Blade Gap?

[DunEdinRanger]

I noticed we have a listing of the blade gaps on the shave wiki, but not all razors are there - http://wiki.badgerandblade.com/index.php/Double-Edged_Safety_Razors_Ranked_by_Aggressiveness -

It would be nice to know what the blade gaps are for the Futur and some of the other models not listed there. Does anyone know, or can they provide that information?

 

[DunEdinRanger]

Anyone?

 

[DunEdinRanger]

I guess we will never know...

 

[Tabaliah]

It would be nice to know what the blade gaps are for the Futur and some of the other models not listed there. Does anyone know, or can they provide that information?

I don't have a Futur (yet) but do have the means to measure one - if I had one, know what I mean (nudge, nudge . . .).

..michael

 

[cfriend]

What WOULD one go about measuring the gap with to a sufficient degree of accuracy?

 

[DunEdinRanger]

I don't have a Futur (yet) but do have the means to measure one - if I had one, know what I mean (nudge, nudge . . .).

..michael

I sure hope you get one soon, and a Slant too. Surely, a good man in the Dominion of Canada will be able to help things out. Chip?

 

[Stubblefield]

What WOULD one go about measuring the gap with to a sufficient degree of accuracy?

Feeler gauges would do the trick.

 

[DunEdinRanger]

Ladies & Gentlemen,

In the interest of science, and as one of my professors would have said, strictly for purposes of my own self edification, following the standards set forth in the forum, I have measured the blade gap of a Merkur Futur set to 6:

*Drum Roll*

0.0069 inches
1.753 mm

You may now commit this to your permanent cerebral consciousness, pending peer review.
​

 

[jpkunst]

0.0069 inches
1.753 mm

​

Great! It would also be interesting to measure the other numbers of the Futur. And you can add them to the wiki yourself (after all, that's what a wiki is for). I just added the Merkur @ 6 info to the wiki.

 

[DunEdinRanger]

Great! It would also be interesting to measure the other numbers of the Futur. And you can add them to the wiki yourself (after all, that's what a wiki is for). I just added the Merkur @ 6 info to the wiki.

Any member can edit the Wiki? Thought special permission was needed.

 

[DunEdinRanger]

This is what the Futur looks like with blade and set to 6

 

[humber burns]

How exactly is the gap measured? From where to where? Does it take into acount blade exposure on top and bottom?

 

[DunEdinRanger]

Ok folks, here are the numbers, first in thousandths of an inch, and then in millimeters

1 ... 0.044 ... 1.127
2 ... 0.047 ... 1.194
3 ... 0.053 ... 1.346
4 ... 0.058 ... 1.473
5 ... 0.063 ... 1.600

I would like someone else to double check and verify these, if they could. What this means is that at its lowest setting, the Futur is as aggressive as a Gillette Adjustable at 9.

 

[rainman]

Ok folks, here are the numbers, first in thousandths of an inch, and then in millimeters

1 ... 0.044 ... 1.127
2 ... 0.047 ... 1.194
3 ... 0.053 ... 1.346
4 ... 0.058 ... 1.473
5 ... 0.063 ... 1.600

I would like someone else to double check and verify these, if they could. What this means is that at its lowest setting, the Futur is as aggressive as a Gillette Adjustable at 9.

Assuming the blade angle, blade exposure, and the weight were the same.

 

[jpkunst]

What this means is that at its lowest setting, the Futur is as aggressive as a Gillette Adjustable at 9.

That would explain why I found a Futur at 1 much too aggressive.

 

[soapbox]

Hey Lou!

Before I add these values to the wiki page, I do have a question or two --

First, did you measure the blade gap between the top of the blade and the blade receiver / handle, or between the cutting edge of the blade and the top of the blade receiver / handle?

Second, did you get the Futur new or used? I got mine used and promptly took it apart to clean it. I discovered that it is possible to thread the handle of the Futur (and, for that matter, a Progress) 180 degrees out of line, such that "1" is more aggressive than expected.

I promise I'm not casting aspersions on your work, but I want to ensure consistency where we can.

For what it's worth, I use my Futur on 2.75 and above that I'm facing a lot of razor burn...

 

[soapbox]

I sure hope you get one soon, and a Slant too. Surely, a good man in the Dominion of Canada will be able to help things out. Chip?

Slants are problematic to measure with feeler gauges, since there's a helical twist that makes your measurements variable along the blade/head of the Slant. I'm open to suggestions about measuring the Slant -- a median or average measurement? Or, how about using a maximum gap measurement? Given the other factors of the Slant's design contributing to its fearsome reputation, would providing the maximum gap be more "truthy" than a more conservative measure?

 

[Jarmo P]

There are other things in head/blade/guard geometry than just the blade gap that affect the shave.
I would imagine that from the http://wiki.badgerandblade.com/index.php/Double-Edged_Safety_Razors_Ranked_by_Aggressiveness measurements, however they were measured, one can make these conclusions:

Since the Merkur Progress starts at such a narrow gap it can be described as a relatively mild adjustable razor. And it's gap while it can be largened to even more than a @5 setting, is not really very usable at the larger gaps, because of the other aspects of the geometry.

And Futur, I don't have one, so it is only speculation: It is designed by geometry for that large gap it starts @1. So it is propably friendlier than adjustables like Progress set to that huge gap Futur starts with. Progress would be need to set for @6 or more to have the same gap as Futur @1.

So the Futur is definately designed for users liking an aggressive shaver, while the Progress is designed for the users liking mild razors. Above is a conclusion from the idea that an adjustable razor is best designed propably to the level it starts or slightly above in head/blade/guard geometry.

The Futur would indeed be much gentler @1 than the Gillette adjustable set @9, since of the smaller blade exposure, even if them were both having approximately the same blade gap size.

 

[DunEdinRanger]

Hey Lou!

Before I add these values to the wiki page, I do have a question or two --

First, did you measure the blade gap between the top of the blade and the blade receiver / handle, or between the cutting edge of the blade and the top of the blade receiver / handle?

Second, did you get the Futur new or used? I got mine used and promptly took it apart to clean it. I discovered that it is possible to thread the handle of the Futur (and, for that matter, a Progress) 180 degrees out of line, such that "1" is more aggressive than expected.

I promise I'm not casting aspersions on your work, but I want to ensure consistency where we can.

For what it's worth, I use my Futur on 2.75 and above that I'm facing a lot of razor burn...

I bought it used from a respectable member of this forum.

I measured between the cutting edge and the top of the receiver/handle. I thought that was how it was supposed to be done.

Slants are problematic to measure with feeler gauges, since there's a helical twist that makes your measurements variable along the blade/head of the Slant. I'm open to suggestions about measuring the Slant -- a median or average measurement? Or, how about using a maximum gap measurement? Given the other factors of the Slant's design contributing to its fearsome reputation, would providing the maximum gap be more "truthy" than a more conservative measure?

You know I measured the maximum gap of the slant and didn't write it down, but if I remember correctly it was only about 0.028 of an inch.

- Lou

 

[soapbox]

I bought it used from a respectable member of this forum.

I measured between the cutting edge and the top of the receiver/handle. I thought that was how it was supposed to be done.

Yep, that's how I think it's supposed to be done too. Just checking.

You know I measured the maximum gap of the slant and didn't write it down, but if I remember correctly it was only about 0.028 of an inch.

- Lou

Yeah, I totally understand and agree with the occasional sentiments here that the blade gap is a poor overall measure of aggressiveness because razor weight, blade angle, and blade exposure (or "overhang") all affect how easy it is to cut yourself and/or your facial hair. I'd like for folks to start weighing their razors to at least lock down that portion of the overall measure, but I recognize the real difficulties in measuring overhang and blade angle (along a line tangent to the upper edge of the comb or safety bar and the top of the blade cap where it touches the skin).

Yeah, see? Exactly.

Oh, but thanks for measuring the Futur's blade gap! I didn't say that before, and I should have said that first. I appreciate your contribution to our razor measures, and I thank you for the quality result!