Carbon vs. Stainless

[lafrancis]

Fine cutlery is almost exclusively made of carbon steel due to its hardness and edge retention properties. I've read here that the reason stainless blades have coatings is to compensate for the roughness of the edge. Putting rust aside, is there any compelling reason why razor blades are overwhelmingly made of stainless steel? Or is it really just the rust issue?

Out of curiosity I tried a Treet Classic carbon steel blade today. It was pretty good.

 

[Billski]

I get many shaves from a stainless blade.

Rust must be stopped.

I also like the Treet Classic steel blade, but it gives a person few shaves.

 

[adamchur]

Carbon steel knives are designed to be sharpened and made to last a lifetime
Straight razors were designed the same way as a carbon steel knife - ie for a lifetime of use
Single edge razors like the Rolls Razor, Valet Autostrop, Gem, Ever Ready and various others were also designed to be sharpened and used for a lifetime
Double edge blades are designed to be disposable - that was how Gillette made their money.
Originally DE blades would have been carbon steel - if they went rusty - think of all the extra profits Gillette made
Most modern DE blades are stainless steel because it's probably cheaper and easier to mass produce than carbon steel.

Having said that, I use Treet Durasharp as part of my blades rotation, and although any more than 3 shaves per blade is outside my comfort zone, I enjoy shaving with them whenever I use them.

Despite the number of shaves per blade that the Excalibur Club can get, like it or not DE blades aren't designed to last very long - they wouldn't make much of a profit if they were - and being part of the "jettison set" it makes sense to make the highest quality product possible for the lowest cost

 

[lafrancis]

Thanks Adam. I get what you're saying about straights and single edge razors. Just that it was always my understanding that carbon steel blades took and held a smoother edge than stainless blades, so wondering why they might not make superior DE blades also. My guess is that comes down cost and the convenience of a blade that won't rust.

 

[Bookworm]

Carbon steels tend to be _harder_ than stainless steels. That means that they can take a thinner edge without bending, which means sharper to most people. The issue is that they also tend to be more vulnerable to oxidation, which means having to keep them oiled between uses, or remove the oxidation (sharpen/strop/hone) each time. When you're talking about a razor edge like a DE blade, oxidation shows its effects faster, and it's harder to maintain the steel. They're also more brittle (generally), which means that the microscopic nicks and bends don't relax the same way as they do in a straight.

Gillette didn't stop producing Blue Blades because they were bad. They switched to stainless because everyone else was, and they were risking losing sales. Keep in mind that the vast majority of shavers at that point were just like the ones today. Shave, put it down, walk off. Maintenance? What's that?

 

[Mouser]

I don't know if everyone is getting it right or wrong here but the industry went to stainless because they last longer. As I have it from someone on another forum who says he was an industry insider back when the big switch was made, Gillette actually had considered moving to stainless long before but when weighing the advantage of each (carbon could take a sharper edge, stainless lasted longer) bet on people preferring the former. Wilkinson Sword showed that the market wanted longevity. As a matter of fact Wilkinson only was offering the stainless blades as an incentive add-on to their garden tools which is where they wanted to focus their business and were taken unprepared for it's popularity.

 

[Mouser]

Carbon steels tend to be _harder_ than stainless steels. That means that they can take a thinner edge without bending, which means sharper to most people. The issue is that they also tend to be more vulnerable to oxidation, which means having to keep them oiled between uses, or remove the oxidation (sharpen/strop/hone) each time. When you're talking about a razor edge like a DE blade, oxidation shows its effects faster, and it's harder to maintain the steel. They're also more brittle (generally), which means that the microscopic nicks and bends don't relax the same way as they do in a straight.

Gillette didn't stop producing Blue Blades because they were bad. They switched to stainless because everyone else was, and they were risking losing sales. Keep in mind that the vast majority of shavers at that point were just like the ones today. Shave, put it down, walk off. Maintenance? What's that?

There actually was/is another option to oiling the blades, a quick alcohol dip after each use which is what I do when using my vintage carbons. It removes all traces of moisture without the mess of oil, slight though it is.

 

[Bookworm]

Alcohol is hygroscopic, yes. Oil blocks the oxygen.

 

[Saxonbowman]

Gillette started coating the Blue Blades in 1960 or so. The 'Super Blues' did indeed last longer and were quite sharp and smooth, but the stainless blades from the '60s lasted twice as long at least.

 

[Highspeedlane]

Fine cutlery is almost exclusively made of carbon steel due to its hardness and edge retention properties. I've read here that the reason stainless blades have coatings is to compensate for the roughness of the edge. Putting rust aside, is there any compelling reason why razor blades are overwhelmingly made of stainless steel? Or is it really just the rust issue?

Out of curiosity I tried a Treet Classic carbon steel blade today. It was pretty good.

Yes, there's a great thread on B&B that concludes exactly what you mentioned. Carbon steel can be honed to a finer edge than stainless, and stainless manufacturers compensate for this difference by the use of edge coatings.

Carbon is also more responsive to stropping, as we know was a common practice through the availability of blade strops such as the Moredge and Twinplex.

However, the maintenance requirements of carbon steel needed to prevent rust generally make stainless the preferred material today.

 

[Mouser]

A 1964 Time magazine article......
Sign InSubscribe
Britain: The Reluctant Millionaires
Friday, May 01, 1964
fIFQFETZHKXUM

• • 
    
  • 
    
  • 
    
  • inShar

"We are rather reluctant about becoming millionaires," says Peter Randolph, the managing director of Britain's Wilkinson Sword Ltd. " It is prob ably going to be more worry than it is worth." Regret it as he may, Randolph will have to grin and bear it. This week Wilkinson stock goes on sale on the London Exchange for the first time —and the value of the shares retained by Randolph and other members of the family-owned company will make them all millionaires overnight. To the owners of 192-year-old Wilkinson, this is only the latest indignity heaped upon them as a result of the firm's success with the stainless steel razor blade — the edge that has touched off bitter competition in the U.S. and Europe for a new and promising market.

Word-of-Mouth. Before introducing the Super Sword, its stainless blade, Wilkinson was a little-known firm that had long been doing a comfortable business in ceremonial swords, bulletproof vests for fearful dictators and statesmen, and fire-detection equipment. It was pinning its future growth on a new line of high quality garden tools, had no desire to excite a battle of blades. But no matter how much it tried to down play its stainless blades and use them only to promote its tools, Wilkinson's blade sales took off in a flurry of word-of-mouth advertising. They now have 40% of the total British market and a 5% edge in the $184 million U.S. blade market. Super Swords account for 80% of Wilkinson's pretax profits, which in four years have jumped tenfold to an expected $9.1 million this year.

What Wilkinson feared most has happened. Its success first lured such U.S. blademakers as Schick (Krona Plus) and American Safety Razor (Personna and PAL) into the stainless field. Then came Gillette, with its great bulk, big name and huge marketing facilities. By now reluctantly committed to a fight it did not want, Wilkinson set up additional manufacturing operations in Britain, Germany, Canada and the U.S. Needing new capital to pay for this expansion, it brushed aside more than 1,000 offers from outside firms to merge or associate with it in favor of putting its stock up for sale. Although family interests will still retain a 71% control, the stock offering should yield nearly $15 million. "This share marketing is rather like leaving school," laments Randolph. "It is inevitable, but you regret it in a way."

New Way to Cut. Gillette is not much happier than Wilkinson about the stainless revolution. The blades have given its competitors a new way to cut into the Boston blademaker's grip on the U.S. market; Gillette's market share has dropped from 72% to 57%, and profits in the first quarter slid 22% to $8.3 million. With a massive advertising onslaught, Gillette is regaining some of its lost ground, but the whole industry is worried about the stainless blades, which are grabbing an ever-widening share of the U.S. market. The companies making them fear that their success may eventually mean a drop in the total dollar sales of blades. After all, the stainless blades give anywhere from two to ten times more shaves than the old kind, and men who average twelve shaves on a blade will obviously buy fewer than the industry wants to sell.

 

[Bookworm]

I guess the writer(s) of that article didn't think about something. People are creatures of habit. If a man was used to 2 comfortable shaves, 2 okay shaves, and then fighting through two more shaves that were uncomfortable, but needed to be done for budgetary reasons, he will continue to do _six_ shaves on a blade. He simply will have six reasonable shaves, and then get another blade out, because he won't want to hit the uncomfortable point again - and he's still inside his budget. (6 shaves per blade)

 

[rabidus]

I tried to file down a carbon Gillette blue blade with no success. It seemed that the blade might have filed down my file a little. I was able to file down two stainless steel blades easier.

 

[Bookworm]

Grinder?

 

[rabidus]

Grinder?

Regular file...

 

[Bookworm]

Regular file...

Sorry, was more of a suggestion than a question. I wasn't clear. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the blade WAS harder than the file.

 

[Mouser]

a later article...
Sign InSubscribe
World Business: The Blade Battle
Friday, Jan. 29, 1965
fIFQFETZHKXUM

• • 
    
  • Tweet
• Read Later

• Email
• Print
• Share
• Reprints

Follow @TIME

While the safety razor and the electric shaver have thoroughly conquered the U.S., many Europeans still strop their own razors or visit a barber for a shave. This naturally makes Europe highly attractive to the world's razor-blade makers. Throat-cutting competition for the market is raging between Boston-based Gillette Co., world's biggest producer, and Britain's Wilkinson Sword Ltd., whose introduction of the long-lasting stainless-steel blade changed the whole nature of the market (TIME, May 1). Stainless blades now account for almost 70% of British blade sales, 35% of the German market, and are increasing fast in other countries as delighted shavers try them. So far, smaller Wilkinson has been holding its own against Gillette.

00:00
/
00:00
00:00
Badly Nicked. Last week Gillette started distribution in Britain of a new stainless blade that will sell for less than both present Gillette and Wilkinson blades.* Gillette's new Seven O'Clock, which sold under that name in traditional carbon steel, will be 14¢ less for a five-pack than Gillette's premium Silver stainless or Wilkinson Super Sword-Edge. By bringing out an established name in stainless, Gillette hopes to hold the old Seven O'Clock market while luring away Wilkinson shavers who never tried Gillette's Silver blades. In Germany, Gillette has also switched a well-known Gillette blade name Rotbart (red beard) to stainless, hoping to beard Wilkinson in the same fashion.

00:00
/
00:00
00:00
Gillette needs a breakthrough. Unlike Wilkinson, which makes only stainless blades, Gillette frequently has to fill one pocket from another as customers switch from its carbon blades to its stainless. This shift, along with high promotion costs for the new blades, has badly nicked Gillette profits. From record 1962 earnings ($45.3 million) the company slipped 8% in 1963 despite higher sales, lost another 11.5% last year. Gillette's British subsidiary cut its employee force 5% last summer, discontinued longtime fair-trade prices on blades and hiked retailer discounts to stimulate sales.

00:00
/
00:00
00:00
Wary Watching. The new marketing moves, Gillette feels, will once more give earnings that old smooth feeling. Even so, it warily watches Wilkinson, which now sells in 50 countries (v. Gillette's more than 100) and quietly slipped into France recently with low-key ads that announced: "Elle est arrivée—the Wilkinson Super Sword." In both France and Italy, Gillette produces lower-priced brands similar to Seven O'Clock that will be converted to stainless if the war heats up. Meanwhile, it receives royalties regularly from Wilkinson, whose blades and bustling business are based on a 1959 Gillette patent ignored until Wilkinson came along.

 

[Mouser]

And as cheap as those prices marked on those vintage carded dispensers seem to us today, they were much more expensive, relatively speaking than any of todays models because the base market had disposable income to pay for a better product. Today largest share comes from third world

 

[rabidus]

Sorry, was more of a suggestion than a question. I wasn't clear. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the blade WAS harder than the file.

I was trying to file it down for a .006" thick shim rather than cut it. I filed down two SS blades easier, they equal .008" thick together though.

 

[JimmyHAD]

In the 60s I started with the blue blades, and undoubtedly I had poor technique, I was just a kid, but the blue blades gave me the blues. I still remember how happy I was when Gillette came out with the Super Stainless, or maybe it was the Platinum Plus, but in spite of the higher cost, they were so far superior it was a joy to use them. I tried the Treet blades some years ago when they were talked about on the forum and they were good, but not in the same league with Feathers, or Gillette Swedes (the hot blades back in '07-'08) IMHO