I have often seen the Schick E5 in the Schick D case. What is the proper case? Would kike some advice.
I have a Canadian one that came in the brown exterior/red interior case (back of the case is marked with "made in canada", not the usual "20 year guarantee". I can't know though if it originally came in that case or was moved to it at some point.
-jim
Check out the pic of the back of the case. At the top you can make out some embossing. Using my daughter to confirm it, it says "Made in United States of America". I never saw that until I took this picture - it's really hard to see in hand.
View attachment 399510
View attachment 399511
It's a nickle plated razor, but looks gold in this pic
View attachment 399512
-jim
With the springs in the US and in Canada also at least in 46 they still said Schick Injector on them, if your razor said that then there is no way to say for sure if it is an E or G type injector especially since it has the tabbed spring. Since it says Eversharp Schick I know for sure it is maybe as earlier as 47 but definitely a 48 or later for sure since the first ones I know for sure that said Eversharp Schick on the spring from the beginning is the Schick 66 or G4 which I know for sure came out first in 1948. It puts the razor solidly in the Type G date range and Eversharp production of these razors.Abbleby calls out black handles as E5.
E5: Rarely seen with black handle.
But he also lists "Magazine Repeating Razor Co." for all E's
I'll have to go through my black handles and see if they all say Eversharp. I bet they do.
I agree there is an incongruity with a trusted source. He does not list a black handle in the G types, yet there is that later head on what seems to be an earlier handle. And the black handle does not seem to fit it in with any of the other G types (it isn't molded plastic). I've suspected for some time that it's a transition - a using up of old stock. Could be wrong about that though, although I would think if it was a regular production item, there would be more of them. They aren't rare, but not as common as most G's. More like the Gold Filled.
I think it's a different type altogether, all by itself - an E/G. But I can certainly see the viewpoint that it is a G based solely on the head and manufacturer date.
And none of this takes in account the cases that they came in.
Just my opinion though.
I like razors that don't fit in with what is generally accepted. More interesting discussions.
-jim
Would this flat spring version (black handled E1?) also be considered an E5?
View attachment 1050940
Depends how you want to delineate the Type E razors. It is a cool find though. I think what is more important here is what set or sets was the black handle Type E injectors sold in. Were they in both the Introductory and De Luxe sets, only one of the two or some other set we don't know about that was sold between 1936 - 1938.Would this flat spring version (black handled E1?) also be considered an E5?
Neither. I wish I had a great story of a eureka find in some out of the way antique store, but the boring truth is this razor was one of a lot I purchased on eBay. I couldn't name other razors in the lot but I seem to recall it was a pretty junky collection. I do remember that the pictures were poor and I couldn't positively identify the E5 (or whatever this is), but I was pretty sure. The seller, of course, had no idea what any of the razors were; it was just a handful of "old razors". The lot went cheap so it wasn't much of a risk. Sometimes it is better to be lucky than good.I have read your story on this gem of a razor, but I never read the finer details. Found in the wild or you paid through the nose on the Internet? Curious.
Neither. I wish I had a great story of a eureka find in some out of the way antique store, but the boring truth is this razor was one of a lot I purchased on eBay...
Neither. I wish I had a great story of a eureka find in some out of the way antique store, but the boring truth is this razor was one of a lot I purchased on eBay. I couldn't name other razors in the lot but I seem to recall it was a pretty junky collection. I do remember that the pictures were poor and I couldn't positively identify the E5 (or whatever this is), but I was pretty sure. The seller, of course, had no idea what any of the razors were; it was just a handful of "old razors". The lot went cheap so it wasn't much of a risk. Sometimes it is better to be lucky than good.
That is fantastic information; thank you very much for researching this and posting what you found. Apparently Schick was proud of this new release: according to the inflation calculator, $2.00 in 1935 is nearly $38 in today's dollars, a pretty princely sum for a razor during the depression.Upon further research if we go by how the marketing and retailers referred to each then this is how to delineate it.
From the Pittsburgh Press Dec 19th. 1935
View attachment 1051489
It clearly states in black and gold aka the razor you have or onyx-composition and gold which is the E1. This also puts the introduction date for the Type razors at Christmas time of 1935. So technically the E5 variations should really just be referred to as black handle E1 or E2 razors depending the style of the guard and/or spring.
Full page ad as an attachment with newspaper date in margin.
That is fantastic information; thank you very much for researching this and posting what you found. Apparently Schick was proud of this new release: according to the inflation calculator, $2.00 in 1935 is nearly $38 in today's dollars, a pretty princely sum for a razor during the depression.
It seems like Appleby's classification system is inconsistent in its treatment of razors that are otherwise identical, save for the color of the handle: in some cases this is just a color variant within type (e.g. Type I black and ivory variants), in others it's classified as a type of its own, like the subject example of the black handled E1 and E2 being given their own type of E5. I guess it depends whether you favor taxanomic lumping or splitting, but it should be one or the other. I think it may be time for some "official" revisions. Any volunteers?