Damn Comfortable Shave

[Ron R]

I've not tried any shims, Ron, but I know about them. Well, I'm learning about them, is what I mean, by reading the threads, etc.

With your RR37 how did you shim it? One shim between the blade and the baseplate, or what? Cool that the razor is more rigid! Notice any downside to the shim?

Your shims are made from old blades? (Some people use old credit cards and stuff other than blades, I've read.)

Happy shaves,

Jim

Hello Jim, yes I placed the shim towards the base plate, as for going with a credit card or thin plastic shim I would just stick with a used blade or two unless you really want a aggressive razor (I put them on a magnetic fridge card so I can find them and not cut myself). Still testing the razors with different blades, today I started with the Nacet with a shim under the blade to give me more gab and Rigidity and no complaints(BBS 90%).
All the best(shaves)

 

[Esox]

This razor does not, in my hands so far, give me a BBS neck shave unless I go over and over and over and over and over (and more overs) my neck.

Too many passes leads to at least a bit of razor burn even if I am perfectly gentle with the razor. I find this to be true, but "too many" is not something I want to quantitate.

I have to agree. Inefficient razors I'm really not liking much at all these days.

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

So, we need a list of razors which are smooth and efficient. Not just a YMMV thing, but a rational, design-based, engineering-based, measurable parameters based list.

What makes a razor smooth?

What makes a razor efficient?

What best combines both, hitting the smooth and efficient sweet spot?

Answer all of those questions completely and the world turns from a YMMV, subjective, opinion-based, poll-based, confused mess to order and one has a legitimate shot at finding an excellent razor with no or little trial and error.

Of course, some people will never buy anything other than a subjective world view, and imprecise, meaningless sorta-kinda word usage. There are plenty of those folks, bless their souls.

Happy shaves,

Jim

 

[Esox]

What makes a razor smooth?

Rigidity, combined with minimal blade gap.

What makes a razor efficient?

Rigidity, combined with blade exposure.

What best combines both, hitting the smooth and efficient sweet spot?

Gillette OLD type and Fatip. There may be the odd European razor that combines the same elements, such as the Eclipse Red Ring, eastern bloc Gillette OLD type copies and possibly Tradere, but I dont believe anyone has done it better than Gillettes original design, other than maybe Fatip. If I had a Single Ring, I'd find out in a hurry!

 

[Johnnynroy]

Rigidity, combined with minimal blade gap.



Rigidity, combined with blade exposure.



Gillette OLD type and Fatip. There may be the odd European razor that combines the same elements, such as the Eclipse Red Ring, eastern bloc Gillette OLD type copies and possibly Tradere, but I dont believe anyone has done it better than Gillettes original design, other than maybe Fatip. If I had a Single Ring, I'd find out in a hurry!

I don’t normally do this, but +1. I think this is spot on.

I would add that many of the single edge razors likely fall into the category of efficient and usually smooth. They typically combine minimal to 0 blade gap with a very rigid blade. This gives you a very smooth, yet efficient, shaving experience. My own personal experience says that the RR Hawk V2 falls into this category, as well as the GEM Junior (so probably all of the GEM 1912 designs).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Esox]

I don’t normally do this, but +1. I think this is spot on.

I would add that many of the single edge razors likely fall into the category of efficient and usually smooth. They typically combine minimal to 0 blade gap with a very rigid blade. This gives you a very smooth, yet efficient, shaving experience. My own personal experience says that the RR Hawk V2 falls into this category, as well as the GEM Junior (so probably all of the GEM 1912 designs).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SE's are a different game altogether, but I agree with your assessment. Most SE's that I've studied do hold to those ideals. Gap changing slightly because of razor design and blade thickness, but blade thickness (rigidity) overcoming that part of the equation.

Are there SE razors that are adjustable regarding gap? Do any SE designs offer the amount of gap say a Gillette adjustable set to 9? I dont remember seeing any. I wonder why. If they had the same amount of gap they may very quickly become very dangerous.

 

[Johnnynroy]

SE's are a different game altogether, but I agree with your assessment. Most SE's that I've studied do hold to those ideals. Gap changing slightly because of razor design and blade thickness, but blade thickness (rigidity) overcoming that part of the equation.

Are there SE razors that are adjustable regarding gap? Do any SE designs offer the amount of gap say a Gillette adjustable set to 9? I dont remember seeing any. I wonder why. If they had the same amount of gap they may very quickly become very dangerous.

If you go to injectors, there are some that are adjustable, mostly vintage. There is the PAL and I think there was a schick adjustable. The supply single edge, which uses injector blades, has different plates like the Rockwell 6s and 6c. So it is somewhat adjustable. I think it is difficult to compare these to say the slim as the angle on many of these SE razors is close to a straight razor while a DE often can go at many different angles. But I haven’t shaved with a DE in a little while now so the angle could be more similar than I remember it being. I’m not certain how the gap of these adjustables compare to DE adjustables and how they would be perceived in regards to smoothness and efficiency.

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

Schick M injector is adjustable, but I don't know the mechanism by which it adjusts.

 

[Johnnynroy]

Congrats on over 1000 posts in this thread Jim! I can certainly say it has made a huge difference in my shaves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Esox]

 

[rasoio]

[emoji106] [emoji106] [emoji106]

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

What makes the razor smooth?

Rigidity, combined with minimal blade gap.

I think it is more guard span than blade gap (assuming @ShavingByTheNumbers is correct), but I also don't understand how blade gap and guard span don't inexorably correlate. I'm still studying available information, and looking at available razors with my magnifying glass, and pondering what I know about their shaves.


What makes the razor efficient?

Rigidity, combined with blade exposure.

Rigidity? How's that?

I agree rigidity is very important, but I don't see how it plays into efficiency. Not saying it does not...




What razors are both smooth and efficient?

OLD type and Fatip. If I had a Single Ring, I'd find out in a hurry!

Not shooting for absolutes here, but these are razors I'd consider adding to the list.

Schöne (basically a Fatip)
Maybe a Phoenix Bakelite OC Slant
NEW SC
Colonial General SS

The first three I've used, but maybe not enough to be entirely sure of. I would agree that the NEW SC is maybe not as efficient as the Fatip (which I've not used), but it is smooth and efficient compared to just about any DE razor I've used.

I have an early 1900s Gillette travel razor (pictured above) which I believe is a single ring (it is at the office). It has a very short handle, but that could likely be switched with a Tech or NEW handle. I may have to try it.

Happy shaves,

Jim

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

Thanks, guys.

If this is an accomplishment to celebrate, it is our celebration, not mine.

Happy shaves,

Jim

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

Congrats on over 1000 posts in this thread Jim! I can certainly say it has made a huge difference in my shaves.

And, mine, and that's what important. Together we're learning some cool and useful stuff, and getting real-life benefits.

I am glad your shaves are so much better. They will continue to improve I believe.

Happy shaves,

Jim

 

[Esox]

Rigidity? How's that?

I agree rigidity is very important, but I don't see how it plays into efficiency. Not saying it does not...

A more rigid blade cuts more efficiently and accurately than a less rigid blade.

Look at the kerf (thickness) on saw blades.



Now lets say we're cutting 2x12 planed stock of White Ash. A very hard, dense wood. Assuming the same number and type of teeth on the blades, a thinner kerf will give less resistance as it passes through the wood, but the wood being very hard and dense it needs to be cut at a slower rate to maintain the same level of accuracy afforded by a blade with a thicker (more rigid) kerf. A thicker more rigid blade can cut that same piece of wood much quicker and very accurately.

On my 12" Milwaukee miter saw I use a thick kerf 96 tooth carbide blade for doing light trim work. Thats because some of the older houses I've worked on doing flooring and windows and then trimming them, I've had what appeared to be 90 degree corners actually work out to 86.7 degrees or whatever off 90 as measured with my digital protractor. When you're working with expensive Walnut, Oak or Mahogany finished trim you dont want a sloppy joint. 1/10th of a degree off is visible in a joint. To get that kind of accuracy in a cut I need a rigid blade and I know that from experience. A blade with a thinner kerf will wobble, sometimes visibly, when it contacts and cuts through a hard material. I cant allow that to happen.

Any flex in any blade makes that blade inefficient to some degree. The more rigid any blade is, the more efficiently and accurately it can cut, no matter the type of blade in question. When the blade is flexing it isnt cutting.

In relation to shaving, a more rigid blade gives a smoother shave, but it also allows the blade to cut more efficiently and effectively because that blade edge flexes less.

Imagine how well your NEW SC would shave with a blade that was .006" thick as blades were back then, instead of the more current norm of .004". The extra .002" I think would make a great difference in all razors used today.

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

A more rigid blade cuts more efficiently and accurately than a less rigid blade.

Look at the kerf (thickness) on saw blades.

View attachment 834836

Now lets say we're cutting 2x12 planed stock of White Ash. A very hard, dense wood. Assuming the same number and type of teeth on the blades, a thinner kerf will give less resistance as it passes through the wood, but the wood being very hard and dense it needs to be cut at a slower rate to maintain the same level of accuracy afforded by a blade with a thicker (more rigid) kerf. A thicker more rigid blade can cut that same piece of wood much quicker and very accurately.

On my 12" Milwaukee miter saw I use a thick kerf 96 tooth carbide blade for doing light trim work. Thats because some of the older houses I've worked on doing flooring and windows and then trimming them, I've had what appeared to be 90 degree corners actually work out to 86.7 degrees or whatever off 90 as measured with my digital protractor. When you're working with expensive Walnut, Oak or Mahogany finished trim you dont want a sloppy joint. 1/10th of a degree off is visible in a joint. To get that kind of accuracy in a cut I need a rigid blade and I know that from experience. A blade with a thinner kerf will wobble, sometimes visibly, when it contacts and cuts through a hard material. I cant allow that to happen.

Any flex in any blade makes that blade inefficient to some degree. The more rigid any blade is, the more efficiently and accurately it can cut, no matter the type of blade in question. When the blade is flexing it isnt cutting.

In relation to shaving, a more rigid blade gives a smoother shave, but it also allows the blade to cut more efficiently and effectively because that blade edge flexes less.

Imagine how well your NEW SC would shave with a blade that was .006" thick as blades were back then, instead of the more current norm of .004". The extra .002" I think would make a great difference in all razors used today.

That makes a great deal of sense. I will buy it.

Whether observations made cutting hardwoods totally hold up when translated into cutting whiskers I'm not sure, but unless I see convincing evidence to the contrary I'm going to accept your observations and conclusions as correct.

Even if you're wrong in terms of efficiency (which I doubt), a rigid blade is still the bee's knees for smoothness, avoiding irritation, and dodging weepers.

Thanks so much.

Happy shaves,

Jim

 

[Esox]

That makes a great deal of sense. I will buy it.

Whether observations made cutting hardwoods totally hold up when translated into cutting whiskers I'm not sure, but unless I see convincing evidence to the contrary I'm going to accept your observations and conclusions as correct.

Even if you're wrong in terms of efficiency (which I doubt), a rigid blade is still the bee's knees for smoothness, avoiding irritation, and dodging weepers.

Thanks so much.

Happy shaves,

Jim

Jeff Cooper - "Years ago we coined the appellation, “Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments,” or PII. This peculiarity lies in attributing importance to measurable deviations so small as to be meaningless. You see it in the people who shoot test groups in rifles, awarding a prize to a group which is only thousandths of an inch smaller than those unrewarded. One sees it in speed records awarded in one-thousandths of one mile-per-hour. One sees it in basketball scores which, nearing the century mark, are separated by less than three points. In all such cases Score A is “better” than Score B, but who cares?"

___

I think much the same as you. The differences between a rigid razor blade that cannot flex at all and a razor blade that can flex minutely I believe are to small to be measured, but the theory is valid lol.

PII needs to be a thing! The Guru said so! lol

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

View attachment 834853

Jeff Cooper - "Years ago we coined the appellation, “Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments,” or PII. This peculiarity lies in attributing importance to measurable deviations so small as to be meaningless. You see it in the people who shoot test groups in rifles, awarding a prize to a group which is only thousandths of an inch smaller than those unrewarded. One sees it in speed records awarded in one-thousandths of one mile-per-hour. One sees it in basketball scores which, nearing the century mark, are separated by less than three points. In all such cases Score A is “better” than Score B, but who cares?"

___

I think much the same as you. The differences between a rigid razor blade that cannot flex at all and a razor blade that can flex minutely I believe are to small to be measured, but the theory is valid lol.

PII needs to be a thing! The Guru said so! lol

If I understand this, it is about the Consequences of
"Inconsequential" Increments.

I have not heard of this PII stuff before. I like it a lot.

Thanks for sharing this. Very nice.

Happy shaves,

Jim

 

[ShavingByTheNumbers]

I think it is more guard span than blade gap (assuming @ShavingByTheNumbers is correct), but I also don't understand how blade gap and guard span don't inexorably correlate. I'm still studying available information, and looking at available razors with my magnifying glass, and pondering what I know about their shaves.

Jim,

In honor of your 1000th, I've made this illustration that helps show how blade gap and guard span are independent. The only exception to that independence is that guard span must be greater than or equal to blade gap since guard span being less than blade gap is physically impossible. It should be clear from the illustration that razors with the same blade gap can perform very differently and have very different aggressiveness.

Congratulations!

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

Jim,

In honor of your 1000th, I've made this illustration that helps show how blade gap and guard span are independent. The only exception to that independence is that guard span must be greater than or equal to blade gap since guard span being less than blade gap is physically impossible. It should be clear from the illustration that razors with the same blade gap can perform very differently and have very different aggressiveness.

Congratulations!

View attachment 834865

What a nice celebratory gift!

Very useful illustration, Grant, and much appreciated. Your illustrations are perfect!

If I understand correctly the razor illustrated on the left in the series above would be less aggressive (milder) than the razor illustrated on the right.

I'll accept that as correct, but I can not say I understand why it is correct.

The only thing I can think of is that the razor on the right, with a much larger guard span allows more tissue (skin) to enter the blade gap space (the area between the blade and the baseplate). This would be true even if the gaps are the same (which they are in the illustration). The razor on the right almost begs more tissue to roll, squeeze, or otherwise enter the gap space. It provides a ramp to make it easy.

Obviously, I'm talking here about something Mike @Esox discusses, but he talks about it in terms of blade gap (more blade gap means more irritation, etc. and less blade gap means more smoothness, if I understand him correctly, and if I'm paraphrasing him accurately; he says if there's no gap, tissue can't enter the non-existent gap space.).

Whether I understand this or not, I do now understand that guard gap and blade gap are independent variables.

Thanks so much,

Jim