That's it. I finally found a vintage Gillette razor that works for me.

[Umma2gumma]

I've been complaining in the past about not being able to get an enjoyable shave with my vintage Gillettes, which for me fall into two categories:

A) Too mild. That's 1960 Tech and 1971 Super 109 Adjustable. Can't get a close BBS quality shave from them without ending up scrubbing my face too many times and getting irritation. These two razors were my biggest source of frustration with regards to vintage Gillettes.

B) Too aggressive. That's my Pre-War Tech and New LC. The pre-war is almost there - I can get a decent close and comfortable shave with it, but I do have to pay close attention or it will get scratchy. Still not on the level of Maggard V3A or Parker Variant which provide guaranteed easy BBS with minimal attention. The New LC is just too aggressive for a daily driver. Perhaps I need more time to tame it.

Well, I just bought a dirty old superspeed. Didn't even know the date, it looked like an earlier version and the price was good so I decided, why not. Ended up being Y-4, so the last quarter of 1953. I did my best to clean it up, loaded it with the new Feather, and used it for the first time just now.

Well, that's it ! This razor is just what I was looking for. It's a little less aggressive than the pre-war Tech - just enough to be an easy shaver - but significantly more efficient than that Super 109. Looking at them side by side, it appears that the blade gap on that superspeed is just a tiny tad bigger than the highest setting on the adjustable. I also really like the balance on that razor, even though I typically prefer thicker / longer handles.

Is it the best shaver I have ? No, but it's up there with the best of them. I guess I got lucky that I bought an early version, as from what I understand, the newer years were less aggressive.

 

[Quaznoid]

Glad you like the SuperSpeed but if it has more blade exposure than the highest setting of the SuperAdjustable it has been damaged or modified in some way.

 

[Dave himself]

Congratulations. Its nice to find these vintage gems

 

[Umma2gumma]

Glad you like the SuperSpeed but if it has more blade exposure than the highest setting of the SuperAdjustable it has been damaged or modified in some way.

It looks unmodified. The blade exposure is the same, it's the blade gap that seems a little higher. Or at least the same as #9 on SA.

 

[md1234]

I love the 40's style Super Speed!

As a side note I find it odd that your Super Speed is more aggressive than the Super Adjustable 109 because I find the three of mine to be some what aggressive on 9, more than say a Red Tip (5 or 6 setting) or Super Speed (3 or 4 setting). Maybe yours is under-clocked or out of whack?

 

[Umma2gumma]

I love the 40's style Super Speed!

As a side note I find it odd that your Super Speed is more aggressive than the Super Adjustable 109 because I find the three of mine to be some what aggressive on 9, more than say a Red Tip (5 or 6 setting) or Super Speed (3 or 4 setting). Maybe yours is under-clocked or out of whack?

It's possible. Looks normal though.

 

[luvmysuper]

If I were to doubt one, and think one was out of whack, it would be the adjustable.
Those Super Speeds were built like tanks.

 

[WThomas0814]

Congratulations on finding your Vintage!

I agree, @luvmysuper. I don't know how a SS of that vintage can be out if whack unless something is visibly broken or bent. I swear I could pound nails with my '51.

 

[Umma2gumma]

If I were to doubt one, and think one was out of whack, it would be the adjustable.
Those Super Speeds were built like tanks.

So, I looked at them again & realized that the gap on the superspeed only looks larger because it has more light coming through the lather slots - there's no bottom plate blocking the light as on the adjustable. So the gap is easier to see.

Doing a not-so-scientific test with stacked up blades, I'd say the gap on that superspeed is about in the same vicinity as 7 through 9 on the adjustable. I can't pinpoint it more closely without getting a set of gauges.

However, this superspeed is less angle sensitive and more efficient than the adjustable. Not sure why.

 

[DrStrange]

I was very happy with my 1940's style Super Speed for years.
But eventually I became curious about the 1941 Gillette Ranger Tech.
I think I like it a little better, but they are very close.

There's a Super Speed permanently installed in the shower caddy
for when I shave in the shower.

When I don't shave in the shower,
After I do three passes with a straight razor,
if I can feel anything when I apply the aftershave
I grab the Ranger Tech and raze it off.
That's mostly on either side of the Adam's apple
where I have a little trouble holding the straight razor effectively.

 

[Joezamboni]

So, I looked at them again & realized that the gap on the superspeed only looks larger because it has more light coming through the lather slots - there's no bottom plate blocking the light as on the adjustable. So the gap is easier to see.

Doing a not-so-scientific test with stacked up blades, I'd say the gap on that superspeed is about in the same vicinity as 7 through 9 on the adjustable. I can't pinpoint it more closely without getting a set of gauges.

However, this superspeed is less angle sensitive and more efficient than the adjustable. Not sure why.

It’s definitely odd. Having owned several examples of both those particular years of notched 40s style superspeeds have never had any sort of issues for me.

Ive seen the adjustables jam at the mechanism for various reasons and the slims/Fatboys Seem to occasionally have tiny misadjustments (probably due to being head heavy and dropped I assume), or the last 1/4 turn not working on the super adjustable.

If you like the superspeed the heavier handles of the aristocrats are nice (same head depending on year) and backroadsgold can do nickel nice if the gold is worn, or gold obviously,

Fatboys are similar shavers too, early flare tips appear to have the exact same head but feel different (not in a bad way).

I do add photos because why not. It’s hard to beat the aristocrats. I’m really digging my 1946 which is a different head but pretty amazing. Sadly the 1946 “ranger” style heads seem to be the ones most prone to adjustment issues in my experience.

 

[Umma2gumma]

It’s definitely odd. Having owned several examples of both those particular years of notched 40s style superspeeds have never had any sort of issues for me.

Ive seen the adjustables jam at the mechanism for various reasons and the slims/Fatboys Seem to occasionally have tiny misadjustments (probably due to being head heavy and dropped I assume), or the last 1/4 turn not working on the super adjustable.

If you like the superspeed the heavier handles of the aristocrats are nice (same head depending on year) and backroadsgold can do nickel nice if the gold is worn, or gold obviously,

Fatboys are similar shavers too, early flare tips appear to have the exact same head but feel different (not in a bad way).

I do add photos because why not. It’s hard to beat the aristocrats. I’m really digging my 1946 which is a different head but pretty amazing. Sadly the 1946 “ranger” style heads seem to be the ones most prone to adjustment issues in my experience.View attachment 1823829

Gorgeous razors.

Not sure if you misread my post or if I wasn't clear. The superspeed has no issues. It's the super adjustable that is less efficient even opened up to 7-8. The superspeed just shaves closer and seems to be less sensitive to the shaving angle.

 

[Joezamboni]

Gorgeous razors.

Not sure if you misread my post or if I wasn't clear. The superspeed has no issues. It's the super adjustable that is less efficient even opened up to 7-8. The superspeed just shaves closer and seems to be less sensitive to the shaving angle.

i over focused on my personal observations without much context once again!

 

[Iridian]

I am still disadvintaged. Not a single one yet, but have some remakes.

 

[Quaznoid]

All I know is that the blade gap on the SuperAdjustable at settings 8 and 9 are the widest ever offered by Gillette

 

[Columbo]

FWIW, I've been daily shaving with a pre-Korean War SS for more years than I can remember now (and no, I am not the original owner). The best $1.25 someone ever spent. I forget how I came to possess it.

I've just never seen a reason to change, and nothing since has bettered it on my face. I tried a '54 regular at one point because I liked the handle grip a little better, but wound up giving it to my son. The early SS just shaves better for me.

A couple times a year, I drop an old Schick Platinum Plus into it, and it's shaving heaven for about 10-12 days.

I've got a lot of old vintage Gillette razors. But they all sit in a closet somewhere, as that old SS sits next to the mouthwash.

 

[Umma2gumma]

All I know is that the blade gap on the SuperAdjustable at settings 8 and 9 are the widest ever offered by Gillette

There must be other things at play there as well. I used it on 8 and it was still a bit of a struggle and excessive cleanup. Looking for info online, I’ve found a few other posters saying that the Super 109 wasn’t as efficient for them as they expected it to be.

I don’t believe there’s anything wrong with my particular copy, it looks intact and the adjustment visibly works. Rather, I believe it’s the head geometry and the shave angle sensitivity.

Looking at my vintage Gillettes - and I by now have a small collection - the shaving angle sensitivity seems to have greatly increased after mid-1950s. My New LC, pre-war Tech and now this 1953 Superseed aren’t very angle-sensitive, at least not any more than my modern razors. The 1960 Tech is pretty angle sensitive and has a small gap, it’s the gentlest razor but also the hardest to get a BBS with. The Super Adjustable is pretty angle-dependent and easily leads to irritation due to multiple passes. The new to me Superspeed is a very close shaver and not at all angle-sensitive, but the first shave was a bit harsher than I initially realized, probably because of the light weight and the resulting subconscious pressure. Still, it’s a very efficient shaver and has promise.

 

[Columbo]

There must be other things at play there as well. I used it on 8 and it was still a bit of a struggle and excessive cleanup. Looking for info online, I’ve found a few other posters saying that the Super 109 wasn’t as efficient for them as they expected it to be.

I don’t believe there’s anything wrong with my particular copy, it looks intact and the adjustment visibly works. Rather, I believe it’s the head geometry and the shave angle sensitivity.

Looking at my vintage Gillettes - and I by now have a small collection - the shaving angle sensitivity seems to have greatly increased after mid-1950s. My New LC, pre-war Tech and now this 1953 Superseed aren’t very angle-sensitive, at least not any more than my modern razors. The 1960 Tech is pretty angle sensitive and has a small gap, it’s the gentlest razor but also the hardest to get a BBS with. The Super Adjustable is pretty angle-dependent and easily leads to irritation due to multiple passes. The new to me Superspeed is a very close shaver and not at all angle-sensitive, but the first shave was a bit harsher than I initially realized, probably because of the light weight and the resulting subconscious pressure. Still, it’s a very efficient shaver and has promise.

Generally speaking, and excluding differences among the red-silver-blue variants, the early SS models are slightly more aggressive than the later ones. But none of them I would consider to be an “aggressive” shaver. The early SS just happens to be tuned ‘just right’ for me.

Your blade choice can have as much to do with it as the razor. And matching the blade to the razor to your face can be somewhat an art. I don’t know if they’ve changed recently, but my recollection is that the Feathers are among the sharpest of the modern blades. I don’t necessarily equate sharp with smooth. That is not a blade I like in my particular SS, and I have a generally tolerable face that can handle most of them.

 

[Quaznoid]

There must be other things at play there as well. I used it on 8 and it was still a bit of a struggle and excessive cleanup. Looking for info online, I’ve found a few other posters saying that the Super 109 wasn’t as efficient for them as they expected it to be.

I don’t believe there’s anything wrong with my particular copy, it looks intact and the adjustment visibly works. Rather, I believe it’s the head geometry and the shave angle sensitivity.

Looking at my vintage Gillettes - and I by now have a small collection - the shaving angle sensitivity seems to have greatly increased after mid-1950s. My New LC, pre-war Tech and now this 1953 Superseed aren’t very angle-sensitive, at least not any more than my modern razors. The 1960 Tech is pretty angle sensitive and has a small gap, it’s the gentlest razor but also the hardest to get a BBS with. The Super Adjustable is pretty angle-dependent and easily leads to irritation due to multiple passes. The new to me Superspeed is a very close shaver and not at all angle-sensitive, but the first shave was a bit harsher than I initially realized, probably because of the light weight and the resulting subconscious pressure. Still, it’s a very efficient shaver and has promise.

My 1978 Black Beauty is the best shaving Gillette I own. I shave at “9” with a Slim or Fatboy but can’t go beyond “8” with my BB. Your results are not mine. Can’t explain it. It must be blade or technique.

 

[rivieraranch]

Where did this designation “Forties Style” Super Speed come from? When referring to a 1947-1953 Super Speed they are all the same. I get if you are referring to a 1954 Super Speed you could denote it as “Forties Style” (as opposed to the 1954 Flare Tip) but to use that to refer to the earlier models seems redundant.