I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but mortise
locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

"John" wrote in message
...
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but mortise
locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)


If there were no pre-ordained conventions to cloud your

judgment, wouldn't you still fit the lock that provides security

in the middle where it will do most good, and the latch

that adds convenience and privacy in the most accessible

(to an adult) place?


--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 21:40:57 -0000, "John"
wrote:

I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but mortise
locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

A mortice is a real lock designed to prevent people breaking in and
goes in the strongest part of the door.

The Yale is termed a "night latch" by the yanks and that just about
sums it up.

In article , John
writes
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but mortise
locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

The most common and vicious form of attack for a door[*] is kicking-in
so it makes sense to keep the strongest protection at waist height or
below. If using 2 reasonable locks as you describe, I'd have the mortice
at just above knee height and a deadlocking cylinder just below shoulder
height.

Having the mortice half way up isn't that great an idea as it leaves a
bit too much spring/flex in the lower part of the door making it a weak
point.

The top cylinder on its own is just to stop the wind blowing the door
open.
[*] Unless it's with a sledge hammer
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs

John wrote:
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but
mortise locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

You can't fit a mortice lock at or near a mortice & tennon joint in the door
cos it weakens it, so it has to go above or below. You can fit a Yale
almost anywhere.

So for max security on a door with a M&T joint halfway ish up it makes sense
to have one lock below & one above the halfway ish point. Since the Yale is
used more frequently it makes sense to have in in the top half.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

"fred" wrote in message ...
In article , John
writes
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but
mortise
locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

The most common and vicious form of attack for a door[*] is kicking-in
so it makes sense to keep the strongest protection at waist height or
below. If using 2 reasonable locks as you describe, I'd have the mortice
at just above knee height and a deadlocking cylinder just below shoulder
height.

Having the mortice half way up isn't that great an idea as it leaves a
bit too much spring/flex in the lower part of the door making it a weak
point.

The top cylinder on its own is just to stop the wind blowing the door
open.





[*] Unless it's with a sledge hammer

Not many people try that sort of thing though;-)

Adam

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
m...
John wrote:
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but
mortise locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

You can't fit a mortice lock at or near a mortice & tennon joint in the
door cos it weakens it, so it has to go above or below. You can fit a
Yale almost anywhere.

So for max security on a door with a M&T joint halfway ish up it makes
sense to have one lock below & one above the halfway ish point. Since the
Yale is used more frequently it makes sense to have in in the top half.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk


Incidentally - I was thinking back to the good old days before break ins.
Our old house only had a Yale front and a surface type of lock on the back
door. I suspect this was typical.

In article ,
ARWadsworth writes

"fred" wrote in message ...
In article , John
writes
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but
mortise
locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

The most common and vicious form of attack for a door[*] is kicking-in
so it makes sense to keep the strongest protection at waist height or
below. If using 2 reasonable locks as you describe, I'd have the mortice
at just above knee height and a deadlocking cylinder just below shoulder
height.

Having the mortice half way up isn't that great an idea as it leaves a
bit too much spring/flex in the lower part of the door making it a weak
point.

The top cylinder on its own is just to stop the wind blowing the door
open.


[*] Unless it's with a sledge hammer

Not many people try that sort of thing though;-)

There was a spate of it a good few years back, top floor tenement flats
(least likely to be disturbed) with the door taken out by a sledge
hammer. My mate's place got done that way, the neighbours heard the
noise but assumed it was someone with the builders in. Since then I've
taken that kind of attack into account when designing my lock layout,
it's also why I have a shock sensor on the door frame with a v loud
sounder beside it.

I think I'm pretty safe now unless some big sparkie takes a run at my
door ;-)
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs

fred wrote:
In article , John
writes
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but
mortise locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

The most common and vicious form of attack for a door[*] is
kicking-in so it makes sense to keep the strongest protection at
waist height or below. If using 2 reasonable locks as you describe,
I'd have the mortice at just above knee height and a deadlocking
cylinder just below shoulder height.

Having the mortice half way up isn't that great an idea as it leaves a
bit too much spring/flex in the lower part of the door making it a
weak point.

The top cylinder on its own is just to stop the wind blowing the door
open.

[*] Unless it's with a sledge hammer

Anyone seen that Cops with Cameras show? They use the 'big red key' to
batter doors down. Oddly uPVC doors seem harder to knock down than timber
doors.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

In article , The Medway
Handyman writes
fred wrote:
In article , John
writes
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but
mortise locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

The most common and vicious form of attack for a door[*] is
kicking-in so it makes sense to keep the strongest protection at
waist height or below. If using 2 reasonable locks as you describe,
I'd have the mortice at just above knee height and a deadlocking
cylinder just below shoulder height.

Having the mortice half way up isn't that great an idea as it leaves a
bit too much spring/flex in the lower part of the door making it a
weak point.

The top cylinder on its own is just to stop the wind blowing the door
open.

[*] Unless it's with a sledge hammer

Anyone seen that Cops with Cameras show? They use the 'big red key' to
batter doors down. Oddly uPVC doors seem harder to knock down than timber
doors.

I nearly made a comment about big fat coppers not being able to lift
their hammers above waist height but thought better of it.

A UPVC door will likely have multipoint locking so will resist a
moderate impact attack better, the door and frame will also deform
elastically, absorbing some of the impact so will be harder to knock in
but it will be far more vulnerable to levering/jemmying attacks just
because it is plastic

In contrast, a wooden door will rarely be installed 'properly', it wont
be multipoint locked, the frame wont be reinforced to resist splintering
on impact and the door wont be reinforced around the (cheap) locks, also
if it's a pretty panelled door then it wont stand a chance.

In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
om...
fred wrote:
In article , John
writes
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but
mortise locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

The most common and vicious form of attack for a door[*] is
kicking-in so it makes sense to keep the strongest protection at
waist height or below. If using 2 reasonable locks as you describe,
I'd have the mortice at just above knee height and a deadlocking
cylinder just below shoulder height.

Having the mortice half way up isn't that great an idea as it leaves a
bit too much spring/flex in the lower part of the door making it a
weak point.

The top cylinder on its own is just to stop the wind blowing the door
open.

[*] Unless it's with a sledge hammer

Anyone seen that Cops with Cameras show? They use the 'big red key' to
batter doors down. Oddly uPVC doors seem harder to knock down than timber
doors.

That is because uPVC doors are much tougher than wooden ones when they are
installed correctly.

They also flex and absorb the shock without breaking like wood does.

"fred" wrote in message ...


In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.

Anything you can add to a wooden door can be added to a plastic one.

fred wrote:
In article , The
Medway Handyman writes
fred wrote:
In article , John
writes
I just wondered why Yale locks were always fitted at eye level but
mortise locks were fitted half way up the door (traditionally)

The most common and vicious form of attack for a door[*] is
kicking-in so it makes sense to keep the strongest protection at
waist height or below. If using 2 reasonable locks as you describe,
I'd have the mortice at just above knee height and a deadlocking
cylinder just below shoulder height.

Having the mortice half way up isn't that great an idea as it
leaves a bit too much spring/flex in the lower part of the door
making it a weak point.

The top cylinder on its own is just to stop the wind blowing the
door open.

[*] Unless it's with a sledge hammer

Anyone seen that Cops with Cameras show? They use the 'big red key'
to batter doors down. Oddly uPVC doors seem harder to knock down
than timber doors.

I nearly made a comment about big fat coppers not being able to lift
their hammers above waist height but thought better of it.

A UPVC door will likely have multipoint locking so will resist a
moderate impact attack better, the door and frame will also deform
elastically, absorbing some of the impact so will be harder to knock
in but it will be far more vulnerable to levering/jemmying attacks
just because it is plastic

In contrast, a wooden door will rarely be installed 'properly', it
wont be multipoint locked, the frame wont be reinforced to resist
splintering on impact and the door wont be reinforced around the
(cheap) locks, also if it's a pretty panelled door then it wont stand
a chance.
In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.

Drug dealers would :-)


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

In article , dennis@home
writes


"fred" wrote in message ...


In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.

Anything you can add to a wooden door can be added to a plastic one.

It would be difficult to imagine the add-ons that would make a uPVC door
installation as secure as a wooden block blank door (or 60min exterior
fire door) with twin BS approved deadlocks, suitable hinging and steel
reinforcement for locks, hinges and frame.

A steel framed uPVC door and frame is a start but the flawed locking
system and the vulnerable panels make it weak once its design limits are
passed.
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs

In article ,
John wrote:
Incidentally - I was thinking back to the good old days before break ins.

You must have a very long memory - to the days when people lived in
caves. I'll bet the first break in occurred shortly after the door was
invented...

--
*Middle age is when it takes longer to rest than to get tired.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"fred" wrote in message ...
In article , dennis@home
writes


"fred" wrote in message ...


In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.

Anything you can add to a wooden door can be added to a plastic one.

It would be difficult to imagine the add-ons that would make a uPVC door
installation as secure as a wooden block blank door (or 60min exterior
fire door) with twin BS approved deadlocks, suitable hinging and steel
reinforcement for locks, hinges and frame.

A steel framed uPVC door and frame is a start but the flawed locking
system and the vulnerable panels make it weak once its design limits are
passed.

You don't fit steel cored panels as well as steel cored frames?
Mine has multipoint locks and a dead lock BTW.

I suspect the brickwork is the weak point as it will be on a good wooden
door.
When I was working for Chubb a few decades back we had to reinforce the
brickwork on some jobs.
These days with battery powered angle grinders it probably isn't worth doing
that.
I bet there is a good chance I could take the whole frame out on 99% of
doors in a couple of minutes whatever locks are fitted.

In article , dennis@home
writes


"fred" wrote in message ...
In article , dennis@home
writes


"fred" wrote in message ...


In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.

Anything you can add to a wooden door can be added to a plastic one.

It would be difficult to imagine the add-ons that would make a uPVC door
installation as secure as a wooden block blank door (or 60min exterior
fire door) with twin BS approved deadlocks, suitable hinging and steel
reinforcement for locks, hinges and frame.

A steel framed uPVC door and frame is a start but the flawed locking
system and the vulnerable panels make it weak once its design limits are
passed.

You don't fit steel cored panels as well as steel cored frames?

No, as I would never fit a plastic door.

Mine has multipoint locks and a dead lock BTW.

Do you think it is as secure as the installation I described above?

I suspect the brickwork is the weak point as it will be on a good wooden
door.
When I was working for Chubb a few decades back we had to reinforce the
brickwork on some jobs.
These days with battery powered angle grinders it probably isn't worth doing
that.

I'd be happy with 5 minute protection with a monitored alarm sounding,
120dB in your ear while bashing away can be quite a distraction I
(don't) hear.

I bet there is a good chance I could take the whole frame out on 99% of
doors in a couple of minutes whatever locks are fitted.
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs

"fred" wrote in message ...
In article , dennis@home
writes


"fred" wrote in message ...
In article , dennis@home
writes


"fred" wrote in message ...


In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.

Anything you can add to a wooden door can be added to a plastic one.

It would be difficult to imagine the add-ons that would make a uPVC door
installation as secure as a wooden block blank door (or 60min exterior
fire door) with twin BS approved deadlocks, suitable hinging and steel
reinforcement for locks, hinges and frame.

A steel framed uPVC door and frame is a start but the flawed locking
system and the vulnerable panels make it weak once its design limits are
passed.

You don't fit steel cored panels as well as steel cored frames?

No, as I would never fit a plastic door.

Mine has multipoint locks and a dead lock BTW.

Do you think it is as secure as the installation I described above?

Yes.
Do you think what you described is secure?
How many minutes do you think it is secure for?


I suspect the brickwork is the weak point as it will be on a good wooden
door.
When I was working for Chubb a few decades back we had to reinforce the
brickwork on some jobs.
These days with battery powered angle grinders it probably isn't worth
doing
that.

I'd be happy with 5 minute protection with a monitored alarm sounding,
120dB in your ear while bashing away can be quite a distraction I (don't)
hear.

But alarms are so easy to disable.
I used to fit them BTW.
They also cause so many false alarms that most are ignored.
I bet that your monitoring company doesn't respond very quick if it has 20
false alarms in the few days leading up to a break in and its easy to make a
false alarm happen, especially on a monitored one if they use the phone
lines.


I bet there is a good chance I could take the whole frame out on 99% of
doors in a couple of minutes whatever locks are fitted.

BTW, have you attached your alarm in such a way that it will go off if
someone removes the frame or is the sensor attached to the frame? I ask
because nobody ever does!

In article , dennis@home
writes

"fred" wrote in message ...

Do you think it is as secure as the installation I described above?

Yes.

I am glad you are happy with your installation, I am also happy with
mine.
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs

fred wrote:
In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.

My basement door is 2" timber with 1/8" steel sheet cladding, with
1/8"
pretty timber lamina on top. It still has the remains of somebody's
kneecap embedded in it.

--
JGH

In article
,
jgharston writes
fred wrote:
In extremis though I reckon I can make a wooden door and frame more
secure than a plastic one but few pay what it would cost to do it.

My basement door is 2" timber with 1/8" steel sheet cladding, with
1/8"
pretty timber lamina on top. It still has the remains of somebody's
kneecap embedded in it.

Nice one :-)
--
fred
BBC3, ITV2/3/4, channels going to the DOGs

On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:29:13 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
John wrote:
Incidentally - I was thinking back to the good old days before break ins.

You must have a very long memory - to the days when people lived in
caves. I'll bet the first break in occurred shortly after the door was
invented...

You need to move somewhere less pikey. ;-)

There were no break-ins on the council estate I was brought up in.

We had now't worth pinchin' .

Derek

"Derek Geldard" wrote in message
...


There were no break-ins on the council estate I was brought up in.

That's not true here.. I quite often came home to find that someone had left
a pie on the table.

In article ,
Derek Geldard wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:29:13 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
John wrote:
Incidentally - I was thinking back to the good old days before break
ins.

You must have a very long memory - to the days when people lived in
caves. I'll bet the first break in occurred shortly after the door was
invented...

You need to move somewhere less pikey. ;-)

There were no break-ins on the council estate I was brought up in.

I find that very hard to believe.

We had now't worth pinchin' .

That doesn't seem to stop them these days - the very poorest of council
flats still seem to get broken into.

--
*A cubicle is just a padded cell without a door.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.