I have a Gougler keyless padlock, and I don't know the combination. Can anyone help me out? The number on the back of the lock is B250. Thanks, Ben
Printable View
I have a Gougler keyless padlock, and I don't know the combination. Can anyone help me out? The number on the back of the lock is B250. Thanks, Ben
These particular models (the 200 and RD200 and I assume the 201) defy the known codes but sometimes only by a little. These usually have a dial stop if you turn it right. Turn until it stops, then dial the combination left-right-left-right.
The "50" part of B250 suggests the last three numbers are 2-6-5 but getting the first number is where things can fall down. I would suggest right to stop, then left 6, right 2, left 6, right 5. If that doesn't work try all possible number of clicks at the start, from 1 to 9. If none of that works you might be out of luck.
Just FYI here is an ad for this style of lock:
You were right: L-6, R-2, L-6, R-5. Thanks for the help!
I'm a bit confused now, as I tried before to get combinations for 2 of these locks...
I have several, but am now not sure of which # to submit???
there are 2 sets of numbers on the back, one set on top & the other is on the bottom..
Which ones do I submit to you for a "code"
The last time we tried, I sent the bottom numbers in & we got nowhere on the 2 locks that I'm referring to..........I'm asking Ben which # he used to get results...thanks, Donnie
My lock only had one number on the back, but it was located at the bottom
Diferent Gouglers put the code in diferent places. Most often it's on the shackle, in early cases on the "under" side of the shackle at the top. In quite a few cases the available known code lists have holes in them.
But locks that were made in a group for a school or factory seem to use codes that were separate, and probably spelled out in a codebook that was supplied to the buyer, and for these the "standard" codes do not work. There may be a code on the shackle that describes the combination, plus a code on the body that is like a serial number for the lock (and could be used to track it back to the owner or locker).
In the current example it was stamped on the back of the lock and was a standard factory code (or close enough).
BTW I ran across a YouTube video showing the demolition of the Kent factory buildings last year. Search for "gougler demolition" without the quote marks.
Were the numbers really small ? like smaller than this type font? Or larger like Newspaper type size?? Most of my locks have 2 sets of #'s larger one's at the top & really small ones at the bottom.....THEN THERE ARE 2 THAT HAVE #"s ON THE SHACKLE....
Like 11629 & the other is 21454.... these are round faced locks with 18 stops. not the longer ones with a key access hole in the bottom......Donnie
Just wandering if someone might could help me (in any way) with the code to my lock. It is a Miller keyless lock Kent Ohio. It has the number 5503 on the front of the shackle. It has a left stop. I would love any information on the code to this. I have been going through all possible combos, hoping to get lucky. I've been through all 3 digit and 4 digit. I have gone about 3/4 of the way through 5 digit combos. My fingers have blisters on them, and I'm sore all the way up to my shoulders. Not joking! Something I don't understand: I seen on some website where a combo to a left stop lock was R4 L8 for the first 2 turns. How could you go back 8 if you only went forward 4? I can only go back as many clicks as I go forward, up to 10. When I go 11 clicks, then I can only go back 4. It's like it trips. Another question, could the number of clicks be higher than 9? Any help PLESE!
Hi, is your lock body round with 18 clicks & a small number on the bottom rear of the case?
I am unsure of what lock you are working on... can you provide a photo front & rear?
Donnie
Guys...
I do not mean to be rude but this here is the Antique Locks forum and not the How to manipulate or bypass locks forum. We mainly talk about history here and not on how to manipulate or bypass locks even if they may not be in use any longer. If your questions would however help to better security of a product that is still distributed I am sure it would be okay but this is not the case.
So if you want to talk about manipulation or how to crack these locks how about joining a forum where these matters are discussed frequently :)?
If you do not know where to go just pass me a pm and I may lead you in the right direction.
Again, we are talking about HISTORY here!
If you do do not want to talk about history you are obviously in the wrong place.
Adrian
Donnie, I appreciate your interest in helping. I have pasted 3 pics below. I hope this helps. Please just ask if you need anything else.
Thanks again
http://www.antique-locks.com/webkit-...A0DC/imagejpeg http://www.antique-locks.com/webkit-...08E6/imagejpeg http://www.antique-locks.com/webkit-...1BA1/imagejpeg
http://www.antique-locks.com/showthr...nto-your-posts
Junker have a look at this and that should help with posting pictures.
Sorry guys. I apologize. I am using an iPhone. I guess I will have to wait until I'm on a PC.
Junker, you should not just ignore my post.
Again, we are talking about HISTORY here!
If you do do not want to talk about history you are obviously in the wrong place.
I would recommend posting your manipulation questions in some other forum. A forum where people deal more frequently with such questions.
Adrian
Again no offense mate :)
I am merely trying to lead you in the right direction.
Personally, I don't see any problem with somebody who has an old/historic lock like the Miller/Gougler/Miller locks trying to find a way to make it operable. This sort of question does not come up frequently and we have adequate guidelines in place to avoid helping somebody open a lock in use by somebody else. The combination is part of the lock's history, and if I own it, why should I be denied a chance of making it a working bit of history instead of just a pretty lump?
Ok guys. Maybe these links will work for the pics. I found these online, since I don't know when I will be able to post some from a PC.
Attachment 6909 Attachment 6910
Dicey, I get where you are coming from, but in my opinion, it is impossible to thoroughly study the history of locks without some discussion of picking, manipulation etc. The majority of design changes that have occurred in the industry over the years, are a direct result of attacks, whether they be criminal or by competitors. If the post was about picking the Bramah lock, there is a very famous, well known bit of history dedicated to that very subject. How deep we go into these topics, no doubt will be regulated by the moderators. But to just ignore the subject, in my mind, is to miss the real story of these "pretty lumps". Doug
Wylk with all do respects.
Junker is not only ignoring my post he is also not interested in any way in the history of his padlock. He just wants to know how to get the combination. And he is also quite new so I am just a bit curious.
You should agree with me that this here is a history and not a manipulation forum.
Well Doug I am not ignoring what you have just said I am also a little into manipulation but I am careful and do make posts on manipulation in other forums or even in closed sections of other forums. We have to be careful what we put out there and what not. And since our new member was not interested in a backround story or history at all I just got a little curious.
I think it is a shame that you guys stab me in the back here. I will withdrawl now and leave you to your discussion but do not expect me to back you up anytime soon.
Farewell.
I don't know who you are, or who you think I am? So now I'm being punished for being new?? I think you are just trying to attack me and can't get anyone else to join in!! Feeling lonely now?? Does this lock favor the one on your front door or something?? If you bothered to look, I started a new thread about a week ago asking for ANY info on this lock! That would include its HISTORY!!! So don't be telling people what I want to know and don't want to know. How could how this lock operates NOT be a part of its HISTORY. Find someone else to bother!!!!!
You are the one being rude now mate and I ALWAYS said "no offense".
You could also have explained that in a more polite way then this. We are all grown up here and I think your mobbing attempts will get you no where.
I am used to being alone so don't you bother lad ;)
I must have missed that other topic of yours then or not read it careful enough. Things like that can happen.
If your lock is indeed like the one you found images for, congratulations, it's a very early model. It looks a lot like US patent 863,868:
Attachment 6911
That patent was filed December 7, 1904, and granted August 20, 1907. So the lock could be said to be from the early 1900s. The "NO NINE" on the back is interesting because I hadn't run across that particular model number before. The company started in 1888 making door locks; this is their first patent for a padlock.
Looking forward to pictures of your lock.
I apologize to everyone else for having read all this. I am not a criminal. I am a collector of anything old that interest me. Hence the name Junker. I found this lock very interesting. I have researched it, but not been able to find a lot on this exact lock. I would love to be able to open it, as well as learn anything at all about it. Everyone prefers to have the key to a lock, and this keyless lock is no different! Thanks in advance for any help or info!
Dicey, I did not mean to be a part of mob attack on you, just put forth my opinion. At the risk of being banned from this forum as I was from the Public Clearstar forum, I try to speak mind. I have noticed that you have been quite involved on this forum recently, and believe me this forum needs all the help it can get. So don't go away . There aren't that many who actually invest there time to begin with. Doug
The odd thing about that patent date (March 18, 1902) is that the only patent I have found on that date that is remotely relevant is the Miller patent 695,472. But it's for a Miller escutcheon plate rather than a padlock. I guess they felt they could stamp on any old patent's date since it was generally difficult at the time to look up a patent.
Yes, I had read that in some notes posted in another thread. I believe the notes were actually posted by you as well!
In those images you posted, I'm not convinced that the patent date on the knob has worn off. It doesn't look that worn, and the other text is in fair condition. I'd speculate that this specimen was manufactured before the patent was granted.
I also noticed that the "NINE" was partially obliterated on the back, not the best-planned layout!
So you're thinking the pictured lock could have been before the patent, and my lock after the patent?
I was just guessing about it being worn because my outside knob writing is completely readable. But in the center, PAT. 18 02 is all that's left. Mar and 19 is gone. Even the "PAT 18 02" that is there is weak. Mine is the same way on the back. "NIN" is all you can make out. The "E" is just a blob, worse than the one pictured.
Please excuse my ignorance, but what does 18 clicks refer to? And how do I tell if mine has 18 clicks? Any number of clicks to the right, 1-10, will take the same number of clicks to get back to the left stop. But once I go 11 clicks to the right, it will only take 4 clicks to get back to the left stop. Then it continues to grow, 1 more click to the left for every additional click to the right. Until you reach 10 clicks to the left again. In other words, no matter how many right clicks, it will never take more than 10 clicks to get back to the left stop. Does this perhaps mean it is a 10 click?? No?? Again, please excuse my ignorance!
It does not mean that. The way these locks work is not similar to a standard combination lock with multiple wheels. These locks have a single wheel that has projections on it that form a sort of maze. Once the lever inside goes through part of the maze it can go further in a given direction than it could have before. So, it is entirely possible to go 10 clicks from the stop and then go back more than that. The only thing that would stop that would be an incorrect combination for the first number of clicks that wouldn't allow the lever to fall into another part of the maze.
That is a rather simplified description of the mechanism, but explains how there can be differnt and at times greater numbers of clicks in different directions.
BBE.
Ok Guys. Finally, my pictures. Here are 5 pictures of my lock. The third picture is what's left of the patent date on the knob (March 18, 1902). The fourth picture is of the number on the shackle, which appears to me to be 5503. It is a little pitted in this area, so it's kind of hard to be certain. I included the fifth picture with the web address here and my user name just for a little proof that this is a picture of my lock. Let me know what y'all think!
Attachment 6960Attachment 6961Attachment 6962Attachment 6963Attachment 6964
That is a nice lock, and not very common at all as far as I know.
I GOT IT OPEN!!!!!! Thanks to everyone who offered help and a SUPER thank you to BBE! It was your explanation of how these things work that got my thinking on the right track, which eventually led to my deciphering the combination. Thank you wylk for your continued input. I ended up googling the patent number and found a written explanation of how it worked to go along with the pictures. This was a huge help as well! I'm so relieved to have it operational now!! Please keep any new info on the lock coming.
After closer examination, I don't believe this is patent 863,868. It is definitely very similar, and the closest patent I can find. But still not exact. I have a link below to the patent 863,868. Notice screws 50 and 51, easiest seen in Fig. 2, on the back side of the lock. My lock does not have these. It does however have screw #49 (seen easiest in hole 10 in Fig.4), found under the shackle, once the lock is opened. This does match patent 863,868. What does all this mean? Could this be a prototype or something? And if so, what would that mean in terms of rarity and value??
http://www.google.com/patents/US863868.pdf