McOmie vs. Oldfast

[MartinHewitt]

I had today a look into McOmie's Penetration Party. Although I did see a lot 6730s in this book I didn't see any safe he manipulated open. At least on all these I thought "Hey, Oldfast would have had it open in no time without damage". Why didn't McOmie manipulate the lock open?

1) Because the book is for the untrained boxman who learns drilling faster than manipulation?
2) Because it is even for McOmie cheaper to drill than to manipulate even so he would have the time to learn manipulation as well as Oldfast?
3) Because it doesn't look good in front of his customers to manipulate it because it looks to easy?

Unfortunately the book doesn't tell the reason for the opening.

Martin Hewitt

PS: Is the lever tit the lever nose? Or is it the fence? Or is it neither?

[Oldfast]

The bulk of recorded information that Dave's contributed to the safe & vault industry is astonishing.
He doesn't even know it... but that man has helped me countless times! Tons of admiration for him.

When I started taking an interest in manipulation I kinda frowned upon drilling - but this was sheer ignorance on my part.
As I began to understand it a little, I started to appreciate it as an art in and of itself. An enormous amount of knowledge
and experience is required. But I still wondered (just like you are) WHY so many containers are drilled vs manipulated?

When the lockout is due to a malfunction with the lock or boltwork, or, a botched burglary.... it's obvious why it's drilled -
it's the only feasible option at that point. But the safes that are in working order? These could potentially be manipulated.

Sure, no doubt there's plenty of locksmiths and even safe-techs out there that grab for a drill way too soon. But that's
not really what you're asking here. Instead, we're looking at a highly accomplished safe technician (such as McOmie).
After assessing the situation, he has chosen to drill. The question is why?

I honestly dunno for sure. So this is just my opinion based on what I've heard and read over the years; but it seems
to come down to time & cost... not only for the safe-tech, but even more so for the customer. To quote a well-known
safe-tech (and world renowned manipulator).... "You're paying for a service rather than a result". The reality is that
there are no guarantees when it comes to manipulation. Imagine a safe-tech spending hours attempting to spin a
lock open before he finally picks up a drill. The final bill given to the customer is sure to bring quite a reaction! lol

I've also been told that many safe-techs WILL attempt to manipulate - but wisely place a limit for themselves.
Then, based on how talkative the lock is or isn't, they make a business decision to pursue it or opt for drilling.

Also, keep in mind WHICH file of McOmie's you're looking at Martin, lol. The name says it all - "Penetration Party".
Hell, they even drill an old Sentry Safe! Which initially made me think WTF?! But then they state in the note below:
"We drilled this one because we were at a Penetration Party, where the focus is necessarily on penetration.
However, in the real world you should never have to drill a functioning Sentry fire safe like this one.
They are usually very easy to manipulate."

PS: Is the lever tit the lever nose? Or is it the fence? Or is it neither?

Hmmm. I've never heard that term. In what context was it used?

[MartinHewitt]

The reality is that
there are no guarantees when it comes to manipulation. Imagine a safe-tech spending hours attempting to spin a
lock open before he finally picks up a drill. The final bill given to the customer is sure to bring quite a reaction! lol

That might have to do with it.

Also, keep in mind WHICH file of McOmie's you're looking at Martin, lol. The name says it all - "Penetration Party".
Hell, they even drill an old Sentry Safe! Which initially made me think WTF?! But then they state in the note below:
"We drilled this one because we were at a Penetration Party, where the focus is necessarily on penetration.
However, in the real world you should never have to drill a functioning Sentry fire safe like this one.
They are usually very easy to manipulate."

This might be the reason why there are no manipulations in this book, but with this safe he wrote that drilling it open took 2 minutes. I assume this is still faster than manipulating it open and your above stated reason might still make drilling favorable.

PS: Is the lever tit the lever nose? Or is it the fence? Or is it neither?

Hmmm. I've never heard that term. In what context was it used?[/quote]
It was either in Penetration Party or in McOmie on Safe Locks for specifying the drilling point for opening a combination lock. But at the moment I can't find it. The reason I ask is because I try to make an English German dictionary as I often remember words in only one language. http://wiki.koksa.org/W%C3%B6rterbuch

[bitbuster]

McOmie has used 'tit' several times in 'The National Safeman' publications.

[MartinHewitt]

Found one in "Dave McOmiw on Safe Locks" in the second opening method of the Mas-Hamilton X0-7: "Drill of the lever tit." From the drill location it has to be something special of the X0-7 as the location is a circular mark in the middle of the lever. Maybe it is some sort of distance piece acting on the back/front of the lock.

[bitbuster]

Found one in "Dave McOmiw on Safe Locks" in the second opening method of the Mas-Hamilton X0-7: "Drill of the lever tit." From the drill location it has to be something special of the X0-7 as the location is a circular mark in the middle of the lever. Maybe it is some sort of distance piece acting on the back/front of the lock.

In ref to that lock, go to page 121 and he explains the 'tit' in his rough drawing.

[MartinHewitt]

Actually ... I do not understand this. Is this snake a kind of spring? And the tit a bump or stump?