Any suggestion of adjustable setting?

[Elmo]

the quotation below says it all

 

[moses]

I really do not get this theory that by adjusting to a milder setting, you are adjusting the blade away from the skin. I am so not a expert here, but what Ron is saying, that the Blade is always against the face, makes sense to me.

Perhaps it depends on how you hold the razor for angle.

The way I do it, I have the head of the razor just resting against my face, with the razor angle down just to where the blade starts to touch. Thus, as I found this weekend, I don't get that different a shave from a Futur on 1 versus on 6. All the safety bar does is protect me if I screw up slightly, especially around corners. And it is the safety bar that is being adjusted. It would be different if the adjustment mechanism poked the blade further and further out (not really possible with a DE, I would think).

On the other hand, if ones angle was created by the safety bar and blade, rather than head and blade, the adjustment would make a huge difference. Although it seems this would be to the angle again, rather than the actually closeness of the blade to skin.

The lawnmower thing is nice, but just doesn't work. Lawnmovers are like beard trimmers - they are designed to leave stubble. This analogy would only work if a safety razor were designed so that the blade was recessed behind the plane of the head and safety bar, so that it could never actually quite touch the skin. (hmm.... would this be what you really want for the Lerch method of beard reduction?).

Final note: My comments on adjustables are based on the Futur. It does occur to me that others may use a different type of adjustment. All the same, it doesn't not seem to me that any would hold the blade off of the face.

 

[Gatorade]

The lawnmower thing is nice, but just doesn't work. Lawnmovers are like beard trimmers - they are designed to leave stubble. This analogy would only work if a safety razor were designed so that the blade was recessed behind the plane of the head and safety bar, so that it could never actually quite touch the skin. (hmm.... would this be what you really want for the Lerch method of beard reduction?).

That is EXACTLY what we are saying. That when you have a Gillette adjusted on the lowest setting, the blade is farther away from what was just cut at the higher setting.

If you could set your lawn mower to cut beyond the shroud then you would have a setting of 9 on the gillette.

That is why I think Ron is wrong going lower after he was at a higher setting. He is missing the hair that was already cut at the higher setting! Who knows it may just be a placebo effect or maybe he isn't reducing as much as he thought on the last pass. He won't explain anything beyond "Less beard, less blade" which is completely backward in reality, for less beard you need more blade.


When you use a Gillette adjustable the saftey bar and the head stay in the same place. The blade actually changes angle and exposure into the head if you dial down the adjustment. Like someone said earlier when you have it set at 1 and you lay the saftey bar on a flat surface then raise the razor till the head contacts the same surface the blade will not actually touch the surface. If you put it at 9 then the blade protrudes past touching the surface and would actually press slightly into the skin.


Maybe the whole discussion is just the difference between the Merkur adjustables and the Gillettes.

 

[moses]

AH, interesting then about the Gillette adjustable. Definitely then, if you shaved set on 1, when the blade actually is behind the plane of the safety bar and head, you definitely would need to extend the blade. I am thinking from the platform of the Futur, where the blade is going to be able to touch skin even on the lowest setting. Therefore, you will still cut beard on a setting of 1, even after a first pass set on 6. The same principle would apply on a Gillette though, on any setting were the blade actually breaks the plane of the safety bar and head (iow, you could not have both the head and bar touching a flat surface, because the blade would be in the way). So you should be able to do a pass on say 9, and then still cut on a second pass at say 5.

One explanation I would have for using a lower setting for later passes: On very mild razors, if I have two or more day's beard, the stubble is so thick that it pushes up on the safety bar and lifts the blade off my face slightly (not so bad if you follow the reduction theory). Using an adjustable opened up, the bar is lifted up further away from my face, so I get more on the first cut (limited experience here, but the theory makes sense, and I have found it to apply). After a first cut reducing the stubble down, this is no longer an issue, so a very mild setting will still cut to the skin (assuming there is still SOME blade exposure, not like what you describle of a Gillette on 1).

Edit: Looking back, I think the last paragraph may be want Ron means by "less beard, less blade."

 

[Gatorade]

I really wish my camera was good enough to show you the gap when you have a Gillette on 1 and compare it to the gap on 9. A picture is worth a thousand words and at this rate I may be over that!

 

[Jim]

This has been an interesting thread...

If I make multiple passes with a non adjustable and on each successive pass I continue to reduce stubble who's theory would apply in this scenario?

 

[Gatorade]

This has been an interesting thread...

If I make multiple passes with a non adjustable and on each successive pass I continue to reduce stubble who's theory would apply in this scenario?

I don't usually do multiple passes in the same direction. I change direction after each pass and then T&C at the end. N-S, then S-N then E-W. So I couldn't answer that.

 

[_C_]

I really wish my camera was good enough to show you the gap when you have a Gillette on 1 and compare it to the gap on 9. A picture is worth a thousand words and at this rate I may be over that!

Excellent idea! My camera isn't all that great for macro photography either , although I thought I'd give it a whirl anyway. The picture below is of a gillette slim adjustable.

View attachment 1660

Notice how the camera failed to pick up the blade when the exposure was set to 1 compared to the exposure set at 9...

 

[Gatorade]

Excellent idea! My camera isn't all that great for macro photography either , although I thought I'd give it a whirl anyway. The picture below is of a gillette slim adjustable.

View attachment 1660

Notice how the camera failed to pick up the blade when the exposure was set to 1 compared to the exposure set at 9...

YES!

Thanks for that!

 

[Kyle Stoner]

Here's some more graphic imagery from my newly repaired Gillette Super Adjustable:

Another factor to consider is the stress of the bent blade - with a higher setting, the blade is under more pressure and less flexible.

 

[GeeQue]

I was always under the impression that the adjustment was different for different faces and stubble. Once you determine what number works for you ...that's it.
If 3 works for your beard, then you should be able to get the best possible close shave for you at that setting...and so on.
I never thought of different adjustments for different stages of a shave. If blade exposure alone would be a determining factor or requiremnet for a close shave, then fixed blade razors as the Superspeed or the Merkur HD would be obsolete.

 

[_C_]

I was always under the impression that the adjustment was different for different faces and stubble. Once you determine what number works for you ...that's it.
If 3 works for your beard, then you should be able to get the best possible close shave for you at that setting...and so on.
I never thought of different adjustments for different stages of a shave. If blade exposure alone would be a determining factor or requiremnet for a close shave, then fixed blade razors as the Superspeed or the Merkur HD would be obsolete.

I tend to agree with you on this point. I probably would have purchased a fixed blade razor if I was confident that I could buy one that had the proper exposure for my face. I figured the adjustable route would be safer as it curtails the need to buy and try several razors.

 

[Gatorade]

I was always under the impression that the adjustment was different for different faces and stubble. Once you determine what number works for you ...that's it.
If 3 works for your beard, then you should be able to get the best possible close shave for you at that setting...and so on.
I never thought of different adjustments for different stages of a shave. If blade exposure alone would be a determining factor or requiremnet for a close shave, then fixed blade razors as the Superspeed or the Merkur HD would be obsolete.

I think that is kinda what happened. Remember that when the adjustable came out they discontinued the colored tip razors and I possibly the Aristocrats and the others that were fixed went away with the exception of one fixed model. It was probably cheaper and worked for many people so you have one fixed and one adjustable line. Remeber not everyone cares about as close a shave as we talk about here. A lot of guys were probably buying whatever was cheaper so the SS kept going but only as one model that changed styles in the 50's, 60's and 70's.

 

[OldSaw]

I was always under the impression that the adjustment was different for different faces and stubble. Once you determine what number works for you ...that's it.
If 3 works for your beard, then you should be able to get the best possible close shave for you at that setting...and so on.
I never thought of different adjustments for different stages of a shave. If blade exposure alone would be a determining factor or requiremnet for a close shave, then fixed blade razors as the Superspeed or the Merkur HD would be obsolete.

I use different settings for different parts of my face. I start on 9 for the easy parts and lower to 3 for the sensitive areas.

As seen by the pictures the setting changes the guard not the blade or the head. With the guard more open on the higher settings the blade can be pushed along the skin more aggressively, mowing down the mightiest trees in the forest. It also gives you a wider range of angle to work with and is more forgiving of technique in regards to closeness. However, it will remove skin, especially in areas like the chin, if pressed too hard. On the lower settings the guard closes, giving you more protection against cutting skin but requires closer attention to the angle you use.

So I would completely disagree with the lawn mower scenario, since the blade is always in contact with your face if done properly. It is an issue of how much matter can be crammed between the blade and the guard, not wether or not the blade is capable of touching your skin. Another factor to consider is the fact that your skin rolls and stretches over the guard, blade and head. So each person will have their own preferences, as long as they agree with mine they are right.