You continue to rock hard, Grant. Many thanks as always.
1957 Gillette Tech: Review, Photos, Measurements, Photo Analysis
- Thread starter ShavingByTheNumbers
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #42
Now I'm sure I'll have my Tech replated, and in gold. . . .
- Thread starter
- #45
Wow! Within measurement precision, the baseplate width of 25.10 mm with your newer Tech is the same as the 25.11 mm that I measured with my 1957 Tech.
Gillette definitely changed the cap in later years, but did they keep the baseplate the same? 
By my eye, it looks like it might be the same.thx, indeed, looks to be same.Wow! Within measurement precision, the baseplate width of 25.10 mm with your newer Tech is the same as the 25.11 mm that I measured with my 1957 Tech.
thanks also for all your work to chart these razors!
- Thread starter
- #47
You're welcome. Thanks for your measurement and feedback. I wonder if anyone from Gillette has confirmed that they stuck with the same Tech baseplate from a specific date onward.
not sure, but looks like they used same mold for their UK made Tech razors.
- Thread starter
- #49
not sure, but looks like they used same mold for their UK made Tech razors.
Our baseplates are different. Here is the one for my 1957 American-made Tech...
Fantastic article and critical analysis of a spectacular DE razor (and a piece of history)!
I just purchased a "new" in box 1960 (F3) U.S. Gillette Tech Ball-End and I can't wait to put it into active use!
Mine is essentially identical to yours and might be just about the last year when everything was still made out of brass and steel - no Zamak!
I'm hoping it will outperform and far outlast my DE89 (though I do like my DE89, as it was my 1st DE razor)!
Cheers
I just purchased a "new" in box 1960 (F3) U.S. Gillette Tech Ball-End and I can't wait to put it into active use!
Mine is essentially identical to yours and might be just about the last year when everything was still made out of brass and steel - no Zamak!
I'm hoping it will outperform and far outlast my DE89 (though I do like my DE89, as it was my 1st DE razor)!
Cheers
Last edited:
I have 1957 Tech on its way to me so I, hopefully, find out Monday night how it is compare to Canadian Tech
Wow - the ultimate in overthinking of such a simple task.
A truly excellent post and bravo on the pictures! I’d always wondered what the blade gap on a tech was. Now i know! Also as far as the weepers and irritation you got using it, i suspect it’s because of your unique shaving style of going xtg and atg twice. If i tried that with a tech it’d chew up my face. I think with the gap as small as it is, it’s probably pulling a lot of the stubble instead of cutting it. I saw that you did try going wtg on your first use and it made me think of the first time i tried a tech. Like you, i had problems with it cutting when shaving wtg but eventually realized that despite conventional wisdom, a little pressure actually makes the tech perform better. At least for me. Using just the weight of the razor didn’t cut it (pun definitely intended.) I suspect it’s because the safety bar is so pronounced that pushing it slightly into the skin allows the blade to actually cut near skin level. Just a theory. In any event excellent post and thanks!
I actually have the same date code Tech, a C2, and I just Piffed a Y4. They both seemed to shave the same for me. I will say that with my limited experience, it is similar to @ShavingByTheNumbers experience. I know everyone says that they are mild razors but to me, the blade exposure on the post war Techs does feel pronounced. The original ball end handle is too narrow and short for me to feel that I have positive control of the razor. That is why I use mine with an aftermarket handle and also why I included an aftermarket handle in my Pif. Like with most razors, there is a learning curve with the Tech. The more I shave with it, the better my shaves. The information about the guard span distance is informative. I have heard that a wider guard span can allow more skin to bunch up in front of the blade edge. Being a fat guy myself, this could be more of an issue for me than it is with a skinnier shaver. As to the blade tabs the OP mentioned, it does feel a bit scary when tightening down on the handle. Tightening down my Rockwell 6S handle doesn't feel nearly as dangerous. The Techs top cap and baseplate are much thinner and the exposed tabs feel more exposed. I just grab a wash cloth and use it over the tabs when tightening and loosening the handle. This was a very in depth post by the OP. However as millions of men have found, you can get good and comfortable shaves with the Tech, but you shouldn't assume you can pick one up and go on auto pilot. Personally I wouldn't recommend it as a razor for a first time shaver until they develop their shaving technique a little.
I re-up from the grave this outstanding review ! Seriously, i think this thread should be the general headquarters for all the post-war Tech lovers... 
Before reading this review, i was thinking that the excellent blade rigidity this razor gives was due to the 3 piece system.
Well in fact, it is not only that but also the geometry of the baseplate that holds the blade on almost its entire surface area. It is the combination of the baseplate geometry + the 3 piece closing system.
Anyway, many thanks to @ShavingByTheNumbers for this very precise & interesting (but difficult to understand for a non-native speaker like me) analysis !
Before reading this review, i was thinking that the excellent blade rigidity this razor gives was due to the 3 piece system.
Well in fact, it is not only that but also the geometry of the baseplate that holds the blade on almost its entire surface area. It is the combination of the baseplate geometry + the 3 piece closing system.
Anyway, many thanks to @ShavingByTheNumbers for this very precise & interesting (but difficult to understand for a non-native speaker like me) analysis !
