Most recent activity
-
They didn't even ask us if we wanted to participate.
We happened to tell them about our new DIB D-Locks back in March and we were told about the test that was already underway by then. They said it was "a damn shame" as it was too late to add anything else. I was very disappointed as we have provided samples to C+ etc many times, with the most recent being a fair old pile of stuff last summer.
-
You're welcome. Useful feedback, so thanks to you too. Several people have said when they're out on a proper ride they won't need to lock the bike so a holster/bracket isn't relevant. Keeping our bikes next to us on a cake stop has been OK for us in the past, but it is a restriction for sure.
We did research an idea suggested by @GA2G, actually, wrt a bracket but couldn't get the dimensions to work on a range of frame sizes. Plastic moulding is tricky due to tooling costs and you need so many adaptors with the variety of tube shapes these days and that compounds the problem, so we've not got any good solutions so far, I'm afraid.
I'm more than happy to bounce ideas around e.g. if anyone knows another manufacturer that has a strong bracket that will fit an 18mm diameter shackle? (The steel on our DIB locks is 16mm diameter, but there is a rubber cover so the OD is 18mm.)
-
Sincere apologies. I was about to say I've got no idea why I didn't get a notification about recent posts on this thread, and then thought it might well be caused by us moving our web/mail server a few weeks ago and the new anti-spam system doesn't seem to be as reliable as we'd like. I was also on holiday around when you e-mailed, so that probably didn't help. Apologies again.
No, to answer your question, we looked into some ideas about a lock holder but decided that they are getting more and more compromised by the new shapes and sizes of frame tubes such that many D-Locks that do come with a frame bracket don't work on a lot of bikes now anyway. Your mileage may vary, of course, but we also had another example recently of a mainstream manufacturer's D-Lock bracket breaking and falling off a bike whilst it was being ridden, very thankfully without any injuries of other serious consequences.
We have a Restrap "lock holster" for testing and intend to offer that for resale, assuming we don't have any problems when we finally get round to trying it properly.
I'm always happy to hear feedback and ideas on this, and this is an excellent forum for exactly that.
Oh, perhaps I should say we've almost sold out on the new DIB D-Locks, so if you do want one, despite us not having a frame bracket, you might wantt to bear that in mind. We will have lots more stock, but it'll be close to Christmas. Apologies on that score, too.
-
For anyone that's interested, we did some chain link cutting tests comparing a cordless grinder with a powerful mains grinder, in a vice and on the floor and also completely hand held. I said to Jonny69 that we don't want to reproduce actual time figures as that might show a thief that his "quick cutting time" could perhaps be quicker, but the ratios are perhaps more meaningful anyway as it gives some guidance on what might be gained by using a thicker chain and/or using it properly.
We did some cuts on our Protector 11mm, 13mm, 16mm and 19mm chains. These were held in a vice and cut with a Dewalt mains grinder and also with an 18v Dewalt cordless grinder (with fully charged lithium battery), and we also did some cuts with a chain lying on the floor and holding the chain by hand.
The ratios between similar cutting tests were as follows:
The cordless grinder typically took 2 to 3 times as long as the mains grinder to cut the same link, with the thicker chains being the 'worse' ones to cut in terms of ratio as well as timing (naturally). I think this is because the thicker chains bind more on the sides of the disc as the cut gets deeper, which obviously applies more in the thicker chains.
With a cordless grinder, the time taken to cut the 11mm vs. 13mm vs. 16mm vs. 19mm was around 100% : 200% : 280% : 367% as percentages of the time to cut the 11mm chain. E.g. it took twice as long to cut the 13mm compared with the 11mm.
Cutting a 13mm chain link lying on the floor with the cordless grinder took about twice as long as when it was held in the vice, significantly, cutting it when it was swinging around in mid-air and I was holding the link by hand, took about 5 times as long as when in a vice (or more than 3 times as long as when it was on the floor).
I think these last figures are the most important of all as they illustrate why we always say you should try to keep a chain off the floor. This makes it much harder to cut with a grinder and also with bolt croppers.
This suggests you might be better off using a 13mm chain 'properly' (particularly keeping it off the floor) rather than having a 16mm chain lying on the floor.
These poorly gripped situations (on the floor or in mid-air) are actually likely to be non-linear as I found the 13mm link was repeatedly snatching in the cut and in fact, so much so, that I would refuse to attempt even a single cut of a handheld 16mm link let alone 19mm! Even with a cordless tool, which is relatively weedy compared to a powerful mains grinder, it was decidedly dangerous on just a 13mm link and it is as you get deeper into the cut that it becomes more likely to snatch. Naturally, a 16mm or 19mm link requires a deeper cut, even with me rotating the link around in order to minimise that effect. It would be harder to rotate a larger link and in a real-life theft situation it would be happening at a mid-point in a run of chain rather than an isolated few links like I was doing. So, the manipulation time would increase significantly and the snatching risk would increase markedly, so you’d have to be very desperate to even try handheld cutting on thicker chains IMHO.
We didn’t try any scenarios where one person was holding the chain and another person was using the grinder. That would presuppose a situation where there is enough room to get 2 people close to part of the chain, which also hints at incorrect use of a chain, just as leaving a chain on the floor.
We also didn’t attempt anything in an awkward handheld position. The only handheld cut I did was scary enough as it was, honestly, when I could rest the link close to my leg.
So, the summary is that whatever you do, it is crucial to keep the chain off the floor (and similar findings would be expected with a D-lock etc).
I hope that helps.
-
Hi Jonny69,
GA2G is right. I am tempted to suggest that you might want to edit your post to remove the detail you've got near the bottom of it as many thieves may not know that such things exist.
Just imagine if a thief normally takes 'x' minutes to cut a chain and you tell him about a way of doing it quicker than that? He will surely investigate the advantage. If you also tell him about a tool he doesn't know about, even more so. We all have to be very careful about this. Ditto when cutting D-locks etc etc. There are doubtless thieves reading this thread, too.
We would be happy to post you an offcut of our 16mm chain as you will get the same results as with chopping up your own. (Perhaps also the 11mm/13mm and 19mm.) PM or e-mail me your address (info@pragmasis.com). However, that would be on the condition that you don't reveal anything that could be useful to thieves. You can put comparative timings on here if you wish so people can make their own judgement on the extra benefit from 19mm over 16mm for that type of attack, given your tool/situation/skill, but we would not want actual figures, even if you're terrible at cutting chains ...as the thief might be even worse! :-)
I hope that make sense?
-
If MrDrem wants to do a home-made ground anchor, we would actually suggest it is not a good idea to concrete-in a bit of chain as the link that emerges from the concrete is very vulnerable to attack with hammers etc, as it is very solidly supported and not flipping and flopping around. If it is attacked and damaged/broken, you end up with a lump of concrete and a worthless bit of chain coming out of it with no easy way of fixing it unless you like using a Kango rather a lot ;-)
We suggest a better home made idea is to either get an offcut of 4" underground PVC drain piping and ideally 2 bends to suit, to contrive a big 'U' shaped tube that you would then embed in the concrete, optionally with some rebar sitting within the 'U' and the whole caboodle embedded in the concrete. That 4" pipe will be big enough to take any of the big chains and potentially more than one of them (depending).
Another similar idea is to use a short length of 4" land drain pipe (also available from builders' merchants) and to use a piece of string to hold that in a 'U', and some duct tape or cling film to bung up the holes (as it's porous piping), before embedding that in concrete as above.
Note that the big eyes used for lifting and fixing things are invariably not big enough to take a decent chain. We get that quite frequently, where someone has made an anchor with one of those as the locking point, and then discovered how bulky the decent chains are. You can solve that by using something like a mini-D-lock to go through the eye and the end of the chain, but that combination can itself make the D-lock vulnerable to twisting attacks against the eye. Better, in our opinion, to either do one of the embeded drain pipe ideas above, or to use something with sufficient capacity to take a proper chain ...such as a decent ground anchor :-)
The other thing to be wary about with home made solutions is that they may not satisfy the insurance requirements. Some cycle policies just require an "immovable object" (read the small print), where something like the drain pipe or other idea may do the job, but if they demand something with Sold Secure Bicycle Gold etc approval, there is little option but to go for a commercial product with the right piece of paper. That is exactly why we pay out initially with each new product and on the annual audits again, so that the piece of paper is available for those that need it.
I hope that helps,
Steve ...a 'he' :-)
-
Hi MrDrem,
Well, since you asked, we make the second one (the Torc Series II anchor), but the first one (PJB's Concave anchor) is also good. We can supply the Torc with a specific fitting kit that allows you to set it into fresh concrete (so there is more metalwork than you see in your photo, as well as different fixings to hold it all together - PM me and I'll give you a link to our web page that details the range of fitting kits, with more photos).The Concave has the advantage that it is truly flush when it is installed, until you put a chain through it and then none of them are flush ;-) The Concave can trap water in its 'U' bend, and although there is usually a drain hole (that should be positioned below the concrete), such things tend to get bunged up with leaves etc after a while. That is pretty minor as the security of your bike is likely to be more important than whether the chain gets mucky or not.
To be honest, it can often be what each supplier also offers in terms of Package Deals etc as there may be more difference in terms of chains and locks and other products. If you can get what you want from a single source, you can potentially save on shipping.
Feel free to ask more specific questions if you like.
I hope that helps,
Steve.
-
I'd be wary of relying on any type of lock just going through the bent bars of the bike rack as they look easy to bolt-crop or hacksaw. I'd certainly put something around one of the more structural horizontals of the stand. The lower horizontal may be impractical because of the woodwork behind it so there may not be enough room to get anything worthwhile around that.
Beware that large D-locks are most vulnerable to twisting and jacking attacks.
For me, a decent chain would be the best solution here by far as you can go through even the upper horizontal if you have to and then the same chain goes through the frame and potentially one or more wheel(s) as well. It's much easier to lock a bike the right way up in those frame, IMHO, too. However, I'd still be wary of clearance behind those horizontals as a chain that will provide a good deterrent will be quite bulky.
I hope that helps.
-
As a manufacturer, I'm not going to get drawn into comments about specific locks, but I will state that bolt croppers are most certainly one of the biggest threats to anyone wanting to keep their bikes (bicycles and motorcycles - they are all commonly stolen with bolt croppers). Bicycle thieves often use bolt croppers up to 24"/60cm and occasionally 36"/90cm, whereas motorcycle thieves will very commonly use the b-i-g 42"/105cm croppers. GA2G is absolutely correct that carrying these things in vans is a common approach, generally for the more professional of thieves. Bicycle thieves do carry the 24" ones under a coat, for example.
Thieves will look for the fastest and most reliable way of stealing a bike, often ignoring the damage that may be caused to another bike (so don't rely on one bike 'anchoring' another bike as you can lose one and have the other one trashed). Hammers work quickly on many cheap locks and chains; 42" bolt croppers on virtually anything below 16mm thick where there is access to get the croppers to bear. This latter aspect is why it can be OK to use a lock with a sub-16mm shackle on a 16mm chain, for example, but only when the lock is a close fit on the chain, and even then most certainly only with 'closed shackle' locks.
I disagree with your comment that U-locks are the only things that are relevant, even for portable use. Most thefts happen from home so the heavy chains etc are very relevant and are immune to various of the attacks that can defeat U-locks. U-locks are often more practical to carry and can be used in addition to a chain where possible. They complement each other and have different advantages and disadvantages, but they both have a role.
Dambek, the first post in this thread and in the Secondary Locks thread set the scene for what each thread was seeking to achieve and GA2G and many others have given a lot of help to countless people that are trying to wade through so many options. Many manufacturers don't make it any easier by having subtle changes to product names or indeed to product specifications over time, so a thread like this that has fresh input on a frequent basis is a very useful resource to many people. I don't agree with everything that is said here, but I do think people can make more informed decisions as a result of these threads being available.
I'm not familiar with the Squire Vulcan lock but I can confirm that it is not approved by Sold Secure:
https://www.soldsecure.com/search?name=Vulcan&action=
The cheapest padlock that we do from Squire that is approved by Sold Secure is the SS50-P5 open shackle lock, and that's about the same price as the one you mentioned:
https://www.soldsecure.com/search///ss50-p5-padlock.html
Open Shackle locks are not as tough as closed shackle, but they are lighter and cheaper. However, we would only recommend that lock with our lightest, 11mm chain, and that is not tough enough to be on the 'Locks that Work' list. We do offer all of our chains in Package Deals with locks that are approved.
This all comes down to how much weight you want to carry, how much you want to spend, and what security level you are after. We are happy to give advice via e-mail if you like?