.:: Keypicking :: Anything And Everything For Locksmiths, Hobbyist Lock Pickers, Locksport, Lock Picking, lockpicks, cutaways and Security. Simply The Best Lockpicking Forum Around!

The oldest LOBC patent I know of is from 1884: https://patents.google.com/patent/US299695A/en
This cover construction is used in all larger (than MagicModule) Yale and Mosler locks, that I am aware of. The cover of the current S&G vault lock has still the same style LOBC even so it is constructed a bit differently.

The LOBC patent does not show a bridge for the rotary fence, as does this patent from 1907: https://patents.google.com/patent/US874807A/en
First patent drawing with bridge is from 1908 with key change wheels: https://patents.google.com/patent/US907915A/en
There is also a bridge in this patent from 1915: https://patents.google.com/patent/US1145377A/en
Maybe their patent from 1908 gave them the idea to add a bridge to stabilize everything, but it could also have been earlier as there are very few patents with these indirect drive locks. Locks without bridge do indeed exist, but they are rare.

Screws are not yet here, but anyway some photos.

The missing lug looks to me like an old defect which was cleaned up.

Managed a couple of decent wins on Ebay over the last few weeks, finally have some good FF locks to practice with.
The first one was listed as a Yale H600, which I thought was cute -- but an easy enough mistake...

A quick change in perspective reveals the truth...


It was listed as missing parts, however the only parts missing are the relocker and everything else is perfectly functional.


But more exciting than that, I think, is this Yale OC5 that was (gasp!) NEVER USED! Basically brand new, still in its shipping box with stamps dating it at 1940.
The enamel on the dial is pristine...



No wear at all on the fence...

or on the wheels... still some burrs around the gates, even...


The story the seller gave is that the lock was ordered as a back-up for a small-town bank vault, was put in a security deposit box and never touched again until the bank recently went out of business and liquidated everything in an auction. Gotta say, I'm pretty excited to have this one for my collection.

One more picture, just to show the difference (and similarity) between the two...

OC9H on the left is the standard magic module size you see with current production locks, so the lock body is the same size as the S&G 6730, etc.. The OC5 on the right is obviously a good bit bigger. The mechanical design is almost identical, tho, just scaled smaller and relocker added for the 9H. Only other difference in these two is the mounting direction... The OC5 is LH mounted, and the OC9H is VU mounted. As far as I can tell, that can't be changed for either of these.

It's funny, I've been watching ebay for two years now waiting for friction fence locks of any sort to show up, and all of a sudden there were four at once... I got outbid on the other two (MH, it might have been you, that 027 1/2 come from ebay? Looks an awful lot like the one I lost out on... cheers!) but I'm quite happy with what I won and can't wait to get them mounted up.

Yes, that was me with the "027 1/2", but I can share these two with you ungrudgingly.

You have here two mysteries:

1) I don't know of any OC9. There is the OC5B, OC5M, OC6M and OC7M. The only difference I know of is the case and in case of the OC6M the hole change wheels. B means bronze, M means malleable iron. The OC7M seems to be the OC7 because of a different malleable iron and perhaps T20 certification. I don't know of any H. The case size of the OC5/6/7 is 3 1/4" x 2 1/4" (excluding bolt). In your OC9H is also OC5 stamped on the bolt as far as I can read it. My OC5M is here: viewtopic.php?p=118942#p118942 Maybe a difference in the relocker makes it a OC9? Your lock probably had never a relocker as my OC5M. In my lock the hole for the relocker is smaller than a mounting hole. In yours it is the same size. My lock doesn't have this screw and spring at the bottom.

2) Your other lock doesn't look like a OC5. It doesn't look like any other Yale that I know, but Yale made a lot of different locks. What is the source of your identification?

I'm glad it went to a good home


So, I haven't been able to find anything about an OC9H model either, just going by the stamp on the side and my ignorance and inability to find reference to all of the models made and their differences. I showed it to Oldfast and he found a mention of it in the HPC guide from 1948 (hope he doesn't mind me sharing the photos)


The number stamped on the bolt could indeed be OC5, tho in real life it looks more like 003 depending on how you hold it to the light.


Yeah, that would be a guess... Obviously, if the OC5 is 3.25"x2.25" then this is not that. This one measures just a nip under 4"x3". I thought the OC5 was the bigger one, but not sure where I got that idea. Again, I can't seem to find any reference for these locks at all, and I'm typically really good at finding this kind of stuff. The only reference to yale combination locks I've found at all is a catalog from 1939 posted on LockReference.com here, but it doesn't mention the OC5 except relative to other locks, and doesn't mention any locks of this size.

The "027 1/2" is that in my last photos. I think it is actually a 025 1/2. Can't find really much about the 027 1/2, but my guess is, that the 025 1/2 has a 4-wheel curb and the other a 3-wheel curb. The LOBC cover has both model numbers imprinted.

The currently available HPC, which also looks quite outdated, doesn't contain this plate and information about the OC9H. This relocker piece is indeed missing from your lock. It would have made sense to produce only one bolt and use that piece in all variants. So OC9 and OC5 on the same lock makes really sense.

I'm taking the big one apart currently, the number 0420 is stamped in a number of places...

The 0402 is a small one. Not impossible, that there is a large 0420.

maybe... there's a 2421Y in that 1939 catalog with the same body size but with key change... perhaps this was a precursor to that one?

Ah, found it! Page 12.

That lock is clearly something else. Key change, different locations of the cover screws, different bolt. It could be related in numbering or not, just as a 025 is not really related to a 025 1/2.

PS: Dating is sadly quite difficult. Lots of locks without dating and context. Lots of safes without dating and context. Extremely little information. I have to look if I find at least some general information on dating US safes.

The 2421Y has a normal lever.

There is also the OC9KM in York safes. K = key change. These have a smaller cam like a normal lock today and therefore no gears and no friction, but a spring loaded roller bolt. That one has the same relocker as yours had. I assume the M is for malleable iron.

So, just remembered I have the original box it was shipped in... I looked at it when I first got it but didn't see anything that seemed relevant at the time because I didn't know what I was looking for... but now looking at it again, written in pencil on the side is "1-2421" and that is the only thing on the box besides a signature I can't make out. So I'm definitely leaning toward 2421 now, with this and being the same case size and dial style of the 2421Y in that catalog.

The 2421Y is a completely different lock. It is built like most other combination locks with a lever and fence. But that is no reason why yours should not be a 2421. I could be a 0420 too. But if it is a lot of places it is probably more likely that 0420 is some sort of serial number.

I got this Rosengrens CNAB-6 and although it doesn't look like it, it is actually a friction fence lock. The patent is https://patents.google.com/patent/US267 ... =US2677265 . You can see the friction fence mechanism best in Fig. 4.