What's new

ATT Kronos OC vs SB heads

Would someone please help me understand what the shave differences would be between the open comb (x2) and the smooth bar (x1) heads on the Kronos razor? I see a lot of bits and pieces in other threads but can't find a concise answer. I'm definitely not an H shaver, rather an M or R if that makes any difference in the replies.
 
thats a hard question as it relates to personal preference however in general OC's are smoother than SB's plus the OC leave cream on your face making buffing easier. Hope that helps you a little
 
Would someone please help me understand what the shave differences would be between the open comb (x2) and the smooth bar (x1) heads on the Kronos razor? I see a lot of bits and pieces in other threads but can't find a concise answer. I'm definitely not an H shaver, rather an M or R if that makes any difference in the replies.

I'm also interested on this question. I use the Atlas handle, but also favor the M or R heads. Detailed information would be great.

Also, has anyone measured (or seen reports of) the blade gaps on the OC versions?
 
Does smoother mean less aggressive?

I used to think so but from what I've read this may not be the case.

I think of smoothness of how a razor feels. A razor that is very smooth might feel like you are shaving without a blade.

The term "aggressive", I've read is being replaced with the term "efficient" which is a measure of how well a razor removes hair. A very aggressive/efficient razor might give you a BBS in two passes while a less aggressive/efficient razor might take three or four passes to give you the same shave.

A razor can be smooth and also be efficient.

I don't have all of the ATT OC plates yet so I can't do a comparison there. Here's my assessment of the three SB plates.

The M plate is somewhat mild but still very efficient at cutting. It is very smooth so you don't really feel a lot of the blade on your face. It is much more efficient than an EJ razor and removes stubble very well. You won't need to but, you can do many passes with this razor without irritation. While ATT uses the term M - Mild for this razor it really isn't a mild razor, it's more of a medium than a mild.

With the R plate you will feel the blade on your face and it will cut a bit better than the M plate. You will get a slightly closer shave with less passes, but it won't be nearly as comfortable to shave with as the M plate. The R plate is an aggressive shaver.

The H plate isn't for everybody. This plate is supposed to be like a smoother version of the R41 razor which is one of the most aggressive razors available. You will definitely feel the blade on your face and will know that you are shaving with an aggressive razor. I haven't found many people using this razor as their daily shaver. If it's not for you you will likely know right away. It will give you an incredibly close shave and if you aren't careful or have sensitive skin you will likely get some irritation.

I really only use two of the plates and suspect other users that have all three plates really only use two of them as well.
Most will use one for the daily shaver and one for a couple days of growth or when they want a really close shave.

I would think that in theory the OC razors should be a little smoother than the SB versions because they allow some cream to be left behind. I have the H2 plate and find it to be a little bit smoother than the H plate that I own. Rodmonster above didn't find this to be the case for the M2 vs M plate. In comparing the blade gaps in some pictures it looks as though the gaps are wider in the OC versions. Maybe this is a factor in the M version comparison and less of a factor in the R and H versions. This probably varies by razor and by person. I've ordered both versions in the plates that I prefer and will use and enjoy all of them.
 
@David

I totally agree with your assessment of "smoothness" as well as your evaluation of the M1 plate. It is so smooth that it cuts silently, and even with a fresh Polsilver this morning, I did not feel the blade against my face. A few areas needed buffing, but overall I just had a smooth, easy shave.

The word on the street is that OC razors should be smoother because they leave cream on the face. I have to say that I have not experienced that with either a Gillette New LC, the IKON OC or the ATT M2. On my face an OC most definitely feels different than a SB. I wouldn't use the word smoother. More efficient?? Maybe. More aggressive? On my face most definitely so. Is it possible that the even tension a SB puts on the skin as the blade makes a pass provides for a smoother shave?

The ATT M1 is a perfect daily shaver for me. I will reserve the OCs for when real work needs to be done.
 
I'm not sure if I agree with substituting "efficient" for "aggressive". Here's a definition of efficient: "productive of desired effects; especially : productive without waste". Here's the defininition of aggressive "ready and willing to fight, argue, etc. : feeling or showing aggression".

I think of the R41 as aggressive (willing to fight) and the Progress as efficient (productive without waste). One is brutal and one is precise. Mike Tyson was aggressive; Muhammad Ali was efficient.
 
I'm not sure if I agree with substituting "efficient" for "aggressive". Here's a definition of efficient: "productive of desired effects; especially : productive without waste". Here's the defininition of aggressive "ready and willing to fight, argue, etc. : feeling or showing aggression".

I think of the R41 as aggressive (willing to fight) and the Progress as efficient (productive without waste). One is brutal and one is precise. Mike Tyson was aggressive; Muhammad Ali was efficient.

I agree that aggressive is not the same as efficient. Indeed, I think use of the term "efficient" as a synonym for aggressive is very misleading since when I say "efficient" I am really saying that the razor works well for me.
 
When it comes to shaving, those dictionary terms do not apply, Efficient and Aggressive in the shaving community have a slightly different meaning, from what I have seen, heard and Experienced. I think most would agree?

I'm not sure if I agree with substituting "efficient" for "aggressive". Here's a definition of efficient: "productive of desired effects; especially : productive without waste". Here's the defininition of aggressive "ready and willing to fight, argue, etc. : feeling or showing aggression".

I think of the R41 as aggressive (willing to fight) and the Progress as efficient (productive without waste). One is brutal and one is precise. Mike Tyson was aggressive; Muhammad Ali was efficient.
 
My point is that using "efficient" in place of "aggressive" is an inaccurate and inefficient use of the word. Both words are good descriptors and used independently of each other, impart more information than using them interchangeably. Clearly, a razor can be very aggressive, mild or anywhere in between and also be efficient, very efficient or inefficient.

I also believe that aggressiveness refers to the degree of comfort during the shaving process while efficiency refers to the razor's ability to accomplish the task of beard removal.
 
Yes in that way, you are correct :eek:)

My point is that using "efficient" in place of "aggressive" is an inaccurate and inefficient use of the word. Both words are good descriptors and used independently of each other, impart more information than using them interchangeably. Clearly, a razor can be very aggressive, mild or anywhere in between and also be efficient, very efficient or inefficient.

I also believe that aggressiveness refers to the degree of comfort during the shaving process while efficiency refers to the razor's ability to accomplish the task of beard removal.
 
All, I believe that the switch to the use of the term efficient instead of aggressive was a marketing thing to make the aggressive razors more appealing. I read an article about this somewhere a while back. If I remembered where I saw it I would share it with you.

It does make sense as who wants to buy something that is labeled as aggressive. It's kinda like saying who want's to buy a really harsh razor. It sounds much better to call an aggressive razor efficient. After all, efficient will lead you to believe that you are buying something that works really well.

Personally, I don't think that the words mean the same thing, after all that is the intended purpose of switching them.
 
My point is that using "efficient" in place of "aggressive" is an inaccurate and inefficient use of the word. Both words are good descriptors and used independently of each other, impart more information than using them interchangeably. Clearly, a razor can be very aggressive, mild or anywhere in between and also be efficient, very efficient or inefficient.

I also believe that aggressiveness refers to the degree of comfort during the shaving process while efficiency refers to the razor's ability to accomplish the task of beard removal.

OK, so I understand that I may be a minority of one, but I think the aggressive-mild spectrum is the critical descriptor. Efficient seems like a euphemism for "I got a great shave w/o hurting myself."

Other than really crappy razors that no one likes, name two razors that are the same level of aggressiveness but noticeably different on the efficiency scale.

Frankly, I have such a pair in mind, but I think they are outliers.
 
Top Bottom