Talk:Master Lock

this is not an easy article to write, so it might look like an advertisment, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerrycobra (talk • contribs) 01:13, 23 June 2006‎ (UTC)

changed it around — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerrycobra (talk • contribs) 01:19, 23 June 2006‎ (UTC)

no physicologiacl effects? 64.83.156.90 21:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

...The comment about the Master lock surviving being "Shot by a rifle" on Myth Busters is not true.

In the Myth Busters episode in question, the team shot at padlocks and deadbolts from "Master Lock" as well as several other manufacturers. The locks were mounted on a variety of different doors, and the team used at least five different weapons ranging from a 9mm pistol to a very powerful rifle. The "Master Lock" brand locks, both padlocks and deadbolts, survived (defined as remained locked) impacts from bullets fired in all of the pistol tests. However, when hit by rifle fire, all of the "Master Brand" padlocks were so severely damaged they could either be pulled off the door by hand or were blown clear off the door by the impact of the bullet.

It is important to note that, despite the numerous examples of locks defeated by gunfire in cinema and television; it is completely impractical to shoot a lock off a door. All of the tests on the Myth Busters show were done at very close range. Under these conditions, the shooter would be risking serious injury by ricochets and shrapnel from the defeated lock.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.73.136.78 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 6 August 2007‎ (UTC)

History? Manufacturing in US and Canada, Dudley
I think there is some interesting history that could be added here that doesn't seem to readily available on Google. - when, where did they manufacture. - Dudley Lock Company, when did they buy it? - some time after 2008, manufacturing was moved to China? - where was the Canadian plant? - where was the US plant (Chicago?) when did it close?

There is a lot of history of manufacturing and innovation in North America which will be lost if we don't record it somewhere. As companies amalgamate and move operations over-seas, they don't have much incentive to publish complete, objective histories.

GregorLarson (talk) 16:09, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Spoken article
I've recorded a version of this article based on the current publix text and will be editing and uploading this week. If people wish to revise or make additions to the article, please do so before Friday (1st of February 2013) in order that I can rerecord the relevant section(s). Chris W. (talk) 04:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Master Lock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110306170736/http://www4.uwm.edu:80/business/corporate/gallery/soref.cfm to http://www4.uwm.edu/business/corporate/gallery/soref.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:34, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

poor security rating
why is there no mention of how poor their products are? they can usually be easily picked or bypassed, often having known flaws which date back decades. Examples of how pathetic the locks are can be found on youtube, such as Bsonian Bill ( https://www.youtube.com/user/bosnianbill/search?query=masterlock ) or The Lock Picking Lawyer ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCm9K6rby98W8JigLoZOh6FQ/search?query=masterlock )


 * I would agree that Master Lock is known for producing bottom of the barrel, low quality products. But my impression does not have to align with what most people think. Maybe we can get a relible source that their products are known for their many, many security flaws? If not then just mention the security flaws by themselves. Kwinzman (talk) 05:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I think their extremely poor quality and design flaws that can only be described as egregious, should absolutely get a section here. I believe LPL is an expert and a reliable source. And I think these videos speak for themselves.
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxmmwWwW6TY&t=73s
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHYpSERxcC4&t=19s
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbYxr7-HZ4E&t=53s
 * timestamped for beginning of the demonstration
 * 2601:442:4600:8F20:2516:59DF:B277:F676 (talk) 04:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC)