How do I remove the spring cover?

[Squelchtone]

Sounds like you have an Emhart High Security lock cylinder.

He says that it's an Emhart in his original post

This is due to a lawsuit by Medeco.

We had a post about this here last summer, I don't think anyone ever found any legit paper work to confirm it, maybe instead of a lawsuit, it was a cease and desist order? Either way I only mention it, because it's one of these urban legends that keeps being repeated without anyone actually being able to back it up or pasting a link to this 'lawsuit'.

Ironically enough, my Medeco dealer also services Emhart to this day, as you said, if it is an existing system, it is still supported for rekeys, repairs, etc. Someone suggested once that the T shaped interlocks used to shear off, which is why they stopped marketing the system, but I feel the locks are well made and the only time those parts would/could break is when a user was mishandling the operation of the lock, or the lock or door fell into disrepair or misalignment making it difficult to turn the key, forcing the keyholder to have to put more force into in than normal use called for.

Three threads so far bringing up this idea suggesting a Medeco vs Emhart lawsuit:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=46514
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11161&view=previous
viewtopic.php?t=11043&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

Either way, lawsuit or not, Emhart is a cool design, I think we can all agree on that much. =)

Squelchtone

ps. my cover strip was a pain to remove as well. Had to put the cylinder in a vice, and use an awl to bite into the brass and tap it out. left a couple nice gouges on the cover strip while doing this.

[n2oah]

Yes, the "Medeco v. Emhart Lawsuit" myth has been going on for a long time. I did some research, and there is no evidence that such a lawsuit happened. I was even told by a Corbin rep that Emhart cylinders are still in production. However, that was a few years ago.

[Evan]

Yes, the "Medeco v. Emhart Lawsuit" myth has been going on for a long time. I did some research, and there is no evidence that such a lawsuit happened. I was even told by a Corbin rep that Emhart cylinders are still in production. However, that was a few years ago.

n2oah:

Emhart cylinders are still in production for existing registered systems only... No new keying systems will be created on Emhart technology, parts such as plugs and shells, cylinders and such are ONLY available to those existing clients and will not be sold to anyone without a properly registered system on record with the key records department as Emhart has been retired and replaced by the Pyramid cylinders...

Probably has more to do with the fact that it is off patent, the keys can be created using commonly available blanks by machining the small channels in the bottom radius of the blade and therefor is not as useful a tool in the key control arsenal as it used to be 30 years ago when code key origination machines like the HPC 1200 were the domain of locksmiths and in-house maintenance technicians...

~~ Evan

[n2oah]

Probably has more to do with the fact that it is off patent, the keys can be created using commonly available blanks by machining the small channels in the bottom radius of the blade and therefor is not as useful a tool in the key control arsenal as it used to be 30 years ago when code key origination machines like the HPC 1200 were the domain of locksmiths and in-house maintenance technicians...

~~ Evan

Highly doubt it. The key control for Emhart locks is better than many key control systems today.

[Evan]

Probably has more to do with the fact that it is off patent, the keys can be created using commonly available blanks by machining the small channels in the bottom radius of the blade and therefor is not as useful a tool in the key control arsenal as it used to be 30 years ago when code key origination machines like the HPC 1200 were the domain of locksmiths and in-house maintenance technicians...

~~ Evan

Highly doubt it. The key control for Emhart locks is better than many key control systems today.

The key control for MOST Emhart cylinders is ZERO... Normal freely available keyblanks can be machined to operate those cylinders if you have any clue at all what you are doing in machining keys... Only the systems on truly restricted factory special keyways which most people have never even seen or heard about have any key control at all...

You only need an HPC 1200 key machine and the correct code card and cutter for Emhart to make any key you have a blank to cut... The slots on the bottom of the key blade can be readily made on a slotter duplicator more commonly used to cut safe deposit flat steel type keys...

So if you have an Emhart cylinder in the 59, D, H, L, families or on the 60 or 70 keyway all you need is to obtain any normal keyblank for that cylinder, machine the slots at the bottom for the interlocking pins, then cut the angled bittings on the key using an HPC 1200 code cutting machine (or your other preferred real code cutting machine) and you would have a working key...

That is why there is no real key control for Emhart anymore unless like I stated above the keyway in question is factory restricted...

~~ Evan

[Evan]

Sounds like you have an Emhart High Security lock cylinder. The pins should have a "T" shape on one end. These pins MUST be loaded from the top-you cannot use a plug follower. You have to interlock the proper pins, drop them in the top, put the springs in and then put the slide cover on. Also DON'T file the bottom of the key down. The slots or "crenellations" on the bottom of the key are necessary to turn the key more than 180 degrees. You cannot buy new cylinders anymore, you can only get them if you have a registered system for replacement. This is due to a lawsuit by Medeco.

It is NOT due to a lawsuit by Medeco...

Where do you keep circulating this myth from... Even if a lawsuit was filed and the case settled before trial there would still be an entry in the federal register for the judge's acceptance of the settlement agreement between the parties of the case... There has NEVER been any sort of legal interaction between Mechanical Development Company (Medeco) of Virginia and Emhart Industries or its successor Corbin-Russwin... Its a moot point anyway they are both divisions of Assa-Abloy at this time and have been for several years now...

The Emhart cylinder technology was RETIRED by Corbin-Russwin because it is off patent and Corbin-Russwin introduced a new patented product the Pyramid... So no new systems will be created and only those users of properly registered cylinders can obtain replacements or expansion materials...

~~ Evan

[n2oah]

The key control for MOST Emhart cylinders is ZERO... Normal freely available keyblanks can be machined to operate those cylinders if you have any clue at all what you are doing in machining keys... Only the systems on truly restricted factory special keyways which most people have never even seen or heard about have any key control at all...

You only need an HPC 1200 key machine and the correct code card and cutter for Emhart to make any key you have a blank to cut... The slots on the bottom of the key blade can be readily made on a slotter duplicator more commonly used to cut safe deposit flat steel type keys...

So if you have an Emhart cylinder in the 59, D, H, L, families or on the 60 or 70 keyway all you need is to obtain any normal keyblank for that cylinder, machine the slots at the bottom for the interlocking pins, then cut the angled bittings on the key using an HPC 1200 code cutting machine (or your other preferred real code cutting machine) and you would have a working key...

That is why there is no real key control for Emhart anymore unless like I stated above the keyway in question is factory restricted...

Yeah, zero key control whatsoever! All you need are a few key machines, special equipment for them and blanks. I'm sure everyone everywhere had this type of equipment available to them. I bet even the people at Walmart could do it.

[FarmerFreak]

n2oah, From a locksmiths point of view Evan is absolutely correct here. Most Emhart keys have no key control at all. The tools Evan lists are pretty basic locksmith tools. Plus if it was a challenge, I could use a regular duplicator a flat file and a pippin file with a couple of regular blanks and make a duplicate Emhart key.

The people at Walmart have a hard enough time making a regular duplicate work. And I'll bet most Corbin/Russwin keys would be restricted as far as they are concerned.

[n2oah]

n2oah, From a locksmiths point of view Evan is absolutely correct here. Most Emhart keys have no key control at all. The tools Evan lists are pretty basic locksmith tools. Plus if it was a challenge, I could use a regular duplicator a flat file and a pippin file with a couple of regular blanks and make a duplicate Emhart key.

So if any random person walks into your shop with an Emhart key, you're going to duplicate it, right? I'm speaking practically here. Not theoretically, with all the time in the world and a bunch of equipment. I could also duplicate Medeco keys with just files. That must mean they have no key control, right?

[Evan]

n2oah, From a locksmiths point of view Evan is absolutely correct here. Most Emhart keys have no key control at all. The tools Evan lists are pretty basic locksmith tools. Plus if it was a challenge, I could use a regular duplicator a flat file and a pippin file with a couple of regular blanks and make a duplicate Emhart key.

So if any random person walks into your shop with an Emhart key, you're going to duplicate it, right? I'm speaking practically here. Not theoretically, with all the time in the world and a bunch of equipment. I could also duplicate Medeco keys with just files. That must mean they have no key control, right?

No... See, Medeco has contractual obligations on the part of locksmiths who service Medeco locks and whom can originate keys to NOT DO SO without the presentation of an authorized code card for that particular key bitting...

Emhart has never had such a requirement... Most Emhart systems are not on factory restricted keyways which the locksmith wouldn't be able to even possess unless they serviced the system as an authorized agent of the end user... Then a contract with the end user would prevent the locksmith from making the duplicates...

Pretty much all Medeco systems being sold these days are restricted... You can obtain blanks for the original air, sky and like two other keyways, then there are like 6 or 8 common biaxial keyblanks on the aftermarket manufacturers offerings... But a reputable Medeco dealer will not duplicate most Medeco keys without the imprint card... They will gladly rekey your cylinder and originate you a set of new keys with an accompanying code card, but without a card they won't make you a dupe of anything but an air or sky...

~~ Evan

[FarmerFreak]

So if any random person walks into your shop with an Emhart key, you're going to duplicate it, right?

Yes. I would use our ITL-9700 (it's listed as manufacture #162 in the machine {system 70}), and use a slotter to cut the slots in the bottom of the key.

I should also point out that we have Medeco Biaxial keys hanging on the board and we cut those for random people that walk in. Why? Because the other locksmiths in this area do it, and because the patent has expired. We never did have a contract with Medeco or Emhart. We have contracts for Schlage Primus and Assa Twin 6000. So even though the patents for the original Primus and Twin 6000 has expired, we can't cut those keys for just anyone. It's just as Evan points out, it all comes down to which contracts we have signed and of course if the patents have expired or not.

[Evan]

Probably has more to do with the fact that it is off patent, the keys can be created using commonly available blanks by machining the small channels in the bottom radius of the blade and therefor is not as useful a tool in the key control arsenal as it used to be 30 years ago when code key origination machines like the HPC 1200 were the domain of locksmiths and in-house maintenance technicians...

~~ Evan

Highly doubt it. The key control for Emhart locks is better than many key control systems today.

@n2oah:

I am just curious what you consider "good" key control ?

Perhaps if you list out a scale of what you think common commercial keyways rate from worst to best...

It would help flesh out your knowledge on the subject a little bit and we could advise you on what is out there without resorting to ultra-high security cylinders on each and every door...

Often times the choice of what type of cylinder to use for high security is defined by the requirements of the rest of the building and finding high security that can be keyed together with lower security locks in the rest of the building rather than having a $200 cylinder keeping the broom closet and electrical room doors secured because there were a handful of doors in a a building with 100's of doors that needed high security and UL-437 certified cylinders...

~~ Evan

[FarmerFreak]

These pins MUST be loaded from the top-you cannot use a plug follower. You have to interlock the proper pins, drop them in the top, put the springs in and then put the slide cover on. Also DON'T file the bottom of the key down.

Now that I have one of these cylinders I can confirm that you were only posting factory recommend techniques and possibly not actually thinking the process through.

Yes the cylinder can for a fact be completely disassembled and reassembled without removing the spring cap. Removing the cap is easier, I'm not going to dispute that. But you never know, maybe someday it will be helpful to know that this or something like this is possible. If nothing else it gives us another option.

Here is what I did. I cut a duplicate, and cut filed down the bottom of the key. Next I unscrewed the cam on the back of the lock (I'm working with a mortise cylinder). Then I took the key with the bottom completely filed down and turned it almost 180 degrees. Then applied light pushing force from the back and then continued to turn the cylinder to the 180 degrees position. The reason for applying the pushing force just before and during the rotation to 180 degrees, is so the T shaped part of the driver pin rotates 90 degrees as it exits the groove and enters the keyway. At this point it is only a matter of pushing the cylinder the rest of the way out with a follower that has a groove cut in it.

All of that is actually really easy to do. Putting it back together is the tricky part. I found I couldn't line up the pins with their respective grooves while at 180 with the key in there. So here is what I did. Of course I made sure that the plug was keyed exactly to the key I was going to turn it with at first. Then I slid the plug back into the housing without a key in it. At that point I could use a pick and push all the pins down (the driver pins are at the bottom, otherwise all the key pins would have fallen out when I tried to put the plug back in the housing). Once I had pushed all the driver pins down, including the T shaped end, I was able to start to rotate the plug.

I know what you are thinking. The T shaped end of the driver pins aren't in their respected grooves, and to top it all off there isn't a key in the lock holding the key pins at the correct height and angle. This will never work... But you'd be wrong. Then I continued to turn the plug back to it's neutral position, oh and I turned the entire lock over when I did it so the key pins are still resting at the bottom of their chambers. Next I put the key that I had keyed up the plug to, and turned it. At the point in which I turned it none of the interlocking pins where interlocked. But as you turn it with the key the driver pins start to fall into their respective grooves one by one, and after a couple quick back and forth turns all the drivers should be where they are suppose to be. Turn it back and take the key out. Everything is back the way it was suppose to be with all the pins interlocked.

The slots or "crenellations" on the bottom of the key are necessary to turn the key more than 180 degrees.

This is correct, the key that I cut off the bottom won't turn past 180 degrees and should only be used to take the cylinder apart.

[n2oah]

@n2oah:

I am just curious what you consider "good" key control ?

Perhaps if you list out a scale of what you think common commercial keyways rate from worst to best...

It would help flesh out your knowledge on the subject a little bit and we could advise you on what is out there without resorting to ultra-high security cylinders on each and every door...

Often times the choice of what type of cylinder to use for high security is defined by the requirements of the rest of the building and finding high security that can be keyed together with lower security locks in the rest of the building rather than having a $200 cylinder keeping the broom closet and electrical room doors secured because there were a handful of doors in a a building with 100's of doors that needed high security and UL-437 certified cylinders...

~~ Evan

Evan, I appreciate the condescension. Although I'm flattered by your request for a list of commercial keyways, I don't have time to compile such a list. I know you'll be quite disappointed by this, and for that, I apologize.
Unfortunately, I also have to reject your advice regarding "what is out there without resorting to ultra-high security cylinders on each and every door." Unbeknowst to you, I actually do have a grasp of the different types of locks and their applications.

[Evan]

Evan, I appreciate the condescension. Although I'm flattered by your request for a list of commercial keyways, I don't have time to compile such a list. I know you'll be quite disappointed by this, and for that, I apologize.
Unfortunately, I also have to reject your advice regarding "what is out there without resorting to ultra-high security cylinders on each and every door." Unbeknowst to you, I actually do have a grasp of the different types of locks and their applications.

@n2oah:

I will have to respectfully disagree with you then...

Your continued assertions that Corbin-Russwin Emhart cylinders have any key control whatsoever in the modern era where non-locksmiths can purchase code originating key machines is one thing, 25 or 30 years ago back when purchasing such machines was a lot more difficult you might have had a point but today you most certainly don't...

Umm... I think you have strong opinions on things lock related yet you have not the first idea of how things actually are from the locksmith's side of the equation... Especially since you saw the requirement of the three standard key machines any person working on an assortment of different lock manufacturers products would need to possess prior to ever even looking at a lock/cylinder/key to work on it... Let alone the other things like pin kits and hand tools...

As far as the comment in my last post where I said: "Often times the choice of what type of cylinder to use for high security is defined by the requirements of the rest of the building and finding high security that can be keyed together with lower security locks in the rest of the building rather than having a $200 cylinder keeping the broom closet and electrical room doors secured because there were a handful of doors in a a building with 100's of doors that needed high security and UL-437 certified cylinders"

It does appear you haven't had enough experience in integrating high security locks into an existing keying system after the fact without replacing all the cylinders... There are only a few manufacturer's systems you can do that with and still operate all the locks with one key... In a large building that needs 30 high security equipped doors out of the 300 doors with locks, the facility manager/owner is going to be able to expect a competent locksmith to come up with a solution that doesn't require replacing all the existing lock cylinders with high security Medeco or Abloy cylinders and having to create a new master key system and issue all new high security keys to all employees just so that the increased security needs of a handful of rooms can be fulfilled... With that many doors, that is tens of thousands of dollars that would be needlessly spent...

Drop-in swaps for high security products are possible with:

Sargent Sectional keyways with the Sargent Signature Series High Security cylinders...
Schlage Classic Obverse/Quad (most keyways) and Everest with the Schlage Primus cylinders...
Yale Multiplex keyways with the Yale High Security cylinders...
Medeco Bi-level with Medeco M3 High Security cylinders...

*The Sargent, Schlage and Yale options above require establishing a High Security System with the appropriate key records department or administrator at the manufacturer to obtain the high security product offering and this requires some lead time to accomplish...

Formerly available:

Corbin-Russwin Z & DH class keyways with the Emhart High Security cylinders...

*Integrating Emhart into an existing keying system usually involved providing a new System 70 keying system as Emhart doesn't use the #1 depth as it is too shallow, keys had to be at least 2 increments apart from each other (master and change, or for cross keying), the use of the angles involved employing different MACS rules and where high security change keys operated any conventional cylinders at all ONLY one angle at each depth could be used as the conventional cylinders can't tell the difference between a left skew and a right skew... So while compatible, it wasn't something you could just swap out for any existing cylinder -- it required some specific planning, careful consideration and had restrictions...

~~ Evan