Any tips to improve pick resistance of a tubular lock?

[femurat]

First of all let me say I'm trying to help a friend of mine. He works for an Italian company that manufactures tubular locks.
I'd like to give him good suggestions to improve the pick resistance of this locks.

They already use different springs in their chambers, so I told him to add 2 stronger springs. So the final configuration should be a couple of soft springs, a couple of very hard springs and 3 normal springs.
To open a lock with a standard tubular pick you have to adjust the friction on the tool fingers to match the spring hardness. Having 3 different hardness could make the impressioning process a lot harder.

Another improvement could be made by using serrated drivers. He's a bit reluctant to this idea since they don't make serrated drivers and this could be a difficult modification of the production process. I'm trying to convince him...

Any further idea or suggestion is appreciated.

Thanks

ps: even if you figured out the company name please don't post it here since I don't want to be involved in their business. One thing is to give a couple of free suggestions to a friend, another one is to be called as a consultant by a company, and I'm not looking for that kind of business at the moment.

[FarmerFreak]

Another improvement could be made by using serrated drivers. He's a bit reluctant to this idea since they don't make serrated drivers and this could be a difficult modification of the production process. I'm trying to convince him...

I second this idea. You should also try to convince him to add serrations to the chambers to make it extra annoying to try and pick. And that can basically be accomplished with a tap.

I have a tapped the chambers of a few lock cylinders now. You'd think that it would make the pins work like crap, but they actually work really well. Although now that I think about it, on a tubular lock it may not be the greatest idea. Since it will likely widen the chamber a little. Which could make it easier for some pins to get loose and fall out....hmmm... Oh well, I think it's still worth considering.

[Raymond]

I once had to drill out a tubular lock that I just could not pick. I then took it apart and found two round, flat plates inserted between the normal shear line. Each plate was drilled exactly for all pins. Half of the pins were spools. However, there was one additional non-moving pin that would allow the plate to rotate about 5 degrees. So, if you picked the lock to the shear between the plate and the top part of the lock, you would set the plate in a position that was non moving and none of the pins would pick any more. The bottom plate was exactly the same. The key opened the lock by setting the pins at the shear line between the two plates. If trying to pick it you still would not know which plate you set your pins at and the spools would mess everything up. I wish I could remember the brand name. Happy planning.

[mh]

Also, of course balance the pin stacks, so that they all have the same length.

[zeke79]

A sidebar could be added and the lock design simplified to using just a single long pin instead of a pin stack this way. We can chat by pm if you are interested in this design. It could go from a very simple design that is higher security than a standard tubular lock to a more complicated design that is very secure.

Of course some of these designs would require a slightly different assembly than a standard tubular lock most likely but they would actually me cheaper to manufacturer more than likely.

[inverseentropy]

Raymond: That's basically what makes the I-Core locks so hard to pick (multiple shear lines). It's funny, just this morning I was thinking about how this effect could be replicated by throwing multiple plates into a lock, although I didn't consider it for a tubular lock, in which case it seems much easier to implement. What if there were five plates or even ten? Then throw in some spool pins. I suppose the pins could possibly get bound up... Maybe the user would have to shake the key a bit when inserting it.

[Raymond]

Yes Inverseentropy, I agree. Some time past I modified a Kwikset cylinder with the same concept. It is posted here somewhere. If you want some photos PM me and I will shoot you some. You can also look in Photobucket at cookiebear7.

[globallockytoo]

Raymond: That's basically what makes the I-Core locks so hard to pick (multiple shear lines). It's funny, just this morning I was thinking about how this effect could be replicated by throwing multiple plates into a lock, although I didn't consider it for a tubular lock, in which case it seems much easier to implement. What if there were five plates or even ten? Then throw in some spool pins. I suppose the pins could possibly get bound up... Maybe the user would have to shake the key a bit when inserting it.

I-core hard to pick? due to multiple shear lines? That makes them easier to pick, not harder.

Pick it to the romove-core position and pull the core.....easy peasy japanesy!

[femurat]

Thanks for all the feedback!

FarmerFreak, I'll pass him the idea. I think a couple of serrated chambers are enough to trap the pins without ruining the smoothness in opening and closing.

Raymond, this is a very clever idea. Adding 2 plates would make it a lot harder to pick and specially to impression since the commercial tools work by impressioning the lock.
Sorry globallockytoo but I don't agree with you on this. Let's take a BEST for example: the 2 shear lines are binding the pins at the same moment, and you don't know on which one you're setting the pins. So usually you get all the pins "correctly" set, but some are on the control, others are on the operation, so the lock wont open. I tried to pick mine in both directions many times. The only way to open it is a bit of luck that sometimes I had, but I can't pick it consistently for this reason.
inverseentropy, we're talking about a real lock. Ten plates and spools... it's a bit exaggerated I guess they want a more secure lock without investing a cent and without modifying the lock... Just kidding.
Anyway, even if this idea requires a substantial modification of the lock itself, I think it's worth trying. I'll let you know the results.

mh, the pins stacks are already balanced, thanks for pointing that out.

zeke79, I'll let you know by PM if I need more details about the sidebar idea. I don't know if they're interested in a super secure lock or just in a little more secure than the actual one. I'll ask him and let you know.

Cheers

[globallockytoo]

Ever wondered why you rarely find any Best (or similar) I-core locks outside the USA?

Because there are so many better, more secure, aesthetically better looking and efficient and cheaper locks elsewhere.

Same reasons go for Medeco products.

[femurat]

Ever wondered why you rarely find any Best (or similar) I-core locks outside the USA?

Because there are so many better, more secure, aesthetically better looking and efficient and cheaper locks elsewhere.

Same reasons go for Medeco products.

So my considerations are wrong since they're based on the best (adjective) i-core lock only? The theory "2 shearlines make the lock more difficult" makes sense, but I'll take your word as true since I've never played with other i-core except for Best (noun). Now I have to look for some crap i-core lock to test it myself.

Cheers

[globallockytoo]

The fact remains, that any pin tumbler cylinder with more than one shear line is significantly easier to pick than a single shear line and it always will be.

This is precisely the reason that Bilock is so good. It has only 1 shearline, whether master keyed or not.

And Abloy is equally as good, except that it is not pin tumbler and doesnt come in IC core.

[FarmerFreak]

The fact remains, that any pin tumbler cylinder with more than one shear line is significantly easier to pick than a single shear line and it always will be.

And if the other shear lines are disabled and only one of multiple shear lines actually opens the lock?

Best locks can sometimes be easy. But that has more to do with the fact that the bottom shear line is usually masterkeyed. And if you want to torsion only the top shear line you can anytime you want with a special wrench. How easy do you think it would be to unlock a Best lock, if the tailpiece is missing, so you have to pick the control. But there aren't any special holes in the bottom to grab the control sleeve. And to top it all off, the control sleeve just happens to be on a bind. (That is the main premise behind the old Corbin lock that I have modified, it is difficult because the pins want to set to the wrong shear line constantly)

[Raymond]

My vote goes to Farmerfreak. Two separate shear lines for the different purposes of core removal and normal opening create a sigificant confusion when picking. Add some spools and a high/low combo for the control and you have way better security than a single shear lock like a Schlage or Sargent, etc.

This combined with the ease of removal and quick change out make SFIC quite a desireable system. Medeco, Marks, Kaba-Peaks, Scorpion, etc., all make HIGHER security locks with patented key control. All come in SFIC.

There is no denying the fact that there are many locks with much higher pick resistance, but all of the varied features make SFIC locks quite the economical buy.

Why Eurasia uses so few SFIC locks is a good question. A better question is "why not."

[femurat]

Thanks FarmerFreak and Raymond for supporting this theory.

Raymond, I think SFIC locks are not used here because a euro profile lock is almost the same thing. You can easily change it just by unscrewing a bolt, so there was no need for a most complicated lock to do the same thing.

Cheers