Arko is okay. Its optimum lather comes in at 12th place out of 17.

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

Introduction

Back in June, I acquired Arko shaving soap from @shavefan through a trade in the BST. (Thanks for the trade!) I recently went through my lather optimization process for the soap. Please see my lather optimization guide in the ShaveWiki for an overview, a disclaimer, and general information about optimizing lather.

Below is my optimum lather table and my review of Arko shaving soap. Overall, Arko is okay. At its best, it can provide some slickness and cushion/protection, but the post-shave is kind of dry with some irritation, at least for me. The price per shave is the lowest so far that I've experienced, but the lather density is also relatively low. I don't know about you, but I don't mind paying more than two cents per shave for a good lather.

Optimum Lather Table

PR	Performance Ranking
PD	Purchase Date (YYYY-MM-DD)
SCM	Soap/Cream Mass (g)
WM	Water Mass (g)
TM	Total Mass (g) = SCM + WM
WSCR	Water-to-Soap/Cream Ratio = WM / SCM
SCIT	Soap/Cream-Incorporation Time (s)
LBT	Lather-Building Time (s)
SCP	Soap/Cream Price (USD)

PR	Soap/Cream	PD	SCM	WM	TM	WSCR	SCIT	LBT	SCP
1	Nanny's Silly Soap (NSS) Original Shaving Soap	2017-04-23	1.20	9.60	10.80	8	30	45	0.15
2	Declaration Grooming (DG) Shaving Soap, Premium Bison Tallow Base	2017-08-11	0.81	8.91	9.72	11	20	60	0.15
3	Proraso Single Blade (PSB) Shaving Cream	2018-01-12	0.95	7.60	8.55	8	3	60	0.07
4	Barrister and Mann (B&M) Shaving Soap	2017-10-19	0.71	8.52	9.23	12	25	30	0.12
5	Cold River Soap Works (CRSW) SELECT Shaving Soap	2017-12-15	0.86	9.46	10.32	11	6	60	0.15
6	Stirling Soap Co. Shave Soap	2017-08-14	0.53	9.01	9.54	17	20	30	0.04
7	Saponificio Varesino (SV) Shaving Soap	2017-12-01	0.64	8.32	8.96	13	90	90	0.15
8	Barrister's Reserve Shaving Soap	2017-06	0.96	11.52	12.48	12	45	60	0.15
9	Proraso Red Shaving Soap	2017-11-27	0.82	8.20	9.02	10	5	75	0.06
10	Martin de Candre (MdC) Shaving Soap	2018-05-31	0.70	7.70	8.40	11	45	60	0.16
11	Mike's Natural Shaving Soap	2017-09	0.75	9.00	9.75	12	60	60	0.07
12	Arko Shaving Soap	2018-04-04	0.51	7.14	7.65	14	75	75	0.02
13	Barrister and Mann (B&M) Latha Shaving Soap (Discontinued)	2018-01-30	0.75	9.75	10.50	13	10	30	0.07
14	Floris Shaving Cream	2018-02	0.98	6.86	7.84	7	1	60	0.29
15	The Art of Shaving (AOS) Shaving Cream	2018-01-03	1.00	7.00	8.00	7	3	45	0.19
16	Mystic Water (MW) Shaving Soap	2018-01-27	0.70	9.10	9.80	13	30	30	0.07
17	The Sudsy Soapery Shave Soap	2018-02-05	0.46	8.28	8.74	18	10	60	0.05

Arko Shaving Soap

Stick of soap, close-up of soap in small jar, and ingredient list​

Purchase Date: April 4, 2018. I acquired the shaving soap from @shavefan through a trade in the BST on June 28, 2018 [8].

Review Period: November 19 to 29, 2018. 10 optimization shaves and 1 ranking test.

Manufacturing Location: Turkey

Ingredients: Potassium Tallowate, Potassium Stearate, Sodium Palm Kernelate, Aqua, Glycerin, Potassium Cocoate, Parfum, Paraffinum Liquidum, Tetrasodium EDTA, CI 77891, Etidronic Acid, Sodium Chloride, Disodium Distyrylbiphenyl Disulfonate, Linalool, Limonene, Citronellol, Geraniol

Appearance: Off-white

Scent: Kind of lemony, but not good to my nose

Hardness: Hard

Optimum Lather Overview: Sheen is matte to okay. Lather has some stiff and some good "peaking" and some yogurt-like behavior of "stringiness". Adhesion is okay to pretty good. Application is okay to pretty good, but kind of choppy. The scent is slightly noticed. Slickness is generally okay to good with a little very good slickness and some moderate friction. Cushion/protection is okay or pretty good. Post-shave is kind of dry and okay with respect to comfort because of some irritation that develops. There is a little clogging of the razor.

Optimization Details: Water-to-soap ratio was varied from 10 to 26 in nonsequential shaves. At a ratio of 10, soap incorporation took almost two minutes and the resulting lather was too dry with inferior slickness and post-shave. In general, with more hydration, slickness and post-shave improved, peaked, and decreased. The optimum water-to-soap ratio was found to be around 14 where the slickness was near the optimum and the balance of slickness, post-shave, and other properties was determined to be the best. At that point, a little more water was found to increase slickness, but decrease post-shave quality. The post-shave was felt to be the limiting factor with dryness and irritation, but it wasn't bad. The optimization of lather-building time was easy because more time beyond what was needed for soap incorporation would have added more aeration and decreased slickness, based on past experience.

Ranking Details: Relative to prior optimization results, it was estimated that Arko should be ranked right below Mike's Natural and above B&M Latha. A ranking test against Mike's Natural was desired for validation. In sequential shaves, the optimum lather with Arko was compared to the optimum lather with Mike's Natural. Adhesion, application, and slickness were better with Mike's Natural. Post-shave moisture with Mike's Natural was better, but post-shave comfort with Mike's Natural was worse because it involved more irritation. Overall, Mike's Natural slightly beat out Arko, as expected.

 

[fast shaver]

I have to chuckle when I see Arko beating B&M Latha soap. I always thought Arko was better than B&M soap.

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

I have to chuckle when I see Arko beating B&M Latha soap. I always thought Arko was better than B&M soap.

Cool. It's not a huge difference, but it's there.

 

[BudgetShaverGuy]

Very cool data. The lather optimization guide is currently broken. Hope it's fixed soon, I need to see how you came to these results. I'm also curious to know why you ranked them as you did as there was no paramater for the quality of the lather itself. If you went by price per shave alone (soap/cream price SCP), Arko killed them all!

Also, at 0.51g / shave, an Arko stick would yield roughly 147 shaves (75/0.51). Bought in bulk, those sticks are roughly $1.25 each, which would result in a cost per shave of roughly 0.9 cents per shave (1.25/147) instead of 2.0 cents per shave as listed above. Only for the hardcore Arko users of course who are buying these in bulk

 

[musicman1951]

It's always interesting to read how much variety there is in all our favorite soap choices.

 

[BudgetShaverGuy]

It's always interesting to read how much variety there is in all our favorite soap choices.

Yes it sure is! It's great when someone like @ShavingByTheNumbers takes the time to do something like this. It's very helpful in indicating how much product, water, and time are required to optimize their favorite soap or cream. And ultimately to see what each shave costs. The table indicates in clear numbers how long a tub of Stirling goes and very likely why so many people love it around here, same with Arko.

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

Very cool data. The lather optimization guide is currently broken. Hope it's fixed soon, I need to see how you came to these results. I'm also curious to know why you ranked them as you did as there was no paramater for the quality of the lather itself. If you went by price per shave alone (soap/cream price SCP), Arko killed them all!

Also, at 0.51g / shave, an Arko stick would yield roughly 147 shaves (75/0.51). Bought in bulk, those sticks are roughly $1.25 each, which would result in a cost per shave of roughly 0.9 cents per shave (1.25/147) instead of 2.0 cents per shave as listed above. Only for the hardcore Arko users of course who are buying these in bulk

Hopefully, the upgrade to the ShaveWiki will be done soon so that you can see the lather optimization guide. Details on lather quality and the optimization process, how I arrived at my best lather for Arko, are in the OP, but they weren't included in tabular form at that time. Since that post, due to helpful feedback similar to yours, I made a comprehensive table---as a picture, which solved another problem---and kept updating that. Here it is:

Yes it sure is! It's great when someone like @ShavingByTheNumbers takes the time to do something like this. It's very helpful in indicating how much product, water, and time are required to optimize their favorite soap or cream. And ultimately to see what each shave costs. The table indicates in clear numbers how long a tub of Stirling goes and very likely why so many people love it around here, same with Arko.

Thanks! It's been some time since I've optimized a soap or cream. Don't know when I'll get back to it, but I appreciate the kind words.

 

[BudgetShaverGuy]

Hopefully, the upgrade to the ShaveWiki will be done soon so that you can see the lather optimization guide. Details on lather quality and the optimization process, how I arrived at my best lather for Arko, are in the OP, but they weren't included in tabular form at that time. Since that post, due to helpful feedback similar to yours, I made a comprehensive table---as a picture, which solved another problem---and kept updating that. Here it is:

Thanks! It's been some time since I've optimized a soap or cream. Don't know when I'll get back to it, but I appreciate the kind words.

Thanks for the chart! So your overall rating is subjective based on the results in the last 4 columns from Slickness to Post-Shave Comfort? Is that correct?

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

Thanks for the chart! So your overall rating is subjective based on the results in the last 4 columns from Slickness to Post-Shave Comfort? Is that correct?

Yes, pretty much. Price is not factored in. PR is performace ranking for a reason. The rankings are performance-based, so slickness, cushion/protection, and post-shave basically cover it. There might be some other factor that could come into play, even though it isn't tabulated, but it would be covered in my optimization details. I can't think of an example like that, though. The basic performance categories cover a lot of ground.

 

[BudgetShaverGuy]

Yes, pretty much. Price is not factored in. PR is performace ranking for a reason. The rankings are performance-based, so slickness, cushion/protection, and post-shave basically cover it. There might be some other factor that could come into play, even though it isn't tabulated, but it would be covered in my optimization details. I can't think of an example like that, though. The basic performance categories cover a lot of ground.

Your results in those last 4 categories are still purely subjective however, that's all I wanted to clarify. Soap usage can be measured very precisely, as well as the amount of water that's needed to get the lather going by using a precision scale, as I'm sure you used for all your calculations up until the last 4 columns. But Slickness? That's a tricky one. I myself have found lots of variation in slickness from the using the exact same soap, brush, and brand of blade, and some days it feels a little different than others usually when the blade is a bit off for whatever reason. To truly gage Slickness it would need to be measured by a device that measures the coefficient of friction to obtain a truly objective result. Same with Post-Shave Moisture, that one changes for me depending on the weather(!), heck even a blade that's rougher than normal throws the whole thing out the window for me, all factors being equal. How to measure Post-shave Moisture objectively? You got me on that one, no clue! There's also some that might get lots of burning from Stirling or Mike's for example, like I have, whereas you don't, and have good Post-Shave Comfort. Those soaps would Rank at the bottom of my list no matter how well it does otherwise because it lights me up. I can see why lots of people love it though based on your non-subjective data.

Lots of great data and information. The Product Ranking is still purely subjective based on the operators skills, and ultimately, his or her skin, though. I'd advise anyone looking to try a new soap to start with your list though, especially the true nerds who want at least some hard facts!

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

Your results in those last 4 categories are still purely subjective however, that's all I wanted to clarify. Soap usage can be measured very precisely, as well as the amount of water that's needed to get the lather going by using a precision scale, as I'm sure you used for all your calculations up until the last 4 columns. But Slickness? That's a tricky one. I myself have found lots of variation in slickness from the using the exact same soap, brush, and brand of blade, and some days it feels a little different than others usually when the blade is a bit off for whatever reason. To truly gage Slickness it would need to be measured by a device that measures the coefficient of friction to obtain a truly objective result. Same with Post-Shave Moisture, that one changes for me depending on the weather(!), heck even a blade that's rougher than normal throws the whole thing out the window for me, all factors being equal. How to measure Post-shave Moisture objectively? You got me on that one, no clue! There's also some that might get lots of burning from Stirling or Mike's for example, like I have, whereas you don't, and have good Post-Shave Comfort. Those soaps would Rank at the bottom of my list no matter how well it does otherwise because it lights me up. I can see why lots of people love it though based on your non-subjective data.

Lots of great data and information. The Product Ranking is still purely subjective based on the operators skills, and ultimately, his or her skin, though. I'd advise anyone looking to try a new soap to start with your list though, especially the true nerds who want at least some hard facts!

It's true that my performance rankings are subjective and they only apply for me. As you point out, it would be difficult or impossible to make objective measurements of those things. The point about subjectivity is made in my lather optimization guide, which is hoped to help others find what works best for them, so I'm glad that you'd advise others to take a look at my list. I still remember---it's hard to forget---the reaction to my Captain's Choice optimization. That was something! There are those out there that love Captain's Choice, but for me, it's still at the bottom of my list. But, hey, that's just me. I didn't mean anything personal by it.

 

[Ad Astra]

Love this data mining! Thanks.

Used Arko today, second day in a row, so. It's working!


AA

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

Love this data mining! Thanks.

Used Arko today, second day in a row, so. It's working!


AA

No problem, AA. Arko works!

 

[nemo]

Used Arko today, second day in a row, so. It's working!

But is your nose working?

 

[BudgetShaverGuy]

It's true that my performance rankings are subjective and they only apply for me. As you point out, it would be difficult or impossible to make objective measurements of those things. The point about subjectivity is made in my lather optimization guide, which is hoped to help others find what works best for them, so I'm glad that you'd advise others to take a look at my list. I still remember---it's hard to forget---the reaction to my Captain's Choice optimization. That was something! There are those out there that love Captain's Choice, but for me, it's still at the bottom of my list. But, hey, that's just me. I didn't mean anything personal by it.

When I worked for one of the largest (and most crooked) connector companies in the world, I worked with a brilliant material scientist who wrote white papers and basically the book about contact physics and how to build an electrical connector. He knew so much about engineering, it was ridiculous. He was also one of the most brutal, petty, and nasty people I've ever encountered but boy, did I learn a lot from him! He always told me "You can assign a number to anything, some things are way harder than others, but ultimately, you can assign a number to anything" (always looking down at me over his glasses while repeatedly calling me the wrong name and asking me if I had a degree or not, which I did).

I'm confident someone can get hard numbers for the qualities in those last 4 columns, but it will probably be very difficult for at least 2 of 4 of them, for sure! I do not have access to the equipment needed for that (I used to) but I always think about how great objective data can help people make an informed decision about a product. When I see tables like the one you posted, some part of my brain lights up like a Christmas tree! I will keep researching this and see if I can help contribute to the work you've done. Thanks for doing it!

 

[Ad Astra]

But is your nose working?

Yes, I don't have the virus yet!

When I start slapping on The Veg ... I better get a swab up my nose!


AA

 

[Tallships]

I'm not one to keep allot of soaps, 4 maybe 5 But it's funny how each of us can rate the same soaps differently. Each of us have Method s, weather it be bowl, puck, face or stick lather, water amount etc. Personally I rate Arko high up on the scale. I get a wonderful rich lather, I even like the scent

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

When I worked for one of the largest (and most crooked) connector companies in the world, I worked with a brilliant material scientist who wrote white papers and basically the book about contact physics and how to build an electrical connector. He knew so much about engineering, it was ridiculous. He was also one of the most brutal, petty, and nasty people I've ever encountered but boy, did I learn a lot from him! He always told me "You can assign a number to anything, some things are way harder than others, but ultimately, you can assign a number to anything" (always looking down at me over his glasses while repeatedly calling me the wrong name and asking me if I had a degree or not, which I did).

Ouch! That's rough.

I'm confident someone can get hard numbers for the qualities in those last 4 columns, but it will probably be very difficult for at least 2 of 4 of them, for sure! I do not have access to the equipment needed for that (I used to) but I always think about how great objective data can help people make an informed decision about a product. When I see tables like the one you posted, some part of my brain lights up like a Christmas tree! I will keep researching this and see if I can help contribute to the work you've done. Thanks for doing it!

I'm sure that you're right, and like you say, it would be very difficult to get those numbers. Thankfully, qualitative ratings can serve a purpose, too, especially if you get a lot of them from a lot of different people. Thanks for your thoughtful comments and appreciation. I'm glad to make someone's brain light up a little!

I'm not one to keep allot of soaps, 4 maybe 5 But it's funny how each of us can rate the same soaps differently. Each of us have Method s, weather it be bowl, puck, face or stick lather, water amount etc. Personally I rate Arko high up on the scale. I get a wonderful rich lather, I even like the scent

It's amazing how differently we can rate the same soap. Never fails to amaze me.

 

[FarmerTan]

I'm surprised at Brother @nemo !

He CAN'T be smelling Arko....

Perhaps he got a bad batch.... or maybe he's fallen victim to that counterfeit Arko gang out of Turkey. I've heard there are MILLIONS of dollars to be made in that trade! I've been approached myself. True story.

 

[FarmerTan]

Thanks for doing these optimization things Mr Numbers! You did catch a lot of flac before, and held your head up. And Cappy Scott took it on the chin like the true Gent he is!

Thank you know Who that we still have freedom of speech here, many places don't.

Please keep these reviews coming, even though you OBVIOUSLY have it out for the Arko Man! Remember, just because he looks like a nice, smiling guy, doesn't mean he doesn't have feelings!