Why a razor costs that much, an example

[Nicholas]

So, after reading a few related threads the last week, I thought I'd share some photos from my personal archive to show you the differences between an affordable and a hi-end (unicorn) razor.

Here we have a side by side comparison of two DEs, a LASSC BBS-1 and a Rockwell 6s.

Rockwell 6s costs $99. It's a razor system with 6 options.
LASSC BBS-1 cost $299. Now the value has skyrocketed. Only one option. 1.00 mm gap that feels a lot milder than that.

You can see the differences in craftmanship, detailing, design, finish and overall quality.

About the shave, this is pretty subjective, you'll hear different opinions. But no one can question the quality of a modern hi-end razor. Don't get me wrong. Rockwell 6s is a fine razor, it's an affordable option that will do the job good, it never disappoints. Hi-end razors like the one above is truly something else. If anyone had the chance to land this unicorn, you perfectly understand me.

There is a huge difference in quality which is worth more than $200 to me. So maybe the BBS-1 was pretty affordable comparing to other razors we see today.

 

[Pepin]

The key is that the buyer is happy with his purchase, and feels that they got value from it.

 

[mawashi]

So, after reading a few related threads the last week, I thought I'd share some photos from my personal archive to show you the differences between an affordable and a hi-end (unicorn) razor.

Here we have a side by side comparison of two DEs, a LASSC BBS-1 and a Rockwell 6s.

Rockwell 6s costs $99. It's a razor system with 6 options.
LASSC BBS-1 cost $299. Now the value has skyrocketed. Only one option. 1.00 mm gap that feels a lot milder than that.

You can see the differences in craftmanship, detailing, design, finish and overall quality.

About the shave, this is pretty subjective, you'll hear different opinions. But no one can question the quality of a modern hi-end razor. Don't get me wrong. Rockwell 6s is a fine razor, it's an affordable option that will do the job good, it never disappoints. Hi-end razors like the one above is truly something else. If anyone had the chance to land this unicorn, you perfectly understand me.

There is a huge difference in quality which is worth more than $200 to me. So maybe the BBS-1 was pretty affordable comparing to other razors we see today.

The same could be said of many things from watches to cars to knives etc, etc.

A point however, is about value. Whatever makes $ense to you.

 

[Twelvefret]

I am definitely about live and let live. My observation is both pictured are Gillette et al early designs that were given away to sell blades.

 

[THall]

I have many lower cost, vintage and modern high end razors. My VDH has a better finish than my Rex, but the Rex is brushed stainless. A lot of variables there. I think your finish comparison is a little unfair because both were designed with completely different finishes in mind. You can put a mirror finish on that 6S also. Try that then tell us which one shaves better.

 

[REV579]

I’m such a vintage Gillette homer. I feel like I could match the shave of either example, but it wouldn’t be the newest toy on the shelf.
As far as looks go, the President that has recently popped up in a thread takes the cake for looks. And it’s a NEW De luxe.

 

[Nicholas]

I think your finish comparison is a little unfair because both were designed with completely different finishes in mind. You can put a mirror finish on that 6S also. Try that then tell us which one shaves better.

Ι don't think I'm being unfair. Rockwell's strategy is focusing on the cost (MIM etc.), while Wolfman on the diversification. No other brand can achieve such a perfect mirror finish and they have access to tools I don't. We've seen that, but there are makers who have publicly said that they're not sure how James does that. He is that good at this. So I don't get what you're saying. This is not a very good suggestion. Also, the shave itself has nothing to do with the finish of a razor based on my experience. This is not a "which one shaves better" thread. It's about the quality of the razor regarding the material and the looks. For that reason alone, the price difference is totally justified.



About the value comments. Any company that focuses on diversification adds more value to their offerings and as such they're able to follow a different pricing policy than others, meaning selling their products at a premium. This is Wolfman. As long as they are sold out, they give a high value for the paying price.

 

[BigJ]

The key is that the buyer is happy with his purchase, and feels that they got value from it.

+1! I enjoy using my kit every AM!!

 

[THall]

Ι don't think I'm being unfair. Rockwell's strategy is focusing on the cost (MIM etc.), while Wolfman on the diversification. No other brand can achieve such a perfect mirror finish and they have access to tools I don't. We've seen that, but there are makers who have publicly said that they're not sure how James does that. He is that good at this. So I don't get what you're saying. This is not a very good suggestion. Also, the shave itself has nothing to do with the finish of a razor based on my experience. This is not a "which one shaves better" thread. It's about the quality of the razor regarding the material and the looks. For that reason alone, the price difference is totally justified.



About the value comments. Any company that focuses on diversification adds more value to their offerings and as such they're able to follow a different pricing policy than others, meaning selling their products at a premium. This is Wolfman. As long as they are sold out, they give a high value for the paying price.

Comparing razors with completely different intended finishes based on whether you can see your face is unfair. My VDH is not better than my Rex because I can see my face in it. Not trying to be snarky here but you can do a lot better in your comparison pictures

 

[Nicholas]

Comparing razors with completely different intended finishes based on whether you can see your face is unfair. My VDH is not better than my Rex because I can see my face in it. Not trying to be snarky here but you can do a lot better in your comparison pictures

This is not a "which one shaves better" thread. It's about the quality of the razor regarding the material and the looks. For that reason alone, the price difference is totally justified.

I just had to quote my previous post again because you fail to understand what I'm talking about.
How about the craftmanship and the detailing or the making process? Do they share the same quality?
...

 

[Twelvefret]

The key is that the buyer is happy with his purchase, and feels that they got value from it.

So true.

 

[Graydog]

So it is a Beauty contest then ?

For that reason alone, the price difference is totally justified.

You should have added that it is justified for You.

 

[FarmerTan]

They are both beautiful regardless.

 

[MyOldKentuckyHome]

Definitely a YMMV kind of situation.

My most expensive razor so far was my $38 Merkur 33c which I enjoy.

But I can't help but feel a special draw to vintage razors. My $10 '56 SS gave as good a shave and my $30 '64 Slim just gave me my best shave yet.

I've sort of set my cap at $50...meaning I will never pay more than $50 for a razor, but that's a personal choice.

It's a hobby and we each get to determine our budgets and what we value. I value cheap and vintage, others value new and artistry. Neither is right or wrong for everyone, but one is right for some and one is right for others.

I'm glad there are others who are willing and able and desirous of spending $200 on a razor because then I get to see pictures, watch videos and hear their reviews - because I'm never going to own one.

 

[Ukrainian]

Rockwell head looks ugly, heavy and non functional under the nose area. In my opinion.

 

[BBS-1]

A $99 USD razor is not affordable.

A Dorco Pl602 or Weishi or Baili or Van Der Hagen or any razor that retails closer to $20 or less is affordable.

 

[Hannah's Dad]

A $99 USD razor is not affordable.

A Dorco Pl602 or Weishi or Baili or Van Der Hagen or any razor that retails closer to $20 or less is affordable.

Respectfully, I disagree with your conclusion. ‘Affordable’ is a term which requires comparison, budget information and value analysis. For Bill Gates, a $99 razor would likely be quite ‘affordable’ — perhaps even ‘cheap.’

 

[THall]

I just had to quote my previous post again because you fail to understand what I'm talking about.
How about the craftmanship and the detailing or the making process? Do they share the same quality?
...

Sorry, I just don’t feel you can post pictures of matte and polished razors and make comparisons between them on finish detailing.

 

[REV579]

A $99 USD razor is not affordable.

A Dorco Pl602 or Weishi or Baili or Van Der Hagen or any razor that retails closer to $20 or less is affordable.

If you strike-out on 4 of 5 vintage razors found in the wild, you still have eye-candy, you enjoy the nostalgia factor, you now have a variety, you’ve added to your knowledge base, and are are likely to still be under $99.
In the most pragmatic sense, the modern razors seem to look the like the same aerodynamically, over-engineered Tech, Floating Head Barbie, or LeCoq. This, of course, is an over-simplification, but there are only so many different ways to design the handle and head.

 

[BBS-1]

Respectfully, I disagree with your conclusion. ‘Affordable’ is a term which requires comparison, budget information and value analysis. For Bill Gates, a $99 razor would likely be quite ‘affordable’ — perhaps even ‘cheap.’

Bill Gates is not the person in mind when you talking about a mass produced product. Boutique stuff is never meant to be affordable. Niche stuff is niche priced.

The poorest of the poor have to live on about $300 USD a month in benefits. Between food and other expenses a $100 razor is not affordable period especially if they have no money saved. A $20 or less razor is when you are living hand to mouth. That is my point it is affordable to anyone in the US based on US pricing. If someone made that caveat that depending income minimum income then you are correct. But that wasn't the implication here.