My home made barrel key collection (& how to)

[GWiens2001]

Because the fourth pin will not lift high enough to insert the full height of the key blank all the way into the keyway.

[Lauren]

Well, now I know who know's what.

That's right. Yale implemented an over-sized 4th bottom pin while maintaining a smaller top pin, which means the bigger pin can not enter the lock body (outside of the cylinder). This simple design feature acts like an adjustable ward plate. It also restricts the insertion of some try-out keys.

[femurat]

I was wondering why GWiens cut the key this way in his thread, and now I have the answer. Thanks

[Lauren]

Here's the finished key for my lock with some exposure of the pins. Notice, the fat fourth bottom pin, and also notice the top pins are spool pins. The spool pins didn't give me trouble at all when using shim material to open lock. I didn't even know they were there at first, until I had taken the lock apart.

[GWiens2001]

Great work, Lauren. Keep it up!

Gordon

[ketchneddy]

those are beautiful. it must be very satisfying to create functional art like that.

[GWiens2001]

Technically, wouldn't those drivers be serrated mushroom pins? Or is half of the spool just that worn, in which case spoorated?

[Lauren]

I would call them serrated mushroom pins.

I had another thought about the reason for the incorporation of the fourth (fat) pin in the lock's design. Suppose someone attempted to pick this lock by hanging on it (assuming the lock was attached to something). If the last pin in question wasn't properly set, and the first three pins were, then the cylinder would be able to shift out exactly the distance of the difference in outer diameters between the fat pin and the serrated mushroom pin. Remember the top pins are smaller then the fat pin. This so-called false opening would perhaps frustrated the would-be picker.

Gwiens2001, Why to choose to impression these locks? Is it for the mere challenge? Which, I could relate to.

[GWiens2001]

Yes, it is the challenge. Still quite a beginner with impressioning, and I do love a challenge. Same with challenging myself with picking ever more difficult locks. I bet there is at least one or two people on this site who can understand, besides you and me.

[MrWizard]

I am very glad to see this lock taken apart to expose the infamous 4th fat bottom pin. Would not ever know it was there or it's function. I like the way you describe it as an adjustable ward plate. In the patent drawing it doesn't show a fat pin. The lock would have really been hard to open if they would have turned the front of the cyld smaller in dia and matched the offset of the body of the lock to it so it couldn't be shimmed. Would have been hard to drill it and make the bottom of the hole flat to match plug back in 1890 - 1901 I would think. It would be hard to do unless they made a sleeve bushing in the front pressed it in and pinned it to the body so it would never loosen. I really like these locks. I have a Sargent one with 2 original flat keys really nice. One of the keys was never used it has gun bluing color on it none worn off at all. I can only assume it was factory done looks like it to me.

Richard

[Lauren]

Shimming probably wasn't a technique back then, my guess. Perhaps, as I collect other similar locks I'll start to see a design change, particularly those that don't just use a plain slotted key way. Does anyone have info. on this?

[MrWizard]

I was checking my Dremel saw tooth cutter as seen in your drill press checked it against some push key deepest cuts it is too small dia to make those cuts what do you do hand file those cuts to finish them? My cutter has never been used yet very sharp had it for decades. Would be nice if they make one just a little but larger. Rotary file type would be better for snag free operation. I tried only once to use my extremely sharp SMS slotter cutter on my key machine using the T131 blank, lightly touching the blank to make duplicate barely touched the blank it folded it over almost 45% to a nice piece of trash instantly. And I might add the chrome on those newest ilco T131 is the worst I have ever encounter once you even touch it with a file to hand file a key it peels off in large chunks right away.

[GWiens2001]

Sounds like they did not prepare the blanks properly before plating. Perhaps they did not clean them well, or used the wrong concentration of acid.

I hate it when I see things that used to be made right becoming junk over time. I absolutely love it when I see someone, or a company, that cares enough to do things right. I don't buy the cheapest product in the category for which I am shopping. I try to find the product that best meets my needs, preferably at a reasonable cost. Unfortunately, in the last few years the selection of quality has been going by the wayside.

Gordon

[MrWizard]

I never buy the cheapest anything but unfortunately when it comes to flat steel keys for no longer made locks you have in this case only one choice. The thing would have been don't chrome them in the first place would have been great if this is the best they can do. I have tons of older Ilco flat steel keys the finish never has began to peal off no matter if you wanted it to. I knew when I seen these it was going to come off just breathing on them. The tinsel strength of the steel is the cheapest metal I have even seen. I have cut 1000's on the same machine never see one fold over just lightly touching it to the cutter. It was instantly bent and once that happened the chrome came off both sides starting at the bend almost the entire length of the blank.

I know people at Ilco I called them to say how disgusted I am with this quality they said yes they are horrible but don't sell many so they make them cheap as possible. I said any cheaper the steel will dissolve with palm sweat!

Richard

[Lauren]

Richard, that's why I make my flate keys out of tempered steel. If the metal is good enough for floor scrapers and mason trowels, it d--n better be good enough for keys. I love the strength and the glass like sound my keys have.