Page 7 of 7

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:57 pm
by OrMeanGene
jeffmoss26 wrote:Now I really can't decide if I want to place an order!


If you do, nows the time. "Christmas" 15% off code.

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:59 pm
by tpark
MHM wrote:I bought a shedload a few weeks ago in two tranches, about US$200 all up. I'm a Sparrows guy for my main picking but I wanted a few specialty bits and pieces, and ended up buying a few Petersen classic shapes as well. The quality seems reasonable - not great, but ok - but the one thing that I just can NOT wrap my head around is that the same shape in different thicknesses...is not the same shape. Here's a gem, in all three thicknesses: they could be three different picks. I've never, ever seen anything like this before and frankly I think it's appalling. FWIW.

DSC_0223.JPG


I've bought a number of the 15 thou plastic Peterson Gems, and I suspect it's a design change. The last batch of Gems had the thinner, longer end on them, the part near the bend being about 73 thou in the older picks, vs. about 55 thou on the newer ones. I dd some experimenting with a GMS core (A schlage clone) - I loaded a 9 pin in chamber 5, and a 2 pin in chamber 6. With the newer Gem, it's possible to lift the 2 pin without oversetting the 9. For the shorter pin situation where the last two pins are 7 and 0, it's much easier to set the back pin with the newer Gem. I haven't had issues setting spools with the newer style Gems, but I suspect they would bend more easily if you leaned on them. I think they should have released them as a different product (Slim Gem?) though. With the new Gem I could set the back pin with a 9-0 difference (which exceeds the MACS of this lock) with difficulty. This is something you might see in a challenge lock, but not in a lock pinnned for use.

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2016 1:25 pm
by jeffmoss26
OrMeanGene wrote:
jeffmoss26 wrote:Now I really can't decide if I want to place an order!


If you do, nows the time. "Christmas" 15% off code.


Broke another pick last night, so I ordered a few new ones. Used the code 'BOTH"

PS - shoot me a PM about decoding that Best core of yours :)

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:45 am
by MHM
tpark wrote:
MHM wrote:I bought a shedload a few weeks ago in two tranches, about US$200 all up. I'm a Sparrows guy for my main picking but I wanted a few specialty bits and pieces, and ended up buying a few Petersen classic shapes as well. The quality seems reasonable - not great, but ok - but the one thing that I just can NOT wrap my head around is that the same shape in different thicknesses...is not the same shape. Here's a gem, in all three thicknesses: they could be three different picks. I've never, ever seen anything like this before and frankly I think it's appalling. FWIW.

DSC_0223.JPG


I've bought a number of the 15 thou plastic Peterson Gems, and I suspect it's a design change. The last batch of Gems had the thinner, longer end on them, the part near the bend being about 73 thou in the older picks, vs. about 55 thou on the newer ones. I dd some experimenting with a GMS core (A schlage clone) - I loaded a 9 pin in chamber 5, and a 2 pin in chamber 6. With the newer Gem, it's possible to lift the 2 pin without oversetting the 9. For the shorter pin situation where the last two pins are 7 and 0, it's much easier to set the back pin with the newer Gem. I haven't had issues setting spools with the newer style Gems, but I suspect they would bend more easily if you leaned on them. I think they should have released them as a different product (Slim Gem?) though. With the new Gem I could set the back pin with a 9-0 difference (which exceeds the MACS of this lock) with difficulty. This is something you might see in a challenge lock, but not in a lock pinnned for use.


That's a very good point and I really hope you're right because it would mean that someone still has a hand on the tiller at Petersens.

The original gem design does look very dated by modern standards but as you say though if it *is* a design change it really should have been telegraphed, there are an awful lot of guys who know and love the old shape. Time will tell.

Michael.

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2016 1:22 am
by jeffmoss26
No complaints with these, so far:
Image

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:43 pm
by mrdeus
^ Hehe, "respect your lunch break" :). My Peterson order finally came in today. It's been sitting in customs over xmas. Haven't picked it up yet, though.

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:32 pm
by mrdeus
Got these two hook 7 in my latest order. Old stock and new, I guess. The new ones look really nice and smooth. The "SERE" bogotas are nicely finished, but don't really fit together (ballpen spring) well like a classic set would.

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:21 pm
by Deadlock
mrdeus wrote: The "SERE" bogotas are nicely finished, but don't really fit together (ballpen spring) well like a classic set would.


Surprised to hear you say that. Mine fit together fine.

Re: Peterson's Significant Down Grade (?)

PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 3:41 am
by Oldfast
Another issue worth noting/linking to... viewtopic.php?p=111782#p111782