Comment on Saturday SOTD Thread - December 16, 2023
djundjila@sub.wetshaving.social 9 months agoI don’t really think of it as a mild razor any longer. It just has a different geometry than the MMOC and Clog-Pruf (which are very similar IMO), and it took me a minute to adjust.
wonder how you feel about […] mildness now
I rudely changed your question to answer with an observation: I don’t think mild and aggressive are super helpful categories, because even mild razors will give you a bad irritation if you don’t do your homework. I used to think of the safety bar as a mix of safety belt (doesn’t help avoid accidents, but helps in case of an accident) and training wheels (does help avoid accidents).
Now, I think of it as a mix of safety belt (not a nuisance) and training wheels (very much a nuisance).
On the spectrum between safety belt and training wheels , a training-wheel-like razor is one where the safety bar gets in the way of a good shave. The Merkur 34c is on the edge of that category for me, for instance. The Flying Wing isn’t, I get to feel and hear the blade without interference from the safety bar.
I see no benefit to a DE over a Micromatic SE.
100% agree. But then again, one can get a great shave from a DE too, and before Gillette adjustables, DE razors were probably much cheaper to manufacture than Micromatics?
gcgallant@sub.wetshaving.social 9 months ago
Yeah, interesting analogy, and spot-on IMO. The training wheels aspect can be overdone. The Henson razor is a design that exemplifies this I think; safety to the detriment of technique development. (Again, IMO. Judging from what I see in pictures). I became aware of technique during my first bout with straight razor shaving years ago. Admittedly, I really didn’t focus on it until I took up wetshaving as a hobby. That was a big mistake.
This is certainly true about 3-piece razors, but I think the “big win” was with the band steel used for DE blades. There’s less steel mass to each blade and almost zero cost to machining both sides of the band. I’m not sure how the user benefits from this. I guess it was a greater benefit to manufacturers than anyone else. I’ve heard many times that Gillette made razors in order to sell blades.
djundjila@sub.wetshaving.social 9 months ago
You’re right. If you want to confirm your suspicion for yourself, I’d be happy to loan you my Henson mild.
I think that works for every blade format of Gillette except the DE blade, which was very quickly copied and Gillette had to compete unlike the later monopolies on patented cartridges.
GEM did that too with the double edge Micromatic blades. Single, spineless piece of band steel with an edge on either side and relatively simple cutouts.
Injector blades are single edge, but very narrow and probably don’t use much more steel per edge that DE blades of the time (they weren’t thin like today).
If you take into account that people used to hone even disposable blades to save money, the GEM format has a huge advantage over DE: if you sharpen a DE blade many times, the edge disappears behind the top cap and becomes useless. A GEM blade can be filed down several millimetre before the mechanism doesn’t push it all the way to the blade stops anymore.
I think the victory or the DE blade might be due to non-technical reasons. Better marketing and early market penetration?
djundjila@sub.wetshaving.social 9 months ago
Anecdotally, I’ve bought an MMOC with an old blade in it that had been honed so many times that it had a very obvious frown