Sargent & Greenleaf Rail Road Environmental Padlock Keys

[MacGyver101]

we must also keep in mind that there are key bittings that would still allow for for the key to be removed. gotta chalk those up too as keys that most likely dont exist.

With the rotating-disc design, I think it's just the three "flat cut" keys (e.g., "000", "111" and "222") that can be pulled out... because of the twisting action, one position cut differently is enough to prevent the key from being pulled out (as that cut couldn't slide past the other disks).

This is in contrast to a traditional pin-tumbler lock, where a shallower cut essentially means a "bigger gap" under the pin -- and, as a result, there are lots of cuts (e.g., 12345, 23456, 11335, etc.) that you would need to avoid to prevent problems. (Whereas the size of the hole in the disc is constant in rotating-disc design... so a "2" can't slide past a "1" disc when the key's in the lock.)

[Riyame]

What about from bow to tip small to big? 1=0, 2=45, 3=90
(including all the same cuts:)
333,332,331
322,321,311
222,221,211,
111
As long as the cuts previous turn less, the key should be able to slide out shouldn't it?

[keymaster1053]

Hmmm, I think you're on to something there Riy! if there was a key cut 133 from bow to tip, I can't see what would keep it from falling out.

[MacGyver101]

As long as the cuts previous turn less, the key should be able to slide out shouldn't it?

I stand corrected: you're quite right. In that case, I think we're down to 17 possible keys that don't violate the key-retaining requirement.

[mister sour]

As long as the cuts previous turn less, the key should be able to slide out shouldn't it?

I stand corrected: you're quite right. In that case, I think we're down to 17 possible keys that don't violate the key-retaining requirement.

that was me and riy

[keymaster1053]

lol

[Riyame]

As long as the cuts previous turn less, the key should be able to slide out shouldn't it?

I stand corrected: you're quite right. In that case, I think we're down to 17 possible keys that don't violate the key-retaining requirement.

that was me and riy

Yes it was

[Riyame]

Well, this pic blows that theory out of the water. Mister Sour posted this pic last night when somebody asked and I noticed something. Look at the last key. It is a #112. If you notice the cuts, it is in the "excluded" lists for being able to come out after the lock is opened.

[nhoj_yelbom]

Hmmmm

[ChemicalRobot]

Why is the middle cut on the 107 key not nearly as wide as the middle cuts on the other keys?

[Riyame]

An earlier version perhaps?

[mister sour]

yup. i stumbled across this pic in my collection of research. its a 112 with an open shackle, key removed

[mister sour]

Why is the middle cut on the 107 key not nearly as wide as the middle cuts on the other keys?

Its a different style key. not sure if that validates its weirdness.

*EDIT* Brass is often used as a blank. Perhaps this key just wasn't cut properly?

[Riyame]

Im betting that they started with the Abloy keys, moved to these ones then went to steel.

[mister sour]

I know, I'm getting picture happy but this photo shows something interesting. Notice the cut progressions?