A possible early double ring prototype? | More double ring fun

[shavefreak]

Ok so a possible very early double ring here. In this comparison I will point out everything I have noticed. I will call the prototype “ proto DR” another non serial numbered double ring I have I will call “Non ser. DR” and I have my next earliest DR (cause yup I have another sweet 1905 set) numbered 227609 to 1904 we will call that ” Numbered DR” the proto is quite different.

All cases were as received with the razors, no moving or mismatching. The proto case is brown has the same leather paper feel as the others the main difference is there is no nail on the top latch like all the others I have. Not a big deal but something I noticed. The case is the only thing going against this being say a 1903 razor as it should have came in a white box or tin. It could have been changed later, it could have been in a reject bin that when short on production was used later, who knows. Anyway let’s have some fun with it. Text is on the pics and another two below I have to re-post. Note on pic two and four the handle knurling. The proto is on the left and the Non ser DR on the right and look near the top of the knurling on the handle. The knurling fades into the handle at the top. All of it feels much, much lighter than the other double and single rings. You can hardly feel the pattern and it blends in at the top and bottom, no clear definitive line.

 

[shavefreak]

two more

 

[ironfist]

Don't know much to add to this, but damn! Wish i had even 1 double ring.

 

[elmerwood]

Pffft I've got like three of those but I'm not going to show you. But thanks for all the info and your time looking onto these. I'll be keeping an eye out for the little things now. Btw my new double ring came in and another 1905.. I wanted earlier sigh

 

[ironfist]

Pffft I've got like three of those but I'm not going to show you. But thanks for all the info and your time looking onto these. I'll be keeping an eye out for the little things now. Btw my new double ring came in and another 1905.. I wanted earlier sigh

Rub it in why don't you

 

[almaga]

Lol

Pffft I've got like three of those but I'm not going to show you. But thanks for all the info and your time looking onto these. I'll be keeping an eye out for the little things now. Btw my new double ring came in and another 1905.. I wanted earlier sigh

 

[alex2363]

They used brass not copper on the razors. Do you think that it may have been altered in design as a prototype?

 

[alex2363]

What do u mean the brown case is missing and hole? is it a design flaw?

 

[alex2363]

two more

View attachment 322233View attachment 322234

Are the stems interchangeable even though they are longer?

 

[MacDaddy]

Very cool piece. We've seen Double Rings with splits in the knob like that before, like this one here which was also a non-serialed "patent applied for" model:



But the rivet through the knob is a new one to me. That almost looks like a later repair, though. The grooves in the heads on either side don't match up with the knurling, as if it were always supposed to be there and was knurled over. It looks more like someone put the rivet through to hold the knob ring onto the inner barrel and then scribed the lines to make it blend in better. AMB's remark there in that last thread mentioned another one that had come off and been put back on backwards.

On the cases: Those holes on the bottom side of the upper latch piece aren't for nails. If you look at the lower latch piece you should see one or two studs sticking up that mate with those holes when the case is closed. It gives the latch a little more security. I have an old Chicago case with just plain lettering on the ribbon (no decoration at all) that also only has the single hole in the upper piece, and I have a later Chicago one with a ribbon more like the one in your case that has the two-hole latch piece. That second case came with a Double Ring with an 11xxxx serial number, making it an early-ish 1905 by our current estimates.

The earlier Double Rings being longer is something that's also come up before here, but we weren't sure exactly when that change happened. It looks like your second "patent applied for" example there might just push that change back into the pre-serial-number range.

Incidentally, my early Double Ring that I mentioned checking the inner barrel of there in that thread is also taller than my later Double Ring by about the same amount as is different between your first and third ones there in that last photo of yours above.

 

[alex2363]

Very cool piece. We've seen Double Rings with splits in the knob like that before, like this one here which was also a non-serialed "patent applied for" model:

View attachment 322262

But the rivet through the knob is a new one to me. That almost looks like a later repair, though. The grooves in the heads on either side don't match up with the knurling, as if it were always supposed to be there and was knurled over. It looks more like someone put the rivet through to hold the knob ring onto the inner barrel and then scribed the lines to make it blend in better. AMB's remark there in that last thread mentioned another one that had come off and been put back on backwards.

On the cases: Those holes on the bottom side of the upper latch piece aren't for nails. If you look at the lower latch piece you should see one or two studs sticking up that mate with those holes when the case is closed. It gives the latch a little more security. I have an old Chicago case with just plain lettering on the ribbon (no decoration at all) that also only has the single hole in the upper piece, and I have a later Chicago one with a ribbon more like the one in your case that has the two-hole latch piece. That second case came with a Double Ring with an 11xxxx serial number, making it an early-ish 1905 by our current estimates.

The earlier Double Rings being longer is something that's also come up before here, but we weren't sure exactly when that change happened. It looks like your second "patent applied for" example there might just push that change back into the pre-serial-number range.

Incidentally, my early Double Ring that I mentioned checking the inner barrel of there in that thread is also taller than my later Double Ring by about the same amount as is different between your first and third ones there in that last photo of yours above.

So it is possible that the DR is a test market razor that somehow was recovered?

 

[MacDaddy]

So it is possible that the DR is a test market razor that somehow was recovered?

Where'd I say anything like that? Its features are consistent with other early examples, but I don't see anything that would make me think that it was some sort of "prehistoric" prototype. The rivet in the knob is the strangest bit, but that looks like a repair job to me.

 

[alex2363]

Where'd I say anything like that? Its features are consistent with other early examples, but I don't see anything that would make me think that it was some sort of "prehistoric" prototype. The rivet in the knob is the strangest bit, but that looks like a repair job to me.

So a Gillette repair.......i always thought it was more cost effective to replace rather than repair these.

 

[amishmotorboat]

The knob that came off and was then put back on backwards was one in an ebay score that I misidentified as a clone. Member johnmrson picked it up and found that it was a legitimate DR that had come apart. I don't think that one had any knob splitting going on.
And I'm not sure why someone with a knob that had fallen off like this would go to all that trouble riveting and patching it up like that when it would have been much easier to use glue or solder. I can't help but notice that the knurling is a little wider on it too. I'm seeing 5 rows of diamonds in an area that fits six on the other knobs.
Quite a head scratcher you have there.

 

[amishmotorboat]

So a Gillette repair.......i always thought it was more cost effective to replace rather than repair these.

There would be no repair numbers if everything was just scrapped.

 

[shavefreak]

What do u mean the brown case is missing and hole? is it a design flaw?

compare to most other cases, the upper latch hardware did not have a machined hole on the right.

The rivet in the knob is the strangest bit, but that looks like a repair job to me.

Yeah I thought it could be a repair or an early trial and they figured a better way. Certainly a repair by Gillette I would think? I know they were much more thrifty back then but would they really repair rather than just replace the barrel? I can't imagine them giving that back to a customer like that. It is not loose or shakey and the rivet is not really tight and jammed in there. Thanks for those other posts, will check 'em out.

 

[alex2363]

The knob that came off and was then put back on backwards was one in an ebay score that I misidentified as a clone. Member johnmrson picked it up and found that it was a legitimate DR that had come apart. I don't think that one had any knob splitting going on.
And I'm not sure why someone with a knob that had fallen off like this would go to all that trouble riveting and patching it up like that when it would have been much easier to use glue or solder. I can't help but notice that the knurling is a little wider on it too. I'm seeing 5 rows of diamonds in an area that fits six on the other knobs.
Quite a head scratcher you have there.

So what are u saying, it was a Gillette repair?

 

[alex2363]

compare to most other cases, the upper latch hardware did not have a machined hole on the right.



Yeah I thought it could be a repair or an early trial and they figured a better way. Certainly a repair by Gillette I would think? I know they were much more thrifty back then but would they really repair rather than just replace the barrel? I can't imagine them giving that back to a customer like that. It is not loose or shakey and the rivet is not really tight and jammed in there. Thanks for those other posts, will check 'em out.

That is my inquiry too, it would just be a more cost effective move to replace it

 

[dundak]

It may be a "lunch project". In many machine shops and assembly operations workers used to "make their own" out of seconds, misspecs and cast-offs. Many won't have serial or brand naming on them. I have seen this in a lot of industries but has become less common over time due to inventory controls etc.

 

[amishmotorboat]

So what are u saying, it was a Gillette repair?

No, it had fallen off at some point and the owner stuck it on backwards. Here is what the auction photo showed. Those thin walls made me think there was no way it was gillette.