I feel that Simpsons best badger offers something truly unique in terms of face feel and brush performance. This is not to exclude other makers that also produce brushes of this grade (e.g. Thater for Fendrihan?), nor to downplay the quality control issues that Simpsons has had in the past. Neither do I mean to say that best badger is any better than any other hair grade, for in this hobby/passion/obsession everything is a matter of personal preference. For the record, I have tried boars, synthetics (Plissofts & tuxedo style) and 2-bands and I enjoy them all for different reasons.
My first badger brush was the Simpsons Berkeley 46. I still really love this brush. For a small (20mm) brush, it is comfortable in the hand, plenty soft (for me) and makes wonderful and plentiful lather. However I personally find it splays too easily to properly 'scratch me where I itch', so I was looking for a model with more ample backbone. This led me to consider the Classic 2, Duke 3 and Chubby 1. I finally went with the latter based on density, knot focus & (expected) relative tip softness.
Here she be after a preliminary break in routine (shampoo, soak and overnight lather). Lost a few hairs, but I consider that normal.
First impressions are very positive. I have small/average size hands, and the handle is very comfortable for me. With its shorter (but wider) handle, it initially seemed a tad smaller than I expected, and the difference in density and knot size between these two brushes, while notable, is not as enormous as I expected.
Measurements are 24.2mm x 47.1mm. It hasn't bloomed out as wide as my Berkeley did due to the denser knot and shorter loft (50mm at the tips vs 52mm). It also has a slightly more bulbous knot shape (note CH1 is pre-bloom in comparison pic). Backbone appears plenty sufficient based on preliminary face feel when wet.
I really enjoy best badger grade, and this brush is definitely much closer to the kind of trade-off I was looking for in terms of softness vs scrubbiness. I see no reason to want more than this, but perhaps in time I would consider trying something bigger.
In a curious twist of fate, I ended up buying another of the same brush on the same day but in Super Badger and for less money. That brush will be arriving soon, and when it does and I have had the chance to properly compare the two, I will be sure to report back with my impressions.
Simpsons brushes are notoriously variable, and different models can be similar in many respects. Information also tends to be disparate and often contradictory, so it is not always easy to evaluate them and the differences between them. I hope this review will contribute in some meaningful way to the research of those of you who are interested in such things.
My first badger brush was the Simpsons Berkeley 46. I still really love this brush. For a small (20mm) brush, it is comfortable in the hand, plenty soft (for me) and makes wonderful and plentiful lather. However I personally find it splays too easily to properly 'scratch me where I itch', so I was looking for a model with more ample backbone. This led me to consider the Classic 2, Duke 3 and Chubby 1. I finally went with the latter based on density, knot focus & (expected) relative tip softness.
Here she be after a preliminary break in routine (shampoo, soak and overnight lather). Lost a few hairs, but I consider that normal.
First impressions are very positive. I have small/average size hands, and the handle is very comfortable for me. With its shorter (but wider) handle, it initially seemed a tad smaller than I expected, and the difference in density and knot size between these two brushes, while notable, is not as enormous as I expected.
Measurements are 24.2mm x 47.1mm. It hasn't bloomed out as wide as my Berkeley did due to the denser knot and shorter loft (50mm at the tips vs 52mm). It also has a slightly more bulbous knot shape (note CH1 is pre-bloom in comparison pic). Backbone appears plenty sufficient based on preliminary face feel when wet.
I really enjoy best badger grade, and this brush is definitely much closer to the kind of trade-off I was looking for in terms of softness vs scrubbiness. I see no reason to want more than this, but perhaps in time I would consider trying something bigger.
In a curious twist of fate, I ended up buying another of the same brush on the same day but in Super Badger and for less money. That brush will be arriving soon, and when it does and I have had the chance to properly compare the two, I will be sure to report back with my impressions.
Simpsons brushes are notoriously variable, and different models can be similar in many respects. Information also tends to be disparate and often contradictory, so it is not always easy to evaluate them and the differences between them. I hope this review will contribute in some meaningful way to the research of those of you who are interested in such things.
Last edited:
