this lock, and I've noticed that the pins seem to set from back to front, because I can pick it with just one rake over the pins if I get lucky. I'm just not sure if that should still be the case when picking it with tension in the other direction.

[Exodus5000]

I think he's just using back to front as an example. If the pins were to bind in the order 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 with a counter-clockwise tension - then i'm pretty sure that it would bind 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 if clockwise tension were to be applied.

Or in your example MCM, if a lock with counter-clockwise tension were applied and the pins were to bind in the order 2, 5, 1, 3, 4 - then with clockwise tension i twould be 4, 3, 1, 5, 2.

It makes sense logicaly. Lock picking works after all due to slight variations in the drill holes where the pin stacks are housed. If the hole that binds first is the hole that is farthest to the right - it would make sense that it would be the last to bind should the tension be reversed.

Take a moment to think that out - it's confusing and im not articulating it very well but it makes sense. I swear it does.

[Bozyo]

Yeah, that's what I mean. It does sound like it makes sense.

[SFGOON]

This is a good point that is being raised. I've noticed that many locks seem to pick front to back or vice-versa. My guess would be that it's because the pins are machined in alignment with each other, but not with the cylinder itself. Were that the case, and assuming you're applying your torque in the correct direction, it should be possible to pick the lock with one rake.

[Varjeal]

A lot has to do also with the wear pattern on the lock. The rear most pin gets the least "use" while the front one gets the most, so the "tolerance" so to speak is tighter towards the rear of the lock.

[SFGOON]

How strange you mention that, Varjeal. I JUST finished reading the sticky you wrote on it. Weird....

[benzy2]

I dont know how used a lock has to be to get the amount of wear needed to cause the order to not be opposite but on the older lock i have I pick it in the opposite order. It is just a 4 pin master padlock though.

[logosys]

What you are saying would certainly hold true ASSUMING all the holes are the same size. However, metal deforms over time, and some DP's will 'slip' and create a bigger hole in one spot than another. So the edges of the holes on one side are not neccessarily the inverse order of the holes on the other side.

[Varjeal]

That is very much correct, and a lot has to do with the actual quality of the lock housing and plug, and the machining tolerances that are considered "acceptable". Wear changes a lock's function a great deal over the course of time and even the size of pins themselves can affect how the plug holes wear depending on how the key(s) are operated in the lock.

For example, someone who jams the key into a lock consistently, is soon going to find out where the short pins in the cylinder are as they are going to have a tendency to "tip" to one side or the other as the bottom of the pin rides on the ridges of the key.

There are many factors that can change the "order" necessary to pick, and that's why many on here will tell you there is no guaranteed order for 100 % success.