Vintage Tech Razors

[Trisbert]

Condolences about your EJ MacDaddy. The scary part is I have one of those EJ89 which I hang on a pair of prongs too.

This gets more interesting all the time. If the EJ89 is so fragile, the Merkur so poorly plated and the old Gillette cleans up so well, Hmm... it might be time to go round the local flea markets.

Robert

 

[talibeard]

The techs are well built but plating is a bit poor; it will be hard to find a used one that doesn't show that clearly. No corrosion issues though so it will be hardly affecting its life span. Modern razors corrode easier when the plating is gone due to the amount of zinc in the alloy. EJ and Mühle have a high quality plating though and as long as that isn't compromised it will corrode even less than an all stainless razor (I expect a lot of those guys to become really ugly over the years, especially the sanded Feather).

Back to the techs; when you like (very) mild razors you really should try one out.

 

[kingfisher]

The plating is poor on the gold Techs, but I have seen a lot of the silver Techs in which the plating is just fine.

I had one gold Tech that was darn near perfect, but I sold it on the B/S/T. I haven't used any DE except my Slim in quite some time.

 

[franz]

I have had a few nickel plated Techs and the plating seems to hold up pretty well. My prewar Tech still has 95% of the plating intact and it has been kicking around for 70+ years.

It is a mild razor to be sure - the prewar Tech slightly less so - but you could always loosen the head a quarter turn, or shim it with an old blade.

 

[gearchow]

+1 on the pre-war nickel plated Techs. Their plating holds up great. Gillette was pretty good a depositing a single layer of gold atoms.

-jim

 

[StuMcB]

I have a 'D' slot tech nice and not too mild and an English regular straight slot tech that's mild. Also an alimnium handled tech even more mild. All three great shaves. Buy one use it and enjoy.

 

[franz]

This is a little bit OT, but the difference in aggressiveness between prewar and postwar Techs is commonly reckoned to be mysterious or even nonexistent. This thread, however, has a couple of photos that illustrate the difference nicely.

http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php/162987-Photo-Analysis-of-Razor-Designs

(Cliffs Notes version - prewar Tech exposes more of the blade.)

 

[eastomjac]

IMHO,you cant find a razor of equal quality for the price of a vintage tech,they were made to last.i recently saw a seller on ebay with a whole box full of brand new gold techs,ive got three in my rotation,one gold,one fat handle nickle,and a plastic handle,all exelent shavers:}

 

[moshulu]

There is a simple explanation of why the Tech is Gillette's best-shaving razor.

With this model, Gillette finally adopted the innovative solid guard bar that had been pioneered by European companies a decade or more earlier. Unfortunately, with the succeeding generations of razors, Gillette added a home-grown feature that detracted significantly from performance (although, arguably, it enhanced safety) - the TTO loading system. One good idea, followed by a bad one, left the Tech at the top of the heap.

 

[man00ver]

There is a simple explanation of why the Tech is Gillette's best-shaving razor.

With this model, Gillette finally adopted the innovative solid guard bar that had been pioneered by European companies a decade or more earlier. Unfortunately, with the succeeding generations of razors, Gillette added a home-grown feature that detracted significantly from performance (although, arguably, it enhanced safety) - the TTO loading system. One good idea, followed by a bad one, left the Tech at the top of the heap.

What a different perspective you offer! Here I thought that the solid guard was much cheaper to produce, and attracted many shavers who found open-comb teeth to be visually threatening. So far the Tech is one of my least favorite shavers, personally. It's mild to a fault, and I get a much closer shave from the TTO Superspeeds (an innovation that greatly increased the cost of manufacture, BTW). If the Tech was "at the top of the heap" as you say, you must be referring to sales volume, which is no surprise considering the low-cost and length of production.

 

[gearchow]

I'm certain that the solid guard was a huge boon to Gillette's manufacturing. Simple to stamp out and no corner teeth to bend. I'm not sure what is wrong with the TTO as far as performance goes? The TTO razor still clamps the blade as effectively as a 3 or 2 piece does. I'll be interested to hear the opposing POV.

-jim

 

[mark_mw]

The TECH "at the top of the heap" - TRASH HEAP only!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gillette failed shavers everywhere when they deviated away from the open comb, and went to near zero blade exposure, with the Tech! The New was a great design, and then Gillette redeemed themselves with the Fatboy Adjustable, one of the very best, if not THE best, DE razor ever made!!

Maybe the Tech is like Jerry Lewis movies over there....

 

[Pjotr]

.............Stainless steel seams to me to be the perfect material for a razor.

I've been shaving with a bakelite razor for the past two weeks and based on the quality of the shaves I'd say plastic is the best material for a razor.

 

[michiganlover]

I'm certain that the solid guard was a huge boon to Gillette's manufacturing. Simple to stamp out and no corner teeth to bend. I'm not sure what is wrong with the TTO as far as performance goes? The TTO razor still clamps the blade as effectively as a 3 or 2 piece does. I'll be interested to hear the opposing POV.

-jim

I'll take a shot at the opposing viewpoint:

The TTO mechanism means that the head of the razor is much larger, and thus harder to get into tight areas like under the nose. It also means there are more parts that can get bent, and lose their tolerances over time.

I don't really think the TTO mechanism was any sort of improvement. Changing a blade on a 3 piece razor is not that dangerous, and if you are sloppy enough to cut yourself when changing the blade, you will very likely only do it once.

Further the TTO design was less about any actual benefit, and more about an attempt to compete with Schick. Schick was heavily promoting that their Injector razor could be loaded without ever touching the bare blade. Not to be outdone by Schick, Gillette invented the TTO, and the special blade packs to go with it, that effectively allowed for the same thing. Note, that in both cases the bare blades still needs to be handled when it is to be removed.

 

[Copierguy]

The TECH "at the top of the heap" - TRASH HEAP only!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gillette failed shavers everywhere when they deviated away from the open comb, and went to near zero blade exposure, with the Tech! The New was a great design, and then Gillette redeemed themselves with the Fatboy Adjustable, one of the very best, if not THE best, DE razor ever made!!

Maybe the Tech is like Jerry Lewis movies over there....

Don't let it get you down, maybe someday you will master the Tech.....

 

[gearchow]

I'll take a shot at the opposing viewpoint:

The TTO mechanism means that the head of the razor is much larger, and thus harder to get into tight areas like under the nose. It also means there are more parts that can get bent, and lose their tolerances over time.

I don't really think the TTO mechanism was any sort of improvement. Changing a blade on a 3 piece razor is not that dangerous, and if you are sloppy enough to cut yourself when changing the blade, you will very likely only do it once.

Further the TTO design was less about any actual benefit, and more about an attempt to compete with Schick. Schick was heavily promoting that their Injector razor could be loaded without ever touching the bare blade. Not to be outdone by Schick, Gillette invented the TTO, and the special blade packs to go with it, that effectively allowed for the same thing. Note, that in both cases the bare blades still needs to be handled when it is to be removed.

Got to agree with this. Certainly added complexity to something that probably didn't need it. Still, I would regret the absence of a 2 piece NEW, Super Adjustable or the Toggle.

Ain't marketing great?

-jim

 

[mark_mw]

Don't let it get you down, maybe someday you will master the Tech.....

Just like driving 30 mph on the expressway will still get you to your destination

The Tech is a simple failure on two fronts - stubble bouncing performance, with the risk of cuts during blade changes.....

When Gillette brought out the adjustable, most shaving situations could be handled by a simple twist, and blade changes became easy and safe - the respective mechanisms have proven their durability through the decades.

 

[.Damon.]

I just pulled out my tech this morning after not shaving with it for a month. It's a great shave for me, and worth the $5 it costs to try one out.

 

[moshulu]

I'm not sure what is wrong with the TTO as far as performance goes? The TTO razor still clamps the blade as effectively as a 3 or 2 piece does. I'll be interested to hear the opposing POV.

-jim

A 3-piece razor simply crushes (not literally, metals being incompressible) the blade between two very rigid surfaces. There is no possibility of motion or misalignment. In a TTO, the blade is only clamped along two narrow strip surfaces, just behind the edge. The rest of the blade is pressed up against the top of the head (you can sight down the head and see how the blade arches and travels upwards as you twist the tightening knob home). Any looseness or bad alignment translates into a variation of exposure angle or, worse yet, blade motion while shaving. I recently observed this on a British #19. Luckily, I spotted it before using the razor. Still not sure how to fix it.

European manufacturers never adopted TTO. They continued to perfect both OC and SGB designs until the end of the DE razor era. That's why the finest European razors (Leresche, Rotbart, others) ultimately out-shave the Gillettes. I emphasize that I am talking about the last few percentage points of shaving performance. Gillette made many excellent razors, I fully acknowledge, the Tech being, IMHO, first among them. And, of course, the YMMV principle applies to this discussion as it does to everything that concerns shaving.

 

[talibeard]

The Tech is a simple failure on two fronts - stubble bouncing performance, with the risk of cuts during blade changes.....

With my first shaves with the Tech I didn't think much of its shaving performance either and wondered if they could still make owners of an 'old type' happy with this one.

Changing blades with a 3-piece is no problem unless you make it one; after 17 years with a TTO I got my first 3-piece and unless you are driving at the same time the risk you are talking about is marginal. I love 3-pieces for how simple you can clean them.

Don't let it get you down, maybe someday you will master the Tech.....

In a funny way I did have to master it. The petite blade gap allows very limited choice in cutting angles and the Tech was no good WTG (I needed at least two) and a disaster ATG (wrong angle for me/ hardly cutting) but did work XTG. So with the Tech I use 2 semi-XTG's in different directions and get an acceptable result; not the closest shave but with a sharp blade more than good enough. In a normal routine with the Tech I would end up with at least 5 passes and probably more irritation than with my Slant or Fatip/R89 on a careless day.