Captain's Choice is the WORST shaving soap that I've optimized so far

[Adam18]

Wow !!! ----- I've been a happy camper here on B&B for about two and a half years, and I don't recall seeing such animosity and contempt as I'm witnessing here on this thread. C'mon Gents ---- let's just be happy and enjoy our shaves without badmouthing each other or hurting anyone's feelings. We are all certainly entitled to our opinions and we all have the right to express them in a respectful manner, but let's all take a deep breath, relax, and remain civil. For me, the main thing that makes Badger & Blade such a wonderful on-line community is the fact that we can all show our respect for our fellow gentlemen while exchanging our thoughts and ideas in a manner reflecting grace and dignity.
As we approach 2019, let's keep it that way !
Happy New Year to you all !

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

That can also make them perfect, or as close too it as can be.

I suspect though Grant that if you stopped thinking about it and just loaded your synthetic with soap and then dipped the tips until you had it where you like it you may find a better shave awaits, but that wouldnt help with your table haha.

You're right, Mike, about my table. I'm quantifying lather. I used to load the brush and add water incrementally, but the more precise I got with soap and water measurements, the more consistent I got at making lather and making the exact lather that I want. Lather-building use to be frustrating, but now, whatever frustration there is comes from the soap or cream, not from me trying to judge by eye and feel. Everything I do now with precise measurements is repeatable.

The one thing I pay attention to regarding soaps is, how much product do I need to make my lather how I like it? That varies, considerably, and influences my future purchases more than anything else.

Yes! It does! I've found that, too. The optimum soap amounts in my table vary from 0.44 g to 1.20 g. Price is not a part of my performance ranking, but I do include a column for the soap price per shave. Overall, you can see a trend with higher price (which usually correlates with more soap) being up top and lower price being ranked lower, but it's not a strict correlation by any means.

There are few soaps I would never use again. T&H 1805 is one. While I love the scent, its performance for me mirrors yours with CC. No matter how I make my lather I cant get what I want from it. The other is Midnight & Two The Coast. Reverse the scents of both, the wonderful 1805 scent and the "Dill Pickle chips and Turpentine" of the Midnight & Two, and I'd swear they were the same soaps because they perform the same no matter what I do to them.

The sad thing is that some people out there will blame you for not getting those soaps to work for you, no matter how much you tested them and no matter how much experience you have.

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

Wow !!! ----- I've been a happy camper here on B&B for about two and a half years, and I don't recall seeing such animosity and contempt as I'm witnessing here on this thread. C'mon Gents ---- let's just be happy and enjoy our shaves without badmouthing each other or hurting anyone's feelings. We are all certainly entitled to our opinions and we all have the right to express them in a respectful manner, but let's all take a deep breath, relax, and remain civil. For me, the main thing that makes Badger & Blade such a wonderful on-line community is the fact that we can all show our respect for our fellow gentlemen while exchanging our thoughts and ideas in a manner reflecting grace and dignity.
As we approach 2019, let's keep it that way !
Happy New Year to you all !

Well said, @Adam18. Happy New Year!

 

[MHBru]

+1 Adam18.... enjoyment can't be quantified... and even using metrics doesn't mean any two people (with diff water, diff brushes and all the other variables) will get the same results. If you had asked me I would say that MWF is near the bottom but i know others love it... and in the most excellent use of this site I found someone to trade my MWF for something else... I love reading everyone's opinions and always remember that oft used... YMMV.

 

[Esox]

Lather-building use to be frustrating, but now, whatever frustration there is comes from the soap or cream, not from me trying to judge by eye and feel.

The frustrating part for me is with a soap such as, again, T&H. I really wanted to like it because it smells so good, but I could load my brush for a week and thats not going to improve its performance for me. Its just not there.

Overall, you can see a trend with more expensive soaps and creams being up top and less expensive soaps and creams being ranked lower, but it's not a strict correlation by any means.

I believe that Grant. CRS cream, while very inexpensive, needs such little product its astonishing. Much the same as Wickham 1912, but its almost twice the cost per tub of CRS and theres less of it. How critical does one wish to be is the question between those two. PdP is another example. Top shelf performance, mid range price and a large hard puck that will last ages.

On the other side of that coin is WK. Great performance but at a higher cost. CRS and Wickham easily perform in the same league and may very well better it for considerably less initial cost. I also use twice the amount of WK as I do Wickham. Which is my more likely repeat purchase?

The sad thing is that some people out there will blame you for not getting those soaps to work for you, no matter how much you tested them and no matter how much experience you have.

Much the same as razors and/or blades. Just because it works for me does not mean it will for someone else. I still think it should though lol.

Yeah! Happy New Year everyone!!

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

I hear you, Mike. You and others are more into scents than I am, but we all like a good value.

 

[REV579]

Considered one of the hardest pucks

The one thing I pay attention to regarding soaps is, how much product do I need to make my lather how I like it? That varies, considerably, and influences my future purchases more than anything else.

This is one of the reasons why I have settled in knots sub-20mm.
For grins I loaded up my 21mm Vie Long, small amount of product:

I could have lathered up 4+ times. I’ll have to see if I saved any pictures from when I first started to use this soap. My lather looked like something that was left over in the bottom of the bathtub. Once I started blooming the puck, it all changed.
I also think that when you bloom a puck, you’ve use less product.

 

[Esox]

Considered one of the hardest pucks


This is one of the reasons why I have settled in knots sub-20mm.
For grins I loaded up my 21mm Vie Long, small amount of product:
View attachment 939700

I could have lathered up 4+ times. I’ll have to see if I saved any pictures from when I first started to use this soap. My lather looked like something that was left over in the bottom of the bathtub. Once I started blooming the puck, it all changed.
I also think that when you bloom a puck, you’ve use less product.

I found the same with PdP. The more I build the lather, the more lather I get. I havent even come close to breaking that lather and having it lose its slickness either. I have CC and Stirling though.

I'm with you on the smaller knots too. I envy @Cal's 18mm Shavemac.

 

[Clay S]

I get good lather with PdP using my favorite brush. People always comment on how small it is. My Pro 10098
@ShavingByTheNumbers , if you happen to get a soap that isn't performing as expected. Some soaps only lather well if incremental, small amounts of water are added over time while whipping/lathering in between additions.

 

[snowman]

I read this thread and the wiki page for optimizing lather. Gotta be honest, I think the whole thing is silly. From a scientific perspective too many variables are ignored.

Last summer I went to a Twins / White Sox game in Minneapolis. The weather was gorgeous, beer was cold, and it was a decent game. My buddy is deep into baseball analytics and he spent the whole game fretting over his charts and forgot to enjoy the experience. Lather optimization charts remind me of baseball analytics. At the end of the day you have a good shave or you don’t. Life is short...enjoy the game.

 

[dfoulk]

Ok, first off it's kinda bad form to call a soap out as the WORST you've ever tried. It's much better to say things like "maybe this one wasn't a good fit for me" or even, "it's not one that I'd prefer to use". I'm all for honest reviews and insist on nothing less but many of these artisan makers put a lot of time and effort into their products. It's really hard to get any kind of publicity so negative publicity is not a good thing for any of them. The maker is a hell of a nice guy and personally I rank his soaps toward the top of my second tier. My top tier only contains 8 soap makers of the 600 plus soaps I've tried. So near the top of my tier 2 would be an excellent product. Something that would be impressive to most that tried it. I don't work for or benefit from anything this or any other vendor sells. I'm not trying to defend anyone, but I try to see the big picture and be kind to everyone. Products that I don't care for might well be someone else's favorite and vise versa. So I try to be respectful.

So in seeing your post title I don't agree, so I want to better understand your criteria and I take a closer look. This closer look makes me even more confused. I didn't see this thread earlier but it appears the mods had to clear some comments making me suspect that I'm not the only one that doesn't agree.

So I proceed further, looking at the facts subjectively.

Now, I'm doing my best to stick to the facts and I'm looking at this with an open mind and unfortunately I'm not sure that I understand how your criteria would effect the performance. I'm completely clueless as to why you're gathering the data that you're gathering and how it impacts your ranking. While I applaud your effort, because I know you're putting some work into this, I'd like to better understand what it is that you're going for.

Please clarify.

PR Performance Ranking - ok, this one matters but I have no idea how it's determined as all other data isn't really related or at least it isn't related to performance to me.
PD Purchase Date (YYYY-MM-DD) - doesn't really matter to me as long as the soap hasn't gone bad or is excessively old.
SCM Soap/Cream Mass (g) - interesting to note but not really related to performance. I use whatever amount that I need to get the ideal lather.
WM Water Mass (g) - see soap/cream mass. I add whatever water I need so this means nothing to me either.
TM Total Mass (g) = SCM + WM - again, pretty much useless to me in determining performance.
WSCR Water-to-Soap/Cream Ratio = WM / SCM - again useless to me.
SCIT Soap/Cream-Incorporation Time (s) - I'm guessing this is how long to convert the soap to a lather. Again, no impact on performance for me.
LBT Lather-Building Time (s) - how long it took to make the lather. Not sure on this one as well.
SCP Soap/Cream Price (USD) - no impact on performance at all.

So from the categories you're looking at how much soap it takes to lather, how easily a soap lathers and what it costs. The rest of the criteria are ratios of the time to lather or the amount of soap/water. Interesting to note but not numbers that I'd use to rate a soaps performance. Kinda on par with picking a car to win a race only because it's blue.

With the statistics you're displaying, as I understand them, I'd expect Martin de Candre to come in first as it seems to produce lather more quickly than anything else on the market and it does so with very little product used.

The performance ratings are nowhere near the order I'd rank those soap in having tried them all. Based on the other comments I suspect others aren't agreeing with your ratings as well.

What I'm not seeing here is water quality, slickness, residual slickness, post shave moisturizing, cushion (though to me this isn't as good of a performance indicator as slickness). There is no mention of anything that I'd consider related to performance. Time to lather is a negative if it's excessive but most are reasonable in this regard as not to stand out.

This test might be more useful in using the same soap each time with different qualities of water to determine water hardness impact on latherability. That would be interesting and the results would likely have a bit more meaning.

Maybe these statistics would be good to determine how long a soap will last or possibly the potential price per shave but again for me price isn't related to performance.

Either way, if I missed it in an earlier post my apologies, but please share some more information as to why you're ranking the performance the way that you are.

 

[Cino]

Ok, first off it's kinda bad form to call a soap out as the WORST you've ever tried. It's much better to say things like "maybe this one wasn't a good fit for me" or even, "it's not one that I'd prefer to use". I'm all for honest reviews and insist on nothing less but many of these artisan makers put a lot of time and effort into their products. It's really hard to get any kind of publicity so negative publicity is not a good thing for any of them. The maker is a hell of a nice guy and personally I rank his soaps toward the top of my second tier. My top tier only contains 8 soap makers of the 600 plus soaps I've tried. So near the top of my tier 2 would be an excellent product. Something that would be impressive to most that tried it. I don't work for or benefit from anything this or any other vendor sells. I'm not trying to defend anyone, but I try to see the big picture and be kind to everyone. Products that I don't care for might well be someone else's favorite and vise versa. So I try to be respectful.

So in seeing your post title I don't agree, so I want to better understand your criteria and I take a closer look. This closer look makes me even more confused. I didn't see this thread earlier but it appears the mods had to clear some comments making me suspect that I'm not the only one that doesn't agree.

So I proceed further, looking at the facts subjectively.

Now, I'm doing my best to stick to the facts and I'm looking at this with an open mind and unfortunately I'm not sure that I understand how your criteria would effect the performance. I'm completely clueless as to why you're gathering the data that you're gathering and how it impacts your ranking. While I applaud your effort, because I know you're putting some work into this, I'd like to better understand what it is that you're going for.

Please clarify.

PR Performance Ranking - ok, this one matters but I have no idea how it's determined as all other data isn't really related or at least it isn't related to performance to me.
PD Purchase Date (YYYY-MM-DD) - doesn't really matter to me as long as the soap hasn't gone bad or is excessively old.
SCM Soap/Cream Mass (g) - interesting to note but not really related to performance. I use whatever amount that I need to get the ideal lather.
WM Water Mass (g) - see soap/cream mass. I add whatever water I need so this means nothing to me either.
TM Total Mass (g) = SCM + WM - again, pretty much useless to me in determining performance.
WSCR Water-to-Soap/Cream Ratio = WM / SCM - again useless to me.
SCIT Soap/Cream-Incorporation Time (s) - I'm guessing this is how long to convert the soap to a lather. Again, no impact on performance for me.
LBT Lather-Building Time (s) - how long it took to make the lather. Not sure on this one as well.
SCP Soap/Cream Price (USD) - no impact on performance at all.

So from the categories you're looking at how much soap it takes to lather, how easily a soap lathers and what it costs. The rest of the criteria are ratios of the time to lather or the amount of soap/water. Interesting to note but not numbers that I'd use to rate a soaps performance. Kinda on par with picking a car to win a race only because it's blue.

With the statistics you're displaying, as I understand them, I'd expect Martin de Candre to come in first as it seems to produce lather more quickly than anything else on the market and it does so with very little product used.

The performance ratings are nowhere near the order I'd rank those soap in having tried them all. Based on the other comments I suspect others aren't agreeing with your ratings as well.

What I'm not seeing here is water quality, slickness, residual slickness, post shave moisturizing, cushion (though to me this isn't as good of a performance indicator as slickness). There is no mention of anything that I'd consider related to performance. Time to lather is a negative if it's excessive but most are reasonable in this regard as not to stand out.

This test might be more useful in using the same soap each time with different qualities of water to determine water hardness impact on latherability. That would be interesting and the results would likely have a bit more meaning.

Maybe these statistics would be good to determine how long a soap will last or possibly the potential price per shave but again for me price isn't related to performance.

Either way, if I missed it in an earlier post my apologies, but please share some more information as to why you're ranking the performance the way that you are.

+1. Could not have said it better.

I don't have an issue with anyone dissing a product they don't like but to create a libelous thread using all caps and to justify it with a pretense of scientific objectivity is bad form and ungentlemanly. Imagine yourself a small businessman who had worked for years to establish a reputation only to have that reputation assailed by an amateur scientist who has not even first subjected his theory to any kind of expert review. The fact that so many disagree with the scientific results is sufficient evidence to suggest that the method needs some work and maybe the libel isn't justified.

Just sayin.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

At the risk of inflating the unrest here, there's two main ways to roast a chicken. You can calculate the exposure time to a controlled temperature, based on a precise calculation of duration per gram. Alternatively, you can whack it in the oven, assess by scent, sound, and feel of the fork you test it with, deciding if and how often to baste, and adjusting the temperature to give you your preferred results.

Some people prefer one way, and some the other.

It seems the same applies when building lather.

Grant @ShavingByTheNumbers prefers the analytical approach, and that is the fun side of this hobby for him. While I can't buy into that concept, as there's far too many variables not factored in - from base levels of hydration in the puck, which is known to be variable, to temperatures, to imperceptible differences in pressure or vigour with the brush, to humidity of the air that's being incorporated, or the variations in mechanical action of different brushes, plus whatever else I've failed to consider - this is Grant's hobby.

Owning and rotating through 100 different soaps, obsessing over the subtle nuances that different hones of the final edge of a straight, and fixations with blade rigidity, are other aspects of this interest that different members here get passionate about, and the motivations for which I find equally alien - but I wouldn't want to interrupt their enjoyment, any more than I would want to interrupt Grant's.

Grant and I have clashed before, and that was more a matter of conversational tone, than any methods or other aspects of interest. I felt he was assuming an authoritative position, rather than just expressing his own interests and hoping to share that with others. I took exception at being told what to think.

I have since noticed Grant has started taking more care to express his findings as HIS findings, and I believe he is more open to the fact that none of his findings may have any relevance to others. Maybe some still feel his findings (opinions) are coming across a little too strongly for some readers. I am sure this is not Grant's intention.

I think we all need to take care (and I can be as guilty as anyone else here) to share our ways and interests, without imposing them on others. I feel strongly/passionately about my own personal approaches to the hobby, but I try to be careful not to shout down another's approach (unless I feel I'm being dictated to or lectured). I personally got rather vocal about a product performing dreadfully for me recently, only to follow it up on the coming days with an admission that it was purely operator error. Hopefully my rants were viewed as my personal frustration, rather than me telling the world that Brand X was an inferior product and should be avoided at all costs. It's possible I might have gotten a little heavy handed too.

I hope I've not done Grant, or anyone else, a disservice here. But I think the clashes are being perceived differently on either side of the locking horns, and what is really hitting a nerve, has neither been intended, nor recognised as potentially inflammatory.

We all find different interests in the shaving world, we all have different passions, and we all have different ways of expressing ourselves, and we maybe need to be a little careful at times that we don't put too much "weight" into how we write - nor how we read - those exchanges with others.

 

[Bogeyman]

...I don't have an issue with anyone dissing a product they don't like but to create a libelous thread using all caps and to justify it with a pretense of scientific objectivity is bad form and ungentlemanly. Imagine yourself a small businessman who had worked for years to establish a reputation only to have that reputation assailed by an amateur scientist who has not even first subjected his theory to any kind of expert review. The fact that so many disagree with the scientific results is sufficient evidence to suggest that the method needs some work and maybe the libel isn't justified.

Just sayin.

Happens every day & all day on Amazon, Ebay, Yelp, etc. The OP's personal opinion hardly can be called libel even in the most liberal sense of the word itself. The problem is that society has been "dumbed down" and many are unable to separate wheat from chaff. As well, many are too sensitive to any critique whatsoever and threaten to "unleash the lawyers!!". Perhaps we should bring back dueling(?).

Take what you want from it & leave the rest. Personally, I think he's wasting his time, but that's his right and I can always choose not to click on the thread.

 

[snowman]

I received some samples of CC soap in a 2018 sabbatical PIF. I've only used it twice so far and I don't think that's enough use to justify a full blown review, but because of the title of this thread I feel compelled to express an off-the-cuff opinion. After a couple uses I would put CC soap as a second tier soap. To put that into perspective, I'm an old school triple-milled tallow soap kinda guy and generally stay away from the latest and greatest artisanal release. Softer soaps and croaps are fine, but not my first choice. I'd put CC with Valobra soft, many of the better RR offerings, etc. Maybe a half-notch above Cella. That's all regarding performance. Scent is excellent. That's my very humble opinion after a couple uses of a sample for what its worth. If my tripled milled tallow favorites disappeared I could very happily shave daily with the CC soap I tried. As an aside, I have well water that is twice filtered and softened.

 

[dundak]

TBH I don't understand your methodology and it makes little sense to me. Creams, croaps and used soap already have water in them so the SCM is ..what??? It's cool to quantify but with no controls it does not make sense to me. It's great if you are tabulating your own YMMV results but has no bearing on how good a soap is. AoS could be used brushless so would have a WSCR of unknown (don't know amount of water in base cream), SCIT=0, LBT=0 and gives a fantastic shave. Don't even have to use a brush. Have fun with trying to quantify your own personal results but don't take offense if people put no merit in them.

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

Have fun with trying to quantify your own personal results but don't take offense if people put no merit in them.

I don't take any offense. Thanks.

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

At the risk of inflating the unrest here, there's two main ways to roast a chicken. You can calculate the exposure time to a controlled temperature, based on a precise calculation of duration per gram. Alternatively, you can whack it in the oven, assess by scent, sound, and feel of the fork you test it with, deciding if and how often to baste, and adjusting the temperature to give you your preferred results.

Some people prefer one way, and some the other.

It seems the same applies when building lather.

Grant @ShavingByTheNumbers prefers the analytical approach, and that is the fun side of this hobby for him. While I can't buy into that concept, as there's far too many variables not factored in - from base levels of hydration in the puck, which is known to be variable, to temperatures, to imperceptible differences in pressure or vigour with the brush, to humidity of the air that's being incorporated, or the variations in mechanical action of different brushes, plus whatever else I've failed to consider - this is Grant's hobby.

Owning and rotating through 100 different soaps, obsessing over the subtle nuances that different hones of the final edge of a straight, and fixations with blade rigidity, are other aspects of this interest that different members here get passionate about, and the motivations for which I find equally alien - but I wouldn't want to interrupt their enjoyment, any more than I would want to interrupt Grant's.

Grant and I have clashed before, and that was more a matter of conversational tone, than any methods or other aspects of interest. I felt he was assuming an authoritative position, rather than just expressing his own interests and hoping to share that with others. I took exception at being told what to think.

I have since noticed Grant has started taking more care to express his findings as HIS findings, and I believe he is more open to the fact that none of his findings may have any relevance to others. Maybe some still feel his findings (opinions) are coming across a little too strongly for some readers. I am sure this is not Grant's intention.

I think we all need to take care (and I can be as guilty as anyone else here) to share our ways and interests, without imposing them on others. I feel strongly/passionately about my own personal approaches to the hobby, but I try to be careful not to shout down another's approach (unless I feel I'm being dictated to or lectured). I personally got rather vocal about a product performing dreadfully for me recently, only to follow it up on the coming days with an admission that it was purely operator error. Hopefully my rants were viewed as my personal frustration, rather than me telling the world that Brand X was an inferior product and should be avoided at all costs. It's possible I might have gotten a little heavy handed too.

I hope I've not done Grant, or anyone else, a disservice here. But I think the clashes are being perceived differently on either side of the locking horns, and what is really hitting a nerve, has neither been intended, nor recognised as potentially inflammatory.

We all find different interests in the shaving world, we all have different passions, and we all have different ways of expressing ourselves, and we maybe need to be a little careful at times that we don't put too much "weight" into how we write - nor how we read - those exchanges with others.

Thanks, Al. I appreciate your help. Yes, I have learned to explicitly say more that my opinions are just that, my opinions, so as to not give any false impression that I am telling others what to think or dismissing their opinions. There used to be a time when we gave people the benefit of the doubt and presumed the best instead of jumping down people's throats. For the most part, we've done that here, trying to understand one another. Thanks for being a part of that.

 

[REV579]

This thread has actually been helpful because it has been a vehicle allowing people to share how it does and doesn't work well, as well as the factors contributing to the experiences. So, for that I can offer my thanks. It also encouraged me to break out my Vie Long 50/50 and try it with, of all things, a hard soap.

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

I get good lather with PdP using my favorite brush. People always comment on how small it is. My Pro 10098
@ShavingByTheNumbers , if you happen to get a soap that isn't performing as expected. Some soaps only lather well if incremental, small amounts of water are added over time while whipping/lathering in between additions.

Clay, thanks for the tip. I've experimented with the issue of incremental amounts of water vs. all of it at the beginning and I didn't find that it mattered for two soaps, at least in my opinion. However, I'm open to further investigation.