Introducing the Blackland Era - 100% stainless steel. 3D printed. $75

[Blackland Razors]

Okay. I followed this thread and had signed up for notification but alas was out of the loop. I also checked the website periodically too. After doing some more checking I see it’s sold out. As I need a new razor like a hole in the head this set of circumstances saves me $75.

Check your spam and also sign up again. It’s pretty common for typos to happen. Newsletters go out to everyone on the list so if your correct email is on the list you were emailed. We’ve also sent a few so if haven’t gotten any then that’s something to look into.

 

[Blackland Razors]

Shane, one other big question i have about the design, why the undercut in areas other then the lather channel? It seems like it would weaken the safety bar/tines connection points and for the bottom surface where the plate holds the blade; it also seems like it’s going to be harder to clean, so where is the win to this approach?

Good question. With regards to cleaning, it’s not different than cleaning between open comb teeth so I don’t think this is really a problem. Strength is also not an issue as that connection is sufficiently thick.

We did this feature for a few reasons:

1. To show off. We can make that undercut and nobody else can (especially at this price point) so I wanted show off that ability and create that “how the hell is this made?” moment.

2. Lather doesn’t just flow directly under the blade. It also goes off to the sides so this gives it a path.

3. Easier to rinse.

 

[Tanuki]

Fresh off my General digital calipers, mm, L-R:
New SC (your New SC my vary)
Karve OC- D, brass, original cap
Era level 4 OC

Cap width:
19.35, 19.21, 20.24
Base clamp surface width
19.37, 17.76, 20.18
Comb width
25.27, 25.04, 25.54 (25.67 on level 3)
Blade reveal is similar on the New SC and the Karve. The Karve cap overhangs the clamp point a bit. ERA matches the clamp points like the New SC, but with much less blade reveal. The increased comb width over the Karve seems quite significant to me.

Today was a carefree pass 2 and trouble spot clean up, with the level 4 OC and a fresh Feather. I confess, I put on a 75mm Russian Ti handle with light knurling. That's how I roll.



Smooth sailing, very close shave. A pod of dolphins knocked on the door, wanting to know what was going on with all that smoothness.

 

[APBinNCA]

Comb width
25.27, 25.04, 25.54 (25.67 on level 3)

I can add to this, my 1SB is the same width as the 3OC. This means that, since the 3 is about neutral exposure, going down to the 2 and 1 reduce the exposure to negative by reducing the gap. This also means that switching between those three will be very intuitive.

I had a suspicion, that I posted during pre-order, that the jump in efficiency listed on their website from the 3 to the 4 indicated the move to positive exposure. This seems to confirm that and clearly communicate that going from a 3 to a 4 isn't going to be as progressive as switching between the lower three plates. This is not a criticism, in fact this is a very well thought out plate spacing. I bet the 5 is the same width as the 4, but with more gap. You can see the height going up in the pictures on their website. This means that the Era is more like a lower gap WR2(maybe RR GC) compared to the Blackbird being more like a WR1(RR Lupo). It doesn't mean they can't have the same effectiveness(in place of efficiency), just that they get there a different way.

 

[never-stop-learning]

It doesn't mean they can't have the same effectiveness(in place of efficiency), just that they get there a different way.

That's how I evaluate razors:

Efficient + Smooth = Effective

 

[APBinNCA]

That's how I evaluate razors:

Efficient + Smooth = Effective

I believe this came up a lot recently in the CG threads comparing the different generations. With so many new razors, merely being highly smooth or highly efficient isn't enough. Credit to you for using this term consistently.

 

[Blackland Razors]

I believe this came up a lot recently in the CG threads comparing the different generations. With so many new razors, merely being highly smooth or highly efficient isn't enough. Credit to you for using this term consistently.

Love this. I'll take any description of shaving performance that doesn't boil everything down to "how aggressive is it?".

 

[APBinNCA]

Love this. I'll take any description of shaving performance that doesn't boil everything down to "how aggressive is it?".

You could probably take your smoothness and efficiency scores and average them and come up with a useful comparison across several of your razor designs. I bet the Vector, one of David's favourites, lands on the top.

Now get that SS back in stock

 

[Beefdrippings]

@Blackland Razors will the Era eventually be available through any vendors outside the US?

 

[Blackland Razors]

@Blackland Razors will the Era eventually be available through any vendors outside the US?

The Era will only be available through our website for the foreseeable future.

 

[joecon]

I believe this came up a lot recently in the CG threads comparing the different generations. With so many new razors, merely being highly smooth or highly efficient isn't enough. Credit to you for using this term consistently.

I agree, many of the new razors are smooth, seems like clamping support is the new fad (and I'm a fan, I think it's one of the best ways to make a blade rigid). I think that the ERA, along with several of the other new razors (like the g3 CG razors) are all pretty amazing to shave with. I think they are all reaching back to "old" ideas that work.

I think that the next frontier that designers need to tackle is width of the razor at the blade front. I think that covered tabs are a good idea, but why does the razor, at the sharp end of the blade, need to be that width as well. In fact, I think width is the reason that the Vector isn't my favorite Blackland, the width ends up acting like a lever or maybe it's just the extra width between the handle and the blade edge, but I think it ends up being more challenging to use then it should be. For me, the ERA is a great blend of rigidity and flexability. Shane, you should make us an injector format Vector style razor next... or just turn the ERA up to 11. Call it the April fools Spinal Tap edition

 

[never-stop-learning]

I believe this came up a lot recently in the CG threads comparing the different generations. With so many new razors, merely being highly smooth or highly efficient isn't enough. Credit to you for using this term consistently.

Thank you, Aaron.

 

[never-stop-learning]

Love this. I'll take any description of shaving performance that doesn't boil everything down to "how aggressive is it?".

Thank you, Shane.

Please feel free to use this way of describing razor performance as you see fit.

 

[BradWorld]

Love this. I'll take any description of shaving performance that doesn't boil everything down to "how aggressive is it?".

In my book, “aggressive” is not a great thing. To me an aggressive razor is one that is efficient, but not smooth. Like an Ikon Tech, or an R41. With lots of uncomfortable blade feel. I always prefer the term “efficient” over aggressive. But all these things are relative to each individual’s perspective and perception. I’m with David 100%:

That's how I evaluate razors:

Efficient + Smooth = Effective

 

[McBlade]

For anyone who has tried the 4 or 5 plate OC as well as a Fatip Piccolo/Grande, how do you think they compare?

The Piccolo also has a reputation for smooth shaves. Just wondering if these have a similar kind of feel. A mild-to-medium OC is my favourite kind of razor.

 

[Blackland Razors]

I think that the next frontier that designers need to tackle is width of the razor at the blade front. I think that covered tabs are a good idea, but why does the razor, at the sharp end of the blade, need to be that width as well.

I couldn't agree more with your design opinion, but I'd push back on it being the "next frontier" because every razor we've ever designed has done this. If you look carefully at the Era, you'll notice that the leading edge of the safety bar where it contacts the skin is about the same width as the cutting edge of the blade. The Blackbird, designed ~7 years ago has this feature to an even more dramatic degree. And, of course, the safety bars on the Vector and Sabre are the exact width of those blade. We've never designed a razor where the safety bar doesn't narrow to the width of the blade.

Green = front of safety bar
Red = cutting edge of blade

 

[Shave Souffle]

I don’t want to speak for joecon, but maybe he means how the front edge of the safety bar is notched where the blade tabs are covered but the front edge of safety bar is tapered back like the RR Lupo SS.

 

[joecon]

I don’t want to speak for joecon, but maybe he means how the front edge of the safety bar is notched where the blade tabs are covered but the front edge of safety bar is tapered back like the RR Lupo SS.

Thanks, I do think Shane understands my thoughts, but he think it is the best set of tradeoffs for the ERA, and I do not even disagree. But I also think the Lupo you are showing is an excellent example of where I would like to see (although I do worry that the very edges may expose the blade in an unsafe way at certain angles).

In Shane’s case, I think that this design is optimized for three things for a target audience that isn’t really this population (new wetshavers). I would guess that the three things are:

Safety- The less likely this design is, the better. If it is a little wider then some of his other designs, it’s probably a tradeoff he makes for this market.

Lather Flow- as mentioned in this thread, he wants to make sure this is clog proof. The Lupo design, or a design I am advocating would make the lather channels smaller, therefore more likely to clog. A shavette would be even less likely to clog then the ERA, but less safe.

Cost- The ERA manufacturing approach likely mitigates this some, but I bet the cost of production correlates with the number and complexity of surfaces. Other than the undercut flex, the production approach on the ERA seems to try to minimize surface area, surfaces that have to be machined/CNCed, and overall number of surfaces. I bet that approach helps to minimize cost and allows him to either increase margin or lower cost.

The design you end up with is all about the tradeoffs you think make the most sense for the product. I think Shane can go further, as with the Lupo example you provided, but he’s the one selling razors. I am sure he’s tried some of the approaches I’m advocating for, and decided that that approach he took for each of his razors is better. In another product, for another target market, he makes different design decisions, maybe including some of the stuff we are suggesting. Given his success, I’d generally trust his judgement.

 

[APBinNCA]

Thanks, I do think Shane understands my thoughts, but he think it is the best set of tradeoffs for the ERA, and I do not even disagree. But I also think the Lupo you are showing is an excellent example of where I would like to see (although I do worry that the very edges may expose the blade in an unsafe way at certain angles).

In Shane’s case, I think that this design is optimized for three things for a target audience that isn’t really this population (new wetshavers). I would guess that the three things are:

Safety- The less likely this design is, the better. If it is a little wider then some of his other designs, it’s probably a tradeoff he makes for this market.

Lather Flow- as mentioned in this thread, he wants to make sure this is clog proof. The Lupo design, or a design I am advocating would make the lather channels smaller, therefore more likely to clog. A shavette would be even less likely to clog then the ERA, but less safe.

Cost- The ERA manufacturing approach likely mitigates this some, but I bet the cost of production correlates with the number and complexity of surfaces. Other than the undercut flex, the production approach on the ERA seems to try to minimize surface area, surfaces that have to be machined/CNCed, and overall number of surfaces. I bet that approach helps to minimize cost and allows him to either increase margin or lower cost.

The design you end up with is all about the tradeoffs you think make the most sense for the product. I think Shane can go further, as with the Lupo example you provided, but he’s the one selling razors. I am sure he’s tried some of the approaches I’m advocating for, and decided that that approach he took for each of his razors is better. In another product, for another target market, he makes different design decisions, maybe including some of the stuff we are suggesting. Given his success, I’d generally trust his judgement.

I have a razor, was going to try to get a picture next to the Era, that has a safety bar the same width as the blade edge(excluding the corners). Quit a bit narrower than the Era. It has covered blade tabs and the cap and baseplate taper into the the safety bar. I was kind of just letting this go because I didn't want to side track the thread. Maybe we should start a thread about this?

 

[Tanuki]

I just did a fast, end-of-day shave, the first using the level 3 OC plate. I was going too fast to want to natter on about the shave details, so 1 point only: I think I can shave just as fast and carelessly with the level 4 OC, and get better results.

I may try to find someone who wants to swap a level 5 OC for my level 3. Unlike the Karve, downshifting a level didn't make an easy, safe razor even easier and safer.