Why an old cylinder may be serviceable, but no longer meet safety requirements
Let's call the client Mikhail. His cylinder worked for many years without a single malfunction. The keys were intact. The mechanism did not jam. But…
The client's name has been changed.
Let's call the client Mikhail. His cylinder worked for many years without a single malfunction. The keys were intact. The mechanism did not jam. But during this time the apartment was rented out several times, different people received the keys, and some of the old copies could no longer be traced.
Mikhail asked:
“If the cylinder is good, why change it?”
Because technical serviceability and access control are different issues. The loss of keys or the suspicion that they might have fallen into the hands of other people are explicitly listed in the source material among the reasons for replacing the system.
The lock can be mechanically perfect
And at the same time, the owner may no longer know:
- how many keys exist;
- who owns them;
- whether copies were made.
In this case, the question does not arise about the quality of the lock. And to the access history.
Why does replacing the cylinder solve this particular issue?
If the design allows only the cylinder to be replaced, the new mechanism creates a new set of keys. Old copies are no longer suitable.
Does this mean that you need to change the cylinder after each guest?
No. The solution depends on the use case. But if the object:
- gave up for a long time;
- changed owner;
- had many temporary users,
updating access can be quite rational.