Does this razor head exist?

[ambelare]

Metrics (see the attached image):

• Short free-end and clamp distances
• Short guard and cap spans
• Short blade gap
• Neutral or negative exposure

Effects:

• Maximize blade rigidity
• Require a non-trivial amount of pressure to cut
  
• Difficult to cause injuries with little pressure

Why pressure?

• A non-trivial amount of pressure is easier to keep constant than minimal pressure, particularly for motor-impaired individuals*
  
• Pressure causes skin to stretch between/around guard and/or cap, particularly useful for one-handed individuals
  
• Cutting forces (hair resistance) affect one's stroke less when handling the razor using higher pressure, particularly in combination with maximized blade rigidity

Does this razor head exist?
If not, is there any razor head that comes close? Any that work well with higher pressure?
Feel free to also state why you think this razor would be terrible.
* Think of how buttons, keyboard keys, joysticks or mice become difficult to use if their weight/resistance becomes too low.

 

[JWK1]

Karve. Plates AA, A, B. This fits your parameters perfectly.

 

[rabidus]

Feather ASD2 or Razorock DE1 comes to mind.

 

[hsbbs04]

Rockwell plate 1 or a late model tech would also serve your needs. Something like you picture would probably clog really easily. Also would probably want more blade bend so it would be possible to have the edge of the blade cut as opposed to scraping.

 

[Esox]

Welcome to the forum!

You seem to have a firm grasp on what you like and why. Its refreshing to see.

Metrics (see the attached image):

• Short free-end and clamp distances
• Short guard and cap spans
• Short blade gap
• Neutral or negative exposure

Yes, in a few iterations. The first one to my mind was the RazorRock Game Changer.

.68 gap.

.84 gap.

The Gillette Tech may also fit your specifics but it has very slightly positive blade exposure.

 

[ambelare]

Thanks for all your answers so far! Keep them coming!

As for right now, I'm not sure if I would actually like a razor as described. So, to get an idea if the concept is going in the direction I prefer, I'll consider the mentioned models based on budget and availability.

• Karve, Feather AS-D2: Noted for the future if the concept is really what I want.
• RazoRock DE1: Is this the same razor as the Baili BD176?
• Rockwell: I guess that is 6C or 6S? Noted for the future.
• RazoRock Game Changer: Is this the same razor as the Baili BD179?
  
• Gillette Tech: Is this comparable to the RazoRock Teck II, also known as Baili BD191?

The inexpensive Baili razors would be excellent to find out if I like the concept.

@hsbbs04: Absolutely right. I skipped the blade bend for simplicity and forgot to mention it. Regarding clogging, I tend to use oil only. Not sure if that helps with clogging.

@Esox: I don't have a firm grasp of what I like. But I've been lurking a lot and read, among others, "a few" posts by you, the other BOSC people and ShavingByTheNumbers. You've got me close to buying a Fatip Piccolo.

I secretly hoped you would find this thread. However, I expected you would at least mention your Fatip Grande because of its rigidity, short free-end distance, short blade gap and the possibility to apply a non-trivial amount of pressure if it's firmly resting on either the guard or cap. Am I remembering correctly that you do this to some degree (not sure whether on the guard or cap)?

You posted three pictures. The first is a Razorock Game Changer, the third a Gillette Tech, but what is the second?

 

[tankerjohn]

Merkur open comb

 

[Esox]

@Esox: I don't have a firm grasp of what I like. But I've been lurking a lot and read, among others, "a few" posts by you, the other BOSC people and ShavingByTheNumbers. You've got me close to buying a Fatip Piccolo.

I secretly hoped you would find this thread. However, I expected you would at least mention your Fatip Grande because of its rigidity, short free-end distance, short blade gap and the possibility to apply a non-trivial amount of pressure if it's firmly resting on either the guard or cap. Am I remembering correctly that you do this to some degree (not sure whether on the guard or cap)?

You posted three pictures. The first is a Razorock Game Changer, the third a Gillette Tech, but what is the second?

The first two pictures are the RR Game Changer showing the two options of blade gap, which also affect blade exposure.

I would have mentioned others, but you specified a neutral to negative blade exposure. The Gillette NEW SC, shown below, while also having a longer guard span distance, has positive blade exposure.

The Fatip while having a short guard span distance also has very generous blade exposure. The R41 also has a short guard span distance, but lacks sufficient base plate support for me. It may not for you however.

My Fatip Grande below. Green line showing the neutral design angle, the red line showing my angle of use with the cap pushed into my skin.

My R41 showing my angle of use.

My 1940 Gillette Regent shown below also has a short guard span distance with generous blade exposure. The same corresponding angles highlighted.

It has as much, if not more blade exposure than my Grande and R41 and it also lacks blade support so the blade can flex and chatter when I use it at other than the angle shown by the red line or shallower.

Another worth considering is the Gillette Old Type. I have a 1916 Single Ring, a made in Canada Gillette and a made in England clone.

L-R Single Ring, Canadian, Brit clone.



All have minimal blade gaps, with the Canadian having literally none. Guard span distance varies slightly as does blade exposure. All are smooth and efficient.

 

[jmudrick]

RRDE1/Teck II is same head as Baili BD176. No it is not the same as a Gillette Tech. The earlier Baili head was an English Tech clone.

Game Changer is unique to RR.

 

[ambelare]

@Esox A quick search mislead me to believe the RazoRock Game Changer was some Baili model. How does it produce two different gap sizes? I must be missing something.
I understand why you didn't mention the others at first. Glad you did now. I tried the Muhle R41. It was weird. I couldn't really feel whether my angle was adequate. Using the Fatip like you do, I might also struggle with this feeling of having only one contact point (beside the blade). Looking at these pictures with angles, I wonder if this might be my general issue with blade exposure. With neutral and especially negative exposure I have two contact points. Intriguing insight if true.

 

[jmudrick]

@Esox A quick search mislead me to believe the RazoRock Game Changer was some Baili model. How does it produce two different gap sizes? I must be missing something.
I understand why you didn't mention the others at first. Glad you did now. I tried the Muhle R41. It was weird. I couldn't really feel whether my angle was adequate. Using the Fatip like you do, I might also struggle with this feeling of having only one contact point (beside the blade). Looking at these pictures with angles, I wonder if this might be my general issue with blade exposure. With neutral and especially negative exposure I have two contact points. Intriguing insight if true.

There are two different Game Changer models.

 

[ambelare]

@jmudrick Thanks for the clarifications!

I'd love to have a table to look up all those "different name, same razor" cases. This still confuses me a lot. Depending on the country, some brands are also easier to get than others.

 

[Esox]

I understand why you didn't mention the others at first. Glad you did now. I tried the Muhle R41. It was weird. I couldn't really feel whether my angle was adequate. Using the Fatip like you do, I might also struggle with this feeling of having only one contact point (beside the blade). Looking at these pictures with angles, I wonder if this might be my general issue with blade exposure. With neutral and especially negative exposure I have two contact points. Intriguing insight if true.

The more blade exposure a razor has, the wider the window of operating angles. As blade exposure decreases, so does that window of operational angles.

The R41 is capable of giving a very good shave, it has for me. I dont particularly like how it feels or the fact that a razor with so much blade exposure needs so many passes in very specific directions to get an easy and smooth shave. Its far easier to me to use my Grande and have a quicker, easier more secure feeling shave.

Neither my Fatip or R41 shave any closer than the other. Its just the road to the same end is different. I rarely like the scenic route.

Finding and maintaining such a shallow angle is easier with more blade exposure. If my NEW SC had the same amount of blade exposure as my Grande, I may not own a Fatip. Because it has only a little positive blade exposure, combined with the large guard span distance, maintaining that very fine effective shallow angle I found very difficult. I can do it, but the finish was patchy with some areas shaved closer than others. My Grande is far easier to use, just as rigid and has even less gap so for me, its an even more comfortable shave.

Blade gaps. Grande left, NEW SC right.



I prefer less gap. As my skin travels through the gap, even the modest .023" of the SC, beyond 3 passes I get irritation. As gap decreases, so does my irritation level and it takes longer for my skin to become irritated. Using my Grande and a Kai blade, even four full passes ATG and a clean up I had zero irritation. Kai blades are .008" wider too. .004" of added blade exposure per side of a DE is considerable.

Finding what works the best for you, or anyone else, comes only through trial and error, assuming you find reason too. In the end, it is worth the effort given.

 

[romsitsa]

It doesn’t exist, the closest would be a cartrige head with one blade. But I’d be intrested how it would work if you build a proto.

Good luck!

Adam

 

[ambelare]

After the discussion so far, it seems there are at least two ways I could proceed to find what I like:

1. positive blade exposure + pressure on one contact point
2. negative (maybe neutral?) blade exposure + pressure on two contact points

I'm trying to work out an available, budget-friendly way to test these. It doesn't need to be the perfect choice immediately, but it should tell me whether I'm going into the right direction or not (divide and conquer).

For variant 1, the obvious choice is the Fatip Piccolo. Available and inexpensive.

For variant 2, I'm still at a loss. The mentioned RazoRock DE1, RazoRock Teck II and Baili BD176? Anything more fitting? (These might not fulfill the original rigidity constraint, but maybe it'd be okay using the two contact points variant.)

@romsitsa I'll let you know when I enter the razor business with my prototype, but it's better not to hold your breath.

 

[rabidus]

You can place a shim between the cap and blade, it should decrease blade exposure on any razor. Make sure the shim is as wide as the cap. Add as many shims as you desire.

 

[Esox]

For variant 2, I'm still at a loss.

I think the RR DE1/Teck II is a good choice. As rabidus said above, you can always shim it to increase the gap.

In the end you may even find its all the razor you need, but with the milder razors, technique is just as important as with more efficient razors like a Fatip, they're just more forgiving of simple missteps. Master one and it will give the same shave as any other, if perhaps, not as quickly.

 

[ambelare]

Thanks, @tankerjohn, for mentioning Merkur open combs. If I'm not missing something, they match all my original constraints closely. To me, their side view looks very similar to a Fatip/R41 with negative exposure.

Shave Like Grandad: Analysis of the Merkur 15C Open-Comb Razor Design

I just now realized that the open comb design allows for the metrics I mentioned in my original post. A closed comb that close to the blade might cause clogging issues, maybe that's why closed combs are often (always?) removed from the blade. Being removed from the blade, they cannot support the blade as well as open combs that keep in contact with the blade almost to the edge.

I haven't found a (good) side view of the Parker 24C. It might be similar to the Merkur open combs.

So, Fatip Piccolo for one-point-contact trial and Merkur 15C/41C (maybe Parker 24C/26C) for two-point-contact trial?

(There don't seem to be any exceptionally cheap open combs with the mentioned features.)

 

[skibik]

I thought it was my understanding that the Piccolo was an aggressive razor so wouldn't you consider that positive blade exposure? I have no experience with Razorock but as mentioned raise the cap by placing shims between the blade and cap, that should give you a negative blade exposure. I have done the opposite and made a more aggressive razor such as my Tech by placing a couple shims between the base plate and blade.

 

[Esox]

Another alternative: RazoRock OLD TYPE Open Comb DE Safety Razor – ItalianBarber