Bumping ehh? Try this:O)

by **fini** » 14 Dec 2006 8:11

Deathadder wrote:well this one is just raised above the point at which a bump key can affect it.

In fact you could get locks with this technique comercially from CES. See http://deviating.net/lockpicking/08.21-shallow01.html for an animation of how it works.

Fini

by **globallockytoo** » 14 Dec 2006 13:13

I see what you mean ...now.....that is indeed a good idea however it reduces the amount of possible change keys available significantly.

Would making the shallower chamber in a random position be included?...so that potential bumpers dont just make a key to suit?

I must say that this is the first solution i have seen that has any real world merit to it.

Great find.

by **Deathadder** » 15 Dec 2006 0:55

FINALLY someone gets what im trying to say!

. lol, thank you fini, i wasn't aware that existed, if i did i would have explained it like that. As i said in my previous post(s) the raised one would be randomly placed in the lock, and might even have more than one just in case the burglar wants to spend 30 minutes trying 5 keys. someone stated to bump it then pick the raised one, but that would not be possible as you would have to pull the key out (besides, theyre just looking for a quick way in, not to pick it) Yes, the keying would be reduced somewhat but its just like going from 9 possible cuts to 8, and only one one or two pins, this would reduce the key count by an insignificant amount.

by **globallockytoo** » 15 Dec 2006 1:50

Deathadder wrote:...Yes, the keying would be reduced somewhat but its just like going from 9 possible cuts to 8, and only one one or two pins, this would reduce the key count by an insignificant amount.

I think there may be a problem with masterkeying in this situation. But that's rather insignificant in the swing of things.

Have you seen the Binary Plus system from Australia?....it is not exactly like this but it does use a single chamber that reduces the available key codes. I'll try to post a description of it...or find a link...Perhaps some of our Aussie buddies could help there.

Binary Plus is highly bump resistant.

by **jiggler** » 15 Dec 2006 10:46

Surely it would be easy to pull the key out and pick the one remaining pin? The cuts on the key are deep and the botom pins would not be touching the drives if the pin columns are set properly.

I see what your'e saying about it stopping someone bumping the lock open instantly but all they have to do is pick one pin and they're in.

Or if the guy had 3 or 4 sets of bump keys each with slightly shallower cuts then he could start with the deepest cut key and work up until the lock is open possibly?

If the one raised pin were a serrated beast then that would cause the average burglar some trouble.

by **globallockytoo** » 15 Dec 2006 18:13

jiggler wrote:...I see what your'e saying about it stopping someone bumping the lock open instantly but all they have to do is pick one pin and they're in.

Or if the guy had 3 or 4 sets of bump keys each with slightly shallower cuts then he could start with the deepest cut key and work up until the lock is open possibly?

When you bump a cylinder...the bump key is what is holding turning pressure on the barrel....if you remove the bump key, wha will keep the turning pressure on to allow you to insert the pic?

To the argument of carrying 3-4 sets of bump keys of the same profile...all i say is TIME.

The burglars biggest enemy is time....the whole idea with bumping is to open the lock quickly and easily...if this is not achievable...bumping will disappear.

by **zeke79** » 15 Dec 2006 18:17

The problem of putting the shallow drilling in random positions is it makes masterkeying almost impossible due to the loss of permutations across random cylinders.

Ie. lock 1 is shallowed drilled in chamber 2 and is limited to a 5 or shallower cut. On lock 2, chamber 2 is not limited but chamber 4 is. Can you see what I mean about ruining masterkey possibilities?

by **globallockytoo** » 15 Dec 2006 18:19

In non-masterkeyed locks for individual residential applications...it might work nicely...but I dont think manufacturers will limit their market place do you?

by **zeke79** » 15 Dec 2006 18:21

globallockytoo wrote:In non-masterkeyed locks for individual residential applications...it might work nicely...but I dont think manufacturers will limit their market place do you?

No, they absolutely will not in my opinion.

by **jiggler** » 15 Dec 2006 22:15

Humans are pretty dextrous creatures and could manage to remove the key while maintaining torque I reckon.

I agree whole-heartedly on the speed thing. And the extra noise it would make trying lots of bump keys out. But bumping is quicker than picking even if you have to use 3 or 4 keys to find the right one.

by **globallockytoo** » 16 Dec 2006 4:49

In thinking about this further, I dont think shallow drilling would work, because all chambers have to be drilled to accomodate the tallest possible pin stack...otherwise the deepest cuts on the keys wont work.

by **Deathadder** » 17 Dec 2006 21:55

ive looked at all of the problems with it, and ill try and work out a solution. the biggest issue is going to be the masterkeying situation though... I was thinking, maybe the raised pin in both the master key and the regular key would be the same, but the other 4 or 5 would have master spacers. if anyone has any better suggestions im sure we'd all like to here them.

Bumping ehh? Try this:O)

Who is online