Bilock Cylinder

[lockr]

They are NG. The main reason that the locks are flogged is because Security at the Shopping centre where it is installed are constantly changing the cores around a couple of times a week, so it is a bit excessive and not really what QCC is designed for. It shows though that on high use locks the chances are higher of being able to pull the core out.

QCC is definitely convenient, but like master keying it's a compromise between security and convenience. From your description it sounds as if the part of the cylinder housing that retains the core is being worn down from the constant action of the ball bearings in the QC core? If that's what happening i'm not really sure what Bilock could do to remedy the problem, apart from using a tougher grade of brass in the housing or redesigning the core retention mechanism.

I wonder why they opted to go for Bilock vs a traditional S/LFIC system. I'm sure it would have been cheaper and more durable.

[globallockytoo]

UL437 is but one rating by one agency. It is the primary rating in the USA. And Bilock actually doesnt have this rating. The system exceeds the rating but Bilock refuses to spend the required $25K needed to "buy" the rating.

European and Australian tests, is what I was refering to.

The other surveys, on customer appreciation of the product are in-house and locksmith feedback, used by Bilock for their own marketing. I dont think the results are publicly available.
Having worked in many companies where Bilock was sold (along with other products), I have seen and heard many similar observations myself from customers who chose Bilock.
I ran a survey for a large employer once, about products and services and found that a significant quantity of our customers that chose Bilock, did so, not because they were sold on the high-security aspect (although that was a bonus), but more because the system was genuinely different to anything else on the market, was good looking and easy to distinguish keys.

The other product that had an almost equal rating was Abloy Exec. (for similar reasons)

Whereas I understand that some customers may be looking for the increase in security or at least the perception of increased security, many more in my experience, dont really care about the high-security component biut significantly more about the key control aspects of any available system. Pick-proof or pick resistant is certainly a consideration today rather than yesterday due to the lock bumping phenomenon but otherwise not a vitsl component of a customers choice of product

[lockr]

UL437 is but one rating by one agency. It is the primary rating in the USA. And Bilock actually doesnt have this rating. The system exceeds the rating but Bilock refuses to spend the required $25K needed to "buy" the rating. European and Australian tests, is what I was refering to.

Not to try and take away from your point, but as of 2011 Bilock apparrently has submitted the updated version of their locks for UL 437 certification, according to the paper that datagram co-authored. This is a pretty reasonable move considering they probably want to see greater adoption in the North American market; and the costs associated with certification are really a drop in the bucket in the corporate world.

Regardless, don't all security certifications aim to achieve the same goal? Basically a certification is just a label that the consumer can associate with that assures them that the particular lock has met or exceeded a minimum set of requirements, primarily in attack resistance. It's meant to convey a sense of security to the consumer without the consumer needing to understand the intricacies and details of the lock's security features. So i'm not really sure why you claim the UL 437 rating is "bought", don't they perform the same or very similar tests as the Australian or European standards agencies perform?

The other surveys, on customer appreciation of the product are in-house and locksmith feedback, used by Bilock for their own marketing. I dont think the results are publicly available.

Having worked in many companies where Bilock was sold (along with other products), I have seen and heard many similar observations myself from customers who chose Bilock.

I guess this begs the question - what about the people who didn't choose Bilock? This is the problem with comments like this, there's no objectivity. If 100 people consider a Bilock system and only 10 of those people actually purchase Bilock, then if you survey these 10 people odds are that pretty much every single one of them would say good things about their purchase.

I ran a survey for a large employer once, about products and services and found that a significant quantity of our customers that chose Bilock, did so, not because they were sold on the high-security aspect (although that was a bonus), but more because the system was genuinely different to anything else on the market, was good looking and easy to distinguish keys.

Whereas I understand that some customers may be looking for the increase in security or at least the perception of increased security, many more in my experience, dont really care about the high-security component biut significantly more about the key control aspects of any available system. Pick-proof or pick resistant is certainly a consideration today rather than yesterday due to the lock bumping phenomenon but otherwise not a vitsl component of a customers choice of product

In Australia, I remember one inexpensive motel that we stayed at. This wasn't a particularly ritzy place and it was pretty cheap - the rooms were clean but it was definitely budget. But they had Bilocks on the doors. It goes without saying that the locks were undoubtedly master-keyed QCC. But it seems to me that using Bilocks on every room would have been an expensive investment, and certainly a serious decision for any establishment that is mindful of their bottom line. So for a place like this to choose Bilock over a much cheaper, more traditional SFIC system really makes me doubt that they would have invested in Bilock because "the keys look cool".

After investing their $20k+ in the Bilock system, of course a locksmith is going to recommend it to customers over any cheaper alternatives. But I bet a lot of customers would choose the cheaper alternative if they were given the option; if the seller was honest and explained that albeit slightly less secure but master keyed QC options were available for serious cost savings; and if they fully understood how much more those "cool" keys were going to cost them in the long run. Caveat emptor?

[globallockytoo]

I think you'll find that SFIC and LFIC are concentrated almost wholly in the North American Market. You just dont see them outside the USA. Similar to Medeco, another product rarely found outside the North American market.

(specifically regarding the motel you stayed in) The point about Bilock is the tight control of keys. People seem to like the fact that keys are much more difficult to obtain than other systems. Primus (standard) can be ordered by any hardware store on behalf of the client. Many Medeco profiles are no longer restricted and blanks are often highly available by many different companies. Assa profiles are sold and bandied about widely (much wider than Bilock). The tight control of Bilock dealerships and close scrutiny of dealers reinforces the company's stand behind the product and it's dealers.

I have sold systems here in the USA, far and wide across the country. Many people are buying them due to the fear of bumping but many are buying them because duplicate or surreptitious duplication is very difficult to achieve without considerable cost and effort. That people like the color options and ergonomic keyheads, may just be another like that while immaterial to security perception, just happens to add to peoples appreciation of the product.

Datagrams information is different to mine. I am not doubting his data however, as far as I know, UL437 has not been granted yet. I do believe it was submitted for review, however it seems an awful long time has passed since December 2011 for their not be be a listing, no?

As to me mentioning the "bought" fact about UL437. Do you remember when Schlage Securekey and Kwikset Smartkey first came out? Both products almpst immediately were granted UL437 compliance. Now, realistically, do you or anyone else think they should be included in the UL437 listings?

As to your assumption that the surveys conducted are meaningless because I didnt mention about the customers that didnt choose Bilock, your first question (correct me if I am wrong) was about reasons for choosing it, not - not choosing it.

[lockr]

I think you'll find that SFIC and LFIC are concentrated almost wholly in the North American Market. You just dont see them outside the USA. Similar to Medeco, another product rarely found outside the North American market.

I wasn't aware S/LFIC isn't widely available outside of North America. Although i'm sure i've seen SFIC on some doors in Australia, my memory just isn't that good. However if that's the case it would certainly explain the popularity of the Bilock QCC in Australia. I'll take a closer look when i'm down that way next.

(specifically regarding the motel you stayed in) The point about Bilock is the tight control of keys. People seem to like the fact that keys are much more difficult to obtain than other systems. Primus (standard) can be ordered by any hardware store on behalf of the client. Many Medeco profiles are no longer restricted and blanks are often highly available by many different companies. Assa profiles are sold and bandied about widely (much wider than Bilock). The tight control of Bilock dealerships and close scrutiny of dealers reinforces the company's stand behind the product and it's dealers.

You're correct, and I agree; key control in applications such as this are actually a pretty big deal. The last thing you want is a guest duplicating the key to their room, and then coming back later and robbing someone blind. Choosing a system with a difficult to obtain key blank is a wise decision in this case with a nod to the consideration of the security of their guests. Of course Bilock isn't the only option (Protec and Mul-T-lock come to mind) but for hotels/motels, why use a mechanical lock at all? Virtually every establishment that i've stayed at in recent years (in Canada and the US) uses an electronic keycard system. Although I have my concerns about the security of these systems, they appear to eliminate the problems with key control, and seem to offer a reasonable level of security and convenience for their guests. Of course i've never investigated these systems in the slightest, so I may be completely wrong. Feel free to correct me on this.

Datagrams information is different to mine. I am not doubting his data however, as far as I know, UL437 has not been granted yet. I do believe it was submitted for review, however it seems an awful long time has passed since December 2011 for their not be be a listing, no?

I don't really know; I could speculate but anything I come up with would only be a guess. I was under the impression from the article that only the new updated cores would be UL 437 certified, not the current design; but I may be mis-interpreting that. Have you heard anything about the new cores being released? The article that datagram co-authored offers only a small but tantalizing glimpse of the new design, but I would definitely prefer the updated version if I was considering purchasing a Bilock system.

As to me mentioning the "bought" fact about UL437. Do you remember when Schlage Securekey and Kwikset Smartkey first came out? Both products almpst immediately were granted UL437 compliance. Now, realistically, do you or anyone else think they should be included in the UL437 listings?

Although i'm vaguely familiar with some of the issues surrounding the Smartkey, I'm not really qualified to offer any form of an answer on that subject. I've never used one, let alone had the opportunity to dismantle one and tinker with it's internal workings. I was hoping that with the demise of the Schlage Securekey locks that i'd be able to pick one up easily [eg cheaply] but so far I haven't come across either. They just don't seem to be too popular in my neck of the woods.

Regardless, I'm sure UL was working with the information they had at the time they evaluated the locks prior to granting the rating. It's easy to fault the system, but it underscores the fundamental issue with certifications - although their intent is to assure consumers on the security a lock offers, you can't blindy trust that any lock sporting a given certification has any higher degree of security than another. Comparing Bilock to Smartkey is laughable, but the fact that Bilock does not have UL 437 certification whereas Smartkey does highlights how useless certifications in general are. Of course i'm not discounting your claims of corruption within the industry, in fact I feel you're correct that Smartkey is most certainly not worthy of the rating; but the money has been paid, UL has granted the certification and now that obvious flaws and severe shortcomings in the Smartkey system have been made apparent** there doesn't seem to be any mechanism in place for UL to revoke said certification. Or is there?

** An obvious example of this is the meager 243 actual differs on a Smartkey lock. UL 437 apparently requires door locks to have at least 1000 different combinations, and the Smartkey in practice has less than a quarter of the minimum.

[lockr]

An obvious example of this is the meager 243 actual differs on a Smartkey lock. UL 437 apparently requires door locks to have at least 1000 different combinations, and the Smartkey in practice has less than a quarter of the minimum.

I meant to add that I know you and most people reading this are more than aware of this, it was added as an example for the benefit of any visitors browsing the forums.

[minifhncc]

I second the fact that I have never seen a SCIF here. They probably do exist, but they certaintly aren't that popular.

I've seen Medeco once, in the lifts (fan control or something) in the new Supreme Court building.

[FarmerFreak]

Unless I'm mistaken Kwikset smartkey only achieved UL rating for pick resistance... NOT for destructive entry or anything other than strictly picking. And to that extent, the smartkey is one hell of a lock to try and pick blind. Now if Schlage's securekey passed the same test the smartkey did, then yes there is obvious problem with the system.

I'm not defending the UL ratings though. I have my doubts that the people doing the tests really know much about picking.

Got a link to the Emhart video? BTW... My son and I both got a real kick out of your video of 'piggy-picking' the Schlage.

Gordon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuTzpJUzQxg

[lunchb0x]

lockr, as Global already said we don't really get SFIC or LFIC locks over here. I only come across them now and then and most of the time it's an over ride cylinder on a Unican lock.
For a high security lock that is convenient to re-key QCC has been the only option for a long time, a couple of years ago Galaxy came out which gives us another option, I haven't really done much with that. It was also made by the same guy who did Bi-Lock.

[GWiens2001]

Galaxy is produced by the Australian Lock Group, the manufacturer of Bilock.

Keyway and Key look pretty interesting. Similar to a tubular lock, but with 'arms' sticking out to the sides, each of which apear to be cut for warding or levers, like a very short safe deposit box key. Seems that would make quite a robust key.

I think they don't use pins, either. However, not having had my grubby little hands on one, can't be sure. Not that I'd ever take one apart.

[lockr]

lockr, as Global already said we don't really get SFIC or LFIC locks over here. I only come across them now and then and most of the time it's an over ride cylinder on a Unican lock.
For a high security lock that is convenient to re-key QCC has been the only option for a long time, a couple of years ago Galaxy came out which gives us another option, I haven't really done much with that. It was also made by the same guy who did Bi-Lock.

Yup, I was surprised to hear that. I learn something new every day and today is no exception

So yes, it makes perfect sense why QCC was such a hit - it filled a void in the market. Interestingly enough, apparently Bilock makes Schlage compatible LFIC cores.

And yes i've heard of Galaxy, checked out what little information I could find on it a few months back. Series Six as well. Definitely looks interesting but being so new there's just so little information out there on it. There used to be a big exploded image of the Galaxy's internal workings but it seems to be gone now.

[lunchb0x]

lockr, as Global already said we don't really get SFIC or LFIC locks over here. I only come across them now and then and most of the time it's an over ride cylinder on a Unican lock.
For a high security lock that is convenient to re-key QCC has been the only option for a long time, a couple of years ago Galaxy came out which gives us another option, I haven't really done much with that. It was also made by the same guy who did Bi-Lock.

Yup, I was surprised to hear that. I learn something new every day and today is no exception

So yes, it makes perfect sense why QCC was such a hit - it filled a void in the market. Interestingly enough, apparently Bilock makes Schlage compatible LFIC cores.

And yes i've heard of Galaxy, checked out what little information I could find on it a few months back. Series Six as well. Definitely looks interesting but being so new there's just so little information out there on it. There used to be a big exploded image of the Galaxy's internal workings but it seems to be gone now.

I have a couple of Galaxy Locks that I had sent to me by a sale rep, they are a pretty solid lock and key. I plan on cutting one of them open to have a play with. It is pretty obvious how it works by looking in the key hole and taking out the removable core which is how you re-key it, I will get to it one day

[lockr]

I have a couple of Galaxy Locks that I had sent to me by a sale rep, they are a pretty solid lock and key. I plan on cutting one of them open to have a play with. It is pretty obvious how it works by looking in the key hole and taking out the removable core which is how you re-key it, I will get to it one day

I'm officially green with envy, lol..

[GWiens2001]

To promote discussion, what parts of the key design do you find inferior, and how could it be improved?

Gordon

[globallockytoo]

To promote discussion, what parts of the key design do you find inferior, and how could it be improved?

Gordon

As a dealer, I dont like to promote any product's (that i sell) shortcomings.

However, It is my experience that the 3 part Bilock colored keyheads tend to come apart which could make that key unusable. Years ago, we jerry rigged a solution, to put superglue on the side panels before clipping them together and this pretty much took care of that issue, but it is a time consuming extra task in construction. Improvement, I guess might be possible if the male and female connectors (male primarily) was mushroom headed and seated better inside the female collector.