Gillette razors -- the best in the world in their heyday?

[kingfisher]

The British flat-bottom New is one of the best shavers I've ever tried. If it were a brand new artisan stainless steel razor that had cost me $225, I would be starting a thread on here about how happy I am with it and why everybody else should go buy one right now!

Ha! Maybe that would be an interesting thread idea.......review a vintage Gillette as if it were the latest-greatest artisan overly expensive artisan razor......

 

[chuckd]

Sorry, I just realized you were only speaking of double edged razors! I think there were a number of quality European makes, but in the US, Gillette was top shelf.

Me too - I was about to reply with, "No, GEM razors were the best!"

 

[glm38]

Yes the best. It's hard to argue with the long lasting quality of the old gillettes given so many thousands are still serviceable today 60, 70 ,80 or more years later.

 

[Salty O'Rourke]

I've shaved with 1930s NEWs, Goodwills, Senators/Sheratons, Techs, and 40s/50s/60s TTOs like the Aristocrats, Diplomats, SuperSpeeds, Flare Tips, Fat Boys, Slims, Black Beauties, and a D1 Toggle, and only the adjustables give me a consistent BBS shave, provided I open them up to the widest setting. Probak, Leresche, Wardonia, Schotz, Gibbs, Famex, Personna (Star DE) - these all shave me better than the Gillettes from their respective time periods. At some point Gillette seems to have concentrated on making pretty razors rather than efficient ones, and they were primarily in the blade business anyway.

 

[jeffmudrick]

Yes the best. It's hard to argue with the long lasting quality of the old gillettes given so many thousands are still serviceable today 60, 70 ,80 or more years later.

That's an argument for durability not were they the best at the time. Certainly true that 3 piece brass razors typically don't wear out.


Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

 

[glm38]

That's an argument for durability not were they the best at the time. Certainly true that 3 piece brass razors typically don't wear out.


Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

That depends on how you define "best". For me durability is a big part of that equation. Given that pretty much all the gillettes are also fine mild shavers that equals best to me.

 

[jeffmudrick]

That depends on how you define "best". For me durability is a big part of that equation. Given that pretty much all the gillettes are also fine mild shavers that equals best to me.

Of course Gillette didn't market their razors that way they wanted customers to buy the latest and greatest thing, not hold on to a razor for decades. And you'd be right that Gillette smartly targeted those seeking mild/comfortable vs close which ASR stressed in their marketing.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

 

[RGMac]

As with many things, there are many factors. Look at the standard cutout that is in pretty much every DE blade made. Wasn't that basically a compromise design to make a generic blade that fit different manufacturers razors?

I'm pretty sure the razors Gillette made that were issued to US troops in WWI went a long way to establishing market dominance as well.

 

[GR5233]

I'm pretty sure the razors Gillette made that were issued to US troops in WWI went a long way to establishing market dominance as well.

And WW2 as well. Coke did the same thing for WW2

 

[jeffmudrick]

As with many things, there are many factors. Look at the standard cutout that is in pretty much every DE blade made. Wasn't that basically a compromise design to make a generic blade that fit different manufacturers razors?

I'm pretty sure the razors Gillette made that were issued to US troops in WWI went a long way to establishing market dominance as well.

It was crucial. Average Joe could not afford the $5 Gillette razor but quite a lot of the boys came home with them. Although King Gillette had left day to day management years before, getting the War Department to issue Gillette razors was a game changer for the company.

Sent from my Google Chromebook Pixel (2015) using Tapatalk

 

[BigJ]

Hello, the original patents of Gillette expired in 1921, but they already lost their protection in the early 1900s in some countries, as local manufacture was required for the patented goods. The New improved was the next protected design, but this wasn't sold in such numbers as the original razor. The New patents were fairly short lived, even in the US.
Besides patent protection Gillettes technique for expansion was to buy its potential competitors.

+1! Yes indeed! They went for the mass market (and succeeded for many decades)!

 

[kingfisher]

+1! Yes indeed! They went for the mass market (and succeeded for many decades)!

They are largely still succeeding, although they are facing a lot more competition in the past 5-8 years.

 

[balesofhay91]

I think they are very good. There are others that give them a run for their money, but the several decade old Gillette razors that have stood the test of time speak for themselves. But I still prefer my Schick Krona.

 

[jeffmudrick]

Hello, the original patents of Gillette expired in 1921, but they already lost their protection in the early 1900s in some countries, as local manufacture was required for the patented goods. The New improved was the next protected design, but this wasn't sold in such numbers as the original razor. The New patents were fairly short lived, even in the US.
Besides patent protection Gillettes technique for expansion was to buy its potential competitors.

Or sue them on dubious grounds.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

 

[Salty O'Rourke]

Hello, the original patents of Gillette expired in 1921, but they already lost their protection in the early 1900s in some countries, as local manufacture was required for the patented goods. The New improved was the next protected design, but this wasn't sold in such numbers as the original razor. The New patents were fairly short lived, even in the US.
Besides patent protection Gillettes technique for expansion was to buy its potential competitors.

That "we're so big you can't beat us" attitude came back to bite them when they picked on someone too big to cave in - AutoStrop. Didn't work out so well for Gillette.

 

[romsitsa]

That "we're so big you can't beat us" attitude came back to bite them when they picked on someone too big to cave in - AutoStrop. Didn't work out so well for Gillette.

Why? Gillette got production capacity, new technology, patents, new advertising to boost sales and kept the Gillette name.

 

[Salty O'Rourke]

Why? Gillette got production capacity, new technology, patents, new advertising to boost sales and kept the Gillette name.

Well, they kept everything except control of their destiny. For all intents and purposes, after their book-juggling shenanigans came to light, Gillette effectively became a division of AutoStrop with Charles Gaisman in charge.

 

[BigSpender]

And now where are they? Just a bookkeeping profit center and registered trademark within the vast P&G conglomerate -- the "G" doesn't even stand for "Gillette."

I've been thinking about the "origin story" of Gillette inventing the "razor and blades" marketing strategy with their first razors. I've heard that some experts say it was not true. I'd like to go a step further: I think the business professors have it backwards.

When you look at the price of the early models and the way they were sold in classy lined wooden boxes with latches (I was lucky enough to buy one from 1905-06 from an erroneous eB auction) saying "Handle and 12 Blades -- PRICE $5.00" on the bottom, it is obvious it is the razors you are paying for, and they are far from inexpensive. That $5 in 1905 would be about $150 today. That's a status symbol, not unlike today's way overpriced Gillette octopus razors -- We're expensive, and YOU are worth it!.

The guys of yore looked at the pictures of the razors in the advertisements, and they desired them. Gillette wasn't selling razors as a mass-commodity, saying how cheap the razor was. The ads, instead, talked about how valuable your time was, and how the razor would pay for itself in the time you save -- going to the barber, waiting for the barber, sitting in the chair, paying the barber.

But they did talk about how cheap the blades were, how many excellent shaves you could get from each one, from each edge, and how much it costs per shave. It seemed they were trying to sell the blades as cheaply as possible, especially after upgrading factory technology early on.

Why were they doing that? They knew that, eventually, other companies could manufacture similar disposable razor blades. But because of the Gillette patents, they would not fit Gillette razors, and would be designed for other, competing razors. So the key to the success of Gillette rested on the predominance of their patented three-hole blade design. The more stores sold Gillette blades, in the more cities and states and countries, the more dominant Gillette would become. To get those stores to carry their blades, they needed to sell them wholesale cheap enough that the stores could make a healthy profit selling them retail. So I doubt Gillette was raking in profits from selling blades, at least in the early years.

Meanwhile, other companies did spring up with incompatible blade designs and sometimes very nice razors. But some consumers outside the big cities probably soon ran up against the problem of finding blades, and potential buyers started to wonder whether there would be blades at all in coming years. I think I've seen ads for some offering to sell razors and blades by mail.

Eventually, of course, Gillette ran ads for razor-blade sets where they said the price was for the blades, and the razor was thrown in free. That was the "razor and blade" strategy, but I don't think it started until the 1920s, and more commonly, the 1930s, from what I recall of advertisements. (This strategy was used especially conspicuously beginning in the 1970s with cartridge razors using patented handle couplings -- Wilkinson, Gillette and others went to extremes to try to get starter handles into the hands of potential consumers.) Obviously, the primary goal was to hook new customers, who would keep buying blades. It may also have been to draw people away from the Gem single-edge razor format. But I'll bet plenty of guys who already owned a Gillette razor liked the bargain set deal, and got an extra razor or two. That may partially account for the many old Gillette razors we see for sale in lightly used or near mint condition.

Were Gillette razors the best in the world back then. I don't know because I haven't tried every other DE razor produced during that era. But, given my experience shaving with the New Type and the Tech, surely there must have been better razors -- the Old Type is another story. On the other hand, there was soon head to head competition on DE blades. My guess is Gillette tried hard to make the best razor blades, because their market and reputation depended on it. However, it is nearly impossible to tell how they shaved when they were new because of corrosion. Perhaps folks who use vintage blades would have some insight into Gillette's quality relative to other blades in the 1920s, 30s and 40s.

There's a lesson in the old Gillette marketing strategy for today's sellers: many people want a razor with class, not just a work tool, and even if they can't afford the top of the line model, it's good that it is there, and the class rubs off onto their lower-priced razors.

This is a little tricky to accomplish today with so many generic razors, sometimes very good, out there. Some of the online sellers that try this end up looking a little foolish, but others do seem to have a better product with their nice packaging. We are also seeing razor manufacturers trying to sell novel designs with proprietary razor blades that are extremely expensive, compared to DE blades. They should remember: Your new razor isn't going anywhere until your blades are reasonably priced, widely available, excellent quality, and likely to be around in five years.

Gillette double edge blades and their widely produced generic design live on, long after Gillette stopped making their own DE razors, and even fit Gillette razors made 118 years ago.

 

[jeffmudrick]

Well, they kept everything except control of their destiny. For all intents and purposes, after their book-juggling shenanigans came to light, Gillette effectively became a division of AutoStrop with Charles Gaisman in charge.

And?? Who and what was this pre-Gaisman Gillette? Nickerson was retired in '25, King was a figurehead in his last years of life, not having day to day management responsibility since before WW1. Gillette in 1930 was bookkeepers and ad-men and sketchy finance guys from all appearances.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

 

[Beefdrippings]

@BigSpender your post has me wondering if barbers were worried or feeling threatened by that marketing back in the early days? Or did they view these new razors as merely a novelty that wouldn’t last? Or neither?