Did I miss the memo?

[Lane101]

I agree with all of that. Williams was a classic hard soap, the other side of the spectrum from the now also discontinued tallow Tabac (I haven't gotten to new formula Tabac yet). But I found if I gradually added the right amount of water to Williams, I got a good result, especially if I used it every day, and the type of brush didn't much matter. It was just more time consuming. I've been using another classic tallow soap, Cella, that is more or less in the middle. It is harder than Tabac and needs more water, but not nearly as much as Williams. It doesn't sound like MWF is for me, but I'll probably give it a try at some point.

Makes sense. Wetter pucks do lather faster and a softened soap would enable any type of brush to work.

Curious, how hard/soft is your old Tallow formula of Tabac? While malleable my new formula Tabac puck is pretty hard. For Cella are you talking about the red bowl that also comes in 1 kilo brick? Don't own any but recall other B&Bers referring to it as a soft soap so your Tabac sounds like it is pretty soft if Cella is harder.

My MWF set up FYI for when you give it a try via the links to the pictures below. Basically drop the dry puck (used roughly once a week) into the 3" diameter clear plastic container and build the lather directly on the puck - same as what I do with Williams in a smaller diameter mug. Let it dry overnight and place back in labeled black container in picture. Easier than Williams in-part because the larger puck provides more surface area for lathering.

Note that Connaught Shaving has MWF for 6.25 GBP or roughly $7 a puck plus shipping. Makes MWF a budget priced soap given the 4.4oz. puck. Red bowl of Cella for 4GBP or under $5. Free shipping if you order 60 GBP of items.

MWFSoap10_22_22.jpg

www.badgerandblade.com

MWFLather10_22_22.jpg

www.badgerandblade.com

 

[mozartman]

Makes sense. Wetter pucks do lather faster and a softened soap would enable any type of brush to work.

Curious, how hard/soft is your old Tallow formula of Tabac? While malleable my new formula Tabac puck is pretty hard. For Cella are you talking about the red bowl that also comes in 1 kilo brick? Don't own any but recall other B&Bers referring to it as a soft soap so your Tabac sounds like it is pretty soft if Cella is harder.

My MWF set up FYI for when you give it a try via the links to the pictures below. Basically drop the dry puck (used roughly once a week) into the 3" diameter clear plastic container and build the lather directly on the puck - same as what I do with Williams in a smaller diameter mug. Let it dry overnight and place back in labeled black container in picture. Easier than Williams in-part because the larger puck provides more surface area for lathering.

Note that Connaught Shaving has MWF for 6.25 GBP or roughly $7 a puck plus shipping. Makes MWF a budget priced soap given the 4.4oz. puck. Red bowl of Cella for 4GBP or under $5. Free shipping if you order 60 GBP of items.

MWFSoap10_22_22.jpg

www.badgerandblade.com

MWFLather10_22_22.jpg

www.badgerandblade.com

Yes, imho no question tallow Tabac was a soft, high water content soap. A little too soft, imo, so if new formula Tabac is a little harder, that's good for me. Cella is definitely harder, or at least, drier. Generally, I'm in the minority that prefers non-tallow formulas. At least, for me non-tallow Haslinger was a step up from tallow Haslinger, which was long one of my favorites. (But I haven't yet reached the latest non-tallow formula Haslinger in my little stockpile.) Finally, Connaught looks like a very good option if one buys enough to qualify for free shipping, but if MWF is anything like Williams was, it isn't for me.

 

[RayClem]

Williams Mug Soap was probably pretty good back when it was actually made by Williams in 1840 using the original formulation. However, the brand changed hands over the years and the formulation changed as well. The emphasis seemed to be keeping the price of the soap inexpensive rather than improving the performance of the soap. According to my soap evaluations Williams I tested a few years ago received a score of 41/60 which is 68%. I consider that to be a failing score. Thus, unlike some others, I am not saddened by the discontinued brand.

I still have a puck of Williams, but it is not worth the cost of postage give it away.

 

[Lane101]

Williams Mug Soap was probably pretty good back when it was actually made by Williams in 1840 using the original formulation. However, the brand changed hands over the years and the formulation changed as well. The emphasis seemed to be keeping the price of the soap inexpensive rather than improving the performance of the soap. According to my soap evaluations Williams I tested a few years ago received a score of 41/60 which is 68%. I consider that to be a failing score. Thus, unlike some others, I am not saddened by the discontinued brand.

I still have a puck of Williams, but it is not worth the cost of postage give it away.

Hi RayClem, Important to add that YMMV applies here. For B&Bers who prefer a softer artisan soap with a more elegant scent that can be loaded in under 10 seconds you are right that Williams, and many similar really hard triple milled soaps, will fail to meet expectations.

For those of us who are primarily focused on core shaving performance, such as lather slickness, cushion and stability, and don't mind loading for around a minute while building lather directly on the puck with a stiffer brush (I use a boar), Williams is an great soap. With the above technique it delivers wonderful shaves. Additionally it was an excellent value at 99 cents a puck before it was discontinued that is missed by many. Right now Arko is likely the next best shaving soap at a similar price point.

Note that with remaining inventories being sold for $10-$20 a puck there are better values out there such as Mitchell's Wool Fat that has similar lathering characteristics with a more pleasant aroma and post-shave feel from a puck that is over twice the size as Williams for a similar price.

 

[mozartman]

Hi RayClem, Important to add that YMMV applies here. For B&Bers who prefer a softer artisan soap with a more elegant scent that can be loaded in under 10 seconds you are right that Williams, and many similar really hard triple milled soaps, will fail to meet expectations.

For those of us who are primarily focused on core shaving performance, such as lather slickness, cushion and stability, and don't mind loading for around a minute while building lather directly on the puck with a stiffer brush (I use a boar), Williams is an great soap. With the above technique it delivers wonderful shaves. Additionally it was an excellent value at 99 cents a puck before it was discontinued that is missed by many. Right now Arko is likely the next best shaving soap at a similar price point.

Note that with remaining inventories being sold for $10-$20 a puck there are better values out there such as Mitchell's Wool Fat that has similar lathering characteristics with a more pleasant aroma and post-shave feel from a puck that is over twice the size as Williams for a similar price.

Oddly, comparing Williams even up with my next cheapest option, the popular VDH Luxury (an inaccurate name if there ever was one), I'd have to give Williams the edge. VDH has a nice, mild scent and easily produces a creamy seeming lather, but its performance is barely adequate unless you add a good cream to it. Williams to me was cheap-smelling, and a lot of time and trouble to lather properly, but to my surprise when I finally got there was a good performer with decent post-shave feel. Not worth the effort, though, as other options are better in every way, again imho.

But I have to agree with you in general regarding the hard, triple milled soaps. I once bought a puck of Geo. F. Trumper almond-scented soap from a shop that had it on sale, mainly because my wife, who was with me, loved the scent. And I have to admit that brand does a wonderful job with scents. But it was worse even than Williams, in fact by far the worst of any major brand I've tried in terms of producing a lather. It needed a long soak in warm water before anything could be done with it. Smaller amounts of water that you might usefully add to other hard soaps would quickly be absorbed and have no effect. Soaps like that are not for me.

 

[Lane101]

Oddly, comparing Williams even up with my next cheapest option, the popular VDH Luxury (an inaccurate name if there ever was one), I'd have to give Williams the edge. VDH has a nice, mild scent and easily produces a creamy seeming lather, but its performance is barely adequate unless you add a good cream to it. Williams to me was cheap-smelling, and a lot of time and trouble to lather properly, but to my surprise when I finally got there was a good performer with decent post-shave feel. Not worth the effort, though, as other options are better in every way, again imho.

But I have to agree with you in general regarding the hard, triple milled soaps. I once bought a puck of Geo. F. Trumper almond-scented soap from a shop that had it on sale, mainly because my wife, who was with me, loved the scent. And I have to admit that brand does a wonderful job with scents. But it was worse even than Williams, in fact by far the worst of any major brand I've tried in terms of producing a lather. It needed a long soak in warm water before anything could be done with it. Smaller amounts of water that you might usefully add to other hard soaps would quickly be absorbed and have no effect. Soaps like that are not for me.

Your comparison of Williams and VDH Luxury is fair once one learns how to lather a really hard soap like Williams. I use a boar, soak the brush in warm water for roughly a couple minutes and then build lather directly on the initially dry puck in my mug. Mitchell's Wool Fat (MWF), that is just as hard, works well the same way for me.

My other hard soaps, while still triple milled in many cases, are just not as hard and work with my softer synthetic brushes. These include Tabac (new formulation), Arko, Razorock What-the-Puck, my custom blends and Van Der Hagen. All of these are somewhat malleable (makes it easier to fit into a mug) compared with Williams and MWF which are rock hard.