FAQ  •  My feedback  •  Feedback
UKLockpickers.co.uk Lockpicking supplies such as Lockpicks, tools, and more! COMMANDOLOCK.COM Military grade padlock systems lockpickshop.com A source for lockpicking supplies such as lockpicks, locksmith tools, and more!

LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

<<

CPT1911

Familiar Face

Posts: 170

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:05 pm

Location: Texas

Post Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:39 am

LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

You may have seen in my other posts that I have been steadily working toward 2M locks. Recently, my confidence on LaGard was running high after several successful opens on their 3330 Group 2. I finally got the courage to mount the Lagard 2M and start working on it.

I've made some very tiny amounts of progress working on the S&G 6630 2M, but I'm still very much in the research/technique development phase with that lock. But at least with the S&G, I think I see A WAY of doing it....

But the LaGard 2M has me absolutely stumped. It reveals nothing! And it is becoming apparent to me that the conventional techniques of manipulation are basically out the window (whereas they just seem to require some modification on the 6630).

The 3332 defeats you through an absence of information versus "too much" or "bad" information on the 6630. Here are some pics that help explain what is going on.

First, a comparison of the 2M 3332 (left) and the regular Group 2 3330 (right).

photo(9).JPG


It appears that the only component changes are:

1. Different lever (no stop for the wire tension spring found on the Group 2's lever but a "lug" at the top of the 2M's lever for the 2M linkage spring)
2. A part on the 2M that I am calling the "tomahawk" (why? because I don't know what it's called but it looks like a fucking tomahawk) that has a pivot on the lock body, is moved by a roller on the back of the cam, and is joined with the lever via a tension spring.
2. Consequently, the 2M has no wire spring to provide constant tension on the lever as found on the Group 2
3. Different cam on the 2M. As mentioned, it has a roller bearing for pushing the linkage around at the appropriate times. ALSO, the cam is relieved on either side of the cam's opening to prevent the nose from dragging and creating conventional contact points (the 2M's linkage is such that the roller & tomahawk are timed to pull the nose downward toward the cam only as the nose passes the opening in the cam. Because of the reliefs I mentioned on either side of the cam opening, the fence actually stops against the wheel pack before the cam can make contact with anything. It's fucking hard to explain. How about some more pics.

Here's another view of the 2M. See the tomahawk? It fucks your world up.
IMG_4370.JPG



In this pic, you can see that the fence is not in contact with the wheel pack. It remains in the state until the roller and tomahawk grab the lever and pull it in (for about 13 graduations).
IMG_4373.JPG


So here you will see the first moment that the fence makes contact with the wheel pack. In this case I am rotating the dial to the right. The tomahawk makes contact with the roller and puts tension on the spring. The spring lifts the nose toward the cam, BUT the cam does not actually ever make contact with the nose. In fact, the cam never actually makes contact with the nose UNLESS the combo is dialed. Why? Well the shape of the tomahawk and the roller's timing do something impressive---when the roller is NOT in contact with the tomahawk, the spring sort of applies a lateral tension that is just enough to keep the nose from ever touching the cam during rotation. When we reach the point shown below, the tomahawk snaps the fence against the wheel pack, but again, the cam isn't touching the nose even now because those relief cuts on either side of the cam opening put air where there used to be cam meat so we could take CP reading.

When developing a technique for this lock, I looked for moments when the fence is actually touching the wheel pack and tried to find ways to take measurements from the dial. So, I considered using the position below as a psuedo CP point. However, it is pure mush. The combination of the roller and the spring and all that nonsense make this contact point NOT a contact point at all. Yes, it lifts the fence against the wheel pack, but you can't actually measure how deep it's going into the wheel pack from the feedback at the dial.
IMG_4375.JPG


Ok, so what else we got? This is the next possible candidate. "Balancing" the roller on the tip at the bottom edge of the tomahawk is a discernible moment in time. Yes, you can pretty much pin it down to one moment on the dial. But again, is that really telling you how deep the fence is moving into the wheel back? Nope. Not for me at least. Spring and linkage and nonsense remove all certainty of what the fence is actually doing on the wheel pack. I tried moving slowly. Moving quickly. Adding magnifying glass. Burning incense and chanting with my eyes rolled back into my head. Nothing.
IMG_4376.JPG


Lastly, we have this stop point. In this case, I am turning the dial to the left. At this moment, for whatever reason, there is a nice hard stop that you can feel and consistently hit to a 10th of a graduation or thereabouts. But, we have the same problem we've been having. Even if we can pinpoint this moment when the fence is hitting the wheel pack, we can't really tell how deep it is going. During my testing, I experimentally replaced the spring with a piece of wire, effectively eliminating ALL the play and mush that the spring caused. Even with this modification, I could not see any difference in readings taken at the dial with one or even two gates under the fence. I am not an engineer, but I think that the leverage that the tomahawk creates some how reduces the differences shown at the dial. (Same principle as any lever. Push the "long" side of the lever through it's arc and you get more movement on that side with less force, but more force and significantly less movement on the other side. Kinda theoretical, but this may be one reason why even replacing the spring with wire showed no change in CP reading.)
IMG_4377.JPG


So where does that leave us? I know this lock can be manipulated because I have seen it specifically listed on course documentation. There is a lot of knowledge and experience on this forum so I have high hopes that someone can help!

Edit: Fixed a crappy pic
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by CPT1911 on Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
<<

flywheel

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 650

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 8:08 pm

Location: USA

Post Tue Jan 28, 2014 8:17 am

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

There are a bunch of LaGards being sold on Ebay. I've been looking at the 3332s and thinking "How big of a difference could that last number make? I should get one." Well, now I see.

Let me throw in my two cents and all my (sarcasm alert) hours of experience. Forget the lever nose and the cam gate. I think the term contact points needs to be redefined to when the roller and the tomahawk meet as that is the only information being relayed back through the dial.

Can you accurately tell when the roller meets the tomahawk (CCW as seen from the back)? Does the fence drop immediately or is there a delay? Is more torque required to turn the dial, due to spring tension, when the fence meets the wheel pack? Have you tried each wheel with one gate under the fence? Have you tried with two gate under the fence? Does the Socratic method coming from someone with only three successful openings rub you the wrong way?

Remember in Altashot's safe talks where he welded a long wire to a key to amplify information being returned through the dial? Until the feel of this 2M is familiar you might secure a longish wire to the dial and a cardboard backing to mark CPs. You might also have to elevate the lock so the wire doesn't hit the table. Do that with one or two gates under the fence and see if something good happens.
Here we go from Altashot's chronicles: http://s1155.photobucket.com/user/Altashot/story/65093

Good luck and keep the pictures coming!
<<

CPT1911

Familiar Face

Posts: 170

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:05 pm

Location: Texas

Post Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:55 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

flywheel wrote: "How big of a difference could that last number make? I should get one."


Haha, OMG bro, it's huge!

flywheel wrote:Can you accurately tell when the roller meets the tomahawk (CCW as seen from the back)? Does the fence drop immediately or is there a delay? Is more torque required to turn the dial, due to spring tension, when the fence meets the wheel pack? Have you tried each wheel with one gate under the fence? Have you tried with two gate under the fence? Does the Socratic method coming from someone with only three successful openings rub you the wrong way?


First, let me thank you for giving this some thought and putting it into words! Yes, you absolutely can feel when the roller meets the tomahawk going left or right. BUT, the tomahawk's position doesn't tell you anything about where the gates are. At the moment the roller first makes contact with the tomahawk, the tomahawk is always at "rest," meaining it is always in exactly the same position. We successfully open group 2's because relative fence depth is changing as we get closer to aligning all the gates. Without the fence being in contact with the wheel pack, we can't measure relative fence depth. And at the moment the roller touches the tomahawk, the fence is floating in midair, so we learn nothing about the nose/cam/fence/wheelpack interaction that would normally tell us what's going on.

flywheel wrote:Remember in Altashot's safe talks where he welded a long wire to a key to amplify information being returned through the dial? Until the feel of this 2M is familiar you might secure a longish wire to the dial and a cardboard backing to mark CPs. You might also have to elevate the lock so the wire doesn't hit the table. Do that with one or two gates under the fence and see if something good happens.


Interesting idea, flywheel. Yes, I remember alta's explanation. Perhaps you are on to something. If we could rig up some kind of amplification device, it could help magnify the moments that the fence is making contact with the wheel pack and perhaps allow us to measure relative fence depth? We could be on the right track here! I'll give this some thought. Thanks!
<<

LockManipulator

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 593

Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:33 am

Location: Florida, US

Post Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:16 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

So if I'm getting this correctly, when the nose is under the drop in area, the tomahawk pulls it down but it isn't low enough to touch the contact points because the fence hits the wheel pack? Do you think you could upload a video of the dial being spun and the real combination being entered? This lock sounds very intriguing but I just can't seem to visualize the movements.
<<

Squelchtone

Active Member

Posts: 341

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 7:16 pm

Location: Massachusetts USA

Post Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:38 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

that 2M cam reminds me of a Mosler 302 cam with the sides scooped out like that.
<<

CPT1911

Familiar Face

Posts: 170

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:05 pm

Location: Texas

Post Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:59 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

Daggers wrote:So if I'm getting this correctly, when the nose is under the drop in area, the tomahawk pulls it down but it isn't low enough to touch the contact points because the fence hits the wheel pack? Do you think you could upload a video of the dial being spun and the real combination being entered? This lock sounds very intriguing but I just can't seem to visualize the movements.


Absolutely! I'll do it tonight. Looking forward to your input, Daggers.
<<

LockManipulator

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 593

Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:33 am

Location: Florida, US

Post Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:28 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

CPT1911 wrote:
Daggers wrote:So if I'm getting this correctly, when the nose is under the drop in area, the tomahawk pulls it down but it isn't low enough to touch the contact points because the fence hits the wheel pack? Do you think you could upload a video of the dial being spun and the real combination being entered? This lock sounds very intriguing but I just can't seem to visualize the movements.


Absolutely! I'll do it tonight. Looking forward to your input, Daggers.


Thanks! I hope I'll be able to help contribute to your manipulation of this lock, which I'm sure, is inevitable :wink:
<<

flywheel

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 650

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 8:08 pm

Location: USA

Post Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:18 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

Sometimes manipulation requires extreme subtlety.

It looks like the 2M is where we go from lock opening theory and practice to the real Art of Manipulation. Now you learn to develop your feel. The roller meeting the tomahawk may be of no value, but when the fence meets the wheel pack the spring tension must increase. If the fence didn't test the wheel pack at some point it would be impossible for the lock to ever open. This requirement means that at some point you will feel the increase in torque required to move the dial due to the spring tension between the lever (with fence stuck on pack) and tomahawk. I liken it to the dial ring being slightly offset requiring a minute amount more force to turn the dial past the "stickiness". Your job is to determine what the areas of maximum stickiness are on your dial. I believe that area will change with high and low spots.

Here is how I imagine the force required to turn the dial.
_______________________-------*****---\\_______________
The dial spins freely at (____). When the roller meets the tomahawk (-----) more force is needed. When the fence drops to the pack (****) and it's movement is restricted turning the dial requires the most force. Then of course you come to the tomahawk's corner and the roller clicks off the tomahawk quickly (\\). With the minute transitions you might try turning the dial with only one finger as gently as possible.

I believe that magnifying the fence drop space on the dial (***) with the aid of wire and cardboard backing will open new doors for you.

Did any of that make sense? Good luck!
<<

CPT1911

Familiar Face

Posts: 170

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:05 pm

Location: Texas

Post Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:02 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

Daggers wrote:Do you think you could upload a video of the dial being spun and the real combination being entered? This lock sounds very intriguing but I just can't seem to visualize the movements.



Here you go, Daggers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM-sJJxWuUc
<<

LockManipulator

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 593

Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:33 am

Location: Florida, US

Post Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:52 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

CPT1911 wrote:
Daggers wrote:Do you think you could upload a video of the dial being spun and the real combination being entered? This lock sounds very intriguing but I just can't seem to visualize the movements.



Here you go, Daggers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM-sJJxWuUc


Thanks! I just watched it and it does seem to be quite the mystery to crack it! So far my thoughts are: When the fence hits the tomahawk and the wheel pack it makes a sound. Maybe try to isolate the two sounds and listen to where on the dial you hear the fence hit the wheel pack. With a gate under the fence, it should take slightly more rotation of the dial for the roller to drag the tomahawk down for the fence to hit the wheel pack. You can see the difference in these two pictures, of course, one is with the combination entered so it'll be a big difference. But maybe the difference is still noticeable when only one gate is under the wheel pack.

If the tomahawk snaps down as soon as the roller hits it, this method wouldn't work. But because the tomahawk lowers gradually as the roller progresses along it, I think this method might be viable.

roller2.png


roller1.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
<<

flywheel

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 650

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 8:08 pm

Location: USA

Post Wed Jan 29, 2014 7:11 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

Good video and explanation.

Now seeing the wheel in action I know the plan of action I would take. I would call the corner of the tomahawk the contact point. It is the only repeatable point when the fence is known to be in contact with the wheel pack under high spring tension. Unlike standard group 2 CPs that you check most accurately from one direction into an obstruction, the new challenge is to accurately determine where the newly defined CP occurs since the roller can fall off the corner in either direction.

I'm guessing the roller passes over the corner at about the number 3 on your lock so I used that for illustration purposes. Map the wheel pack and using techniques to magnify your data and note each time the roller is centered on the corner of the tomahawk.

Step #1 to prove that this technique works is to note the tomahawk corner point when no gates are under the fence and then again with the combination dialed in. Considering how subtle these results might be, accuracy is of the utmost importance.

Good luck and thanks for sharing!

__________________________/\---________________________
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
<<

LockManipulator

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 593

Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:33 am

Location: Florida, US

Post Wed Jan 29, 2014 7:18 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

flywheel: That seems like a good idea too! I briefly thought of that but then I saw where CPT1911 said:
Ok, so what else we got? This is the next possible candidate. "Balancing" the roller on the tip at the bottom edge of the tomahawk is a discernible moment in time. Yes, you can pretty much pin it down to one moment on the dial. But again, is that really telling you how deep the fence is moving into the wheel back? Nope. Not for me at least. Spring and linkage and nonsense remove all certainty of what the fence is actually doing on the wheel pack. I tried moving slowly. Moving quickly. Adding magnifying glass. Burning incense and chanting with my eyes rolled back into my head. Nothing.


CPT1911: Have you tried finding the point at which the roller is balanced and measuring that with no gates, 1 gate (each wheel), and perhaps even 2 gates under the fence?

EDIT: Re-watching the video, the roller does hit the "contact point" of the tomahawk at a different spot on the dal when all the wheels are under the fence. Let's say there's only 1 gate under the fence. The fence hits the wheel pack before the roller reaches the tip. This might be a problem. I think because of this that this method won't work. BUT if a gate is under the fence, the tomahawk tip should be in a different spot since the nose would be lower. But I'm still not sure because the tomahawk affects the nose and not the other way around.
<<

flywheel

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 650

Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 8:08 pm

Location: USA

Post Wed Jan 29, 2014 7:36 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

Think of the lock opening process. We measure known points when the fence is in contact with the wheel pack.

Let's apply that to the 2M. The fence is known to contact the wheels in a certain range of the dial. In that same range there is only one point where we know with absolute certainty where the roller and tomahawk are in relation to each other. In the picture below the blue area shows where the roller and tomahawk meet AND the fence is against the wheel pack. To my eye there is only one reproducible point in that area for every turn of the dial.

Unlike previous locks dealing in 1/4 and 1/8 increment deflections, these locks most likely have deflections of 1/10 or less. On top of the need for an incredible feel for the dial this also requires a way to magnify the results accurately.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
<<

LockManipulator

User avatar

Active Member

Posts: 593

Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:33 am

Location: Florida, US

Post Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:21 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

flywheel wrote:Think of the lock opening process. We measure known points when the fence is in contact with the wheel pack.

Let's apply that to the 2M. The fence is known to contact the wheels in a certain range of the dial. In that same range there is only one point where we know with absolute certainty where the roller and tomahawk are in relation to each other. In the picture below the blue area shows where the roller and tomahawk meet AND the fence is against the wheel pack. To my eye there is only one reproducible point in that area for every turn of the dial.

Unlike previous locks dealing in 1/4 and 1/8 increment deflections, these locks most likely have deflections of 1/10 or less. On top of the need for an incredible feel for the dial this also requires a way to magnify the results accurately.


Ok yeah i get what your saying! I think that'll work but it's gonna be a bitch to try and read haha
<<

CPT1911

Familiar Face

Posts: 170

Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:05 pm

Location: Texas

Post Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:18 pm

Re: LaGard 3332 2M Frustration

Thanks for all the ideas fellas! I'll take a look tonight and try it with a magnifier. I'd like to see if it can be done that way before rigging up wire pointers, etc.
Next

Return to Safes, Strongboxes & Combination Locks

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot]

Don't forget to visit our sponsors for all of your lockpicking needs!
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Grop
"CA Black" theme designed by stsoftware