Yes, but the Gillette adjustable razors we now call Fatboy and Slim were inspired in no small part by the Gibbs adjustable, which came considerably earlier. Without the iconic Gillette adjustables, I doubt there would be any Rex Ambassador. There isn't much need to duplicate the Slim, as original examples are plentiful, and can be refurbished and rhodium plated, if luxury bling is your thing.
Gillette Fatboy/Slim adjustable - can they still compete with today razors?
- Thread starter IoanPop
- Start date
Compete? I'd reckon outperforms. It shaves beautifully, it's plated in gold and it's 62 years old. If you don't get it I can't help you. Ask me again how your "modern" razor is doing in 60 years...
After using it one time, I would say
Yes
Yes
I wouldn't say any of the Gillette's adjustables are a clone of the Gibs. They operate entirely differently. The Ambassador operates exactly like a Gibbs.
Edit to say I also do not think that's a bad thing. I finally got myself a Gibbs clone. Great design and razor.
Last edited:
Also to add, adjustability has always been in Gillette's mindset from the very beginning. Their marketing for the little twist back for a more efficient shave was around with the original double and single ring razors.
Eclipse Red Ring did that as well.
Berkeley razors did so as well with a spring plate in there.
All the way to the modern PAA Ascension twist.
Gibbs are great but adjustable safety razors have always been around since the beginning of safety razors.
Eclipse Red Ring did that as well.
Berkeley razors did so as well with a spring plate in there.
All the way to the modern PAA Ascension twist.
Gibbs are great but adjustable safety razors have always been around since the beginning of safety razors.
Last edited:
I remember someone saying that the Gibbs razors were super inexpensive in the past and were rarely seen to cost more than $100 even in great condition, but after the Rex Ambassador was released and people learned that the razor was inspired by the Gibbs, it didn't take long before people started looking into it and the prices skyrocketed.
There are plenty of obscure vintage brands that didn't make a lot of razors, but because of a couple of people spreading the word here and there and the prices start rising to the roof. I'm glad that I was able to get hold of most vintage razors I wanted also managed to get them at a ''fair'' price with a couple of exceptions, but after trying a good number of modern razors, I just don't see myself spending more than $100 on a vintage razor anymore, unless it's something very nice of course.
One of the few remaining vintage razors that I wanted to add is the rhodium Gillette Executive, but even the caseless and beaten ones that require new plating can rarely be seen for less than $120-$150. That's just crazy.
Yes, a higher end product and design than the inexpensive Gillette. That was obvious when I tried the Rex. But you are talking like an expert hobbyist. They are basically the same -- an adjustable razor with numbers indicating the different settings. That was the idea Gillette adopted and after some false starts made into the Slim.
I'm not sure Gillette adopted how to count from Gibbs.
The entire collectables space, not just razors, has gone bonkers the past 3 years.
I do have to say though the '49/'50 Executive is amazing. Most of my vintage Gillette razors I bought pre that time. I think I paid around $75 for mine. Now I have to be much more selective and have started looking outside the Gillette space.
Like the Segal. Now that is a fun razor. But you've said it in another thread it's cheap because people don't want to hack up blades. For me that was part of the fun.
Pretty obvious after the fact, isn't it? At least Gillette can be credited as the first to come up with a cheap, mass-produced adjustable that sold in the millions and worked forever. And is now an iconic symbol of the 60s. Though they had a few false starts making that happen.
I would not so much as say false starts. They put a lot of effort into engineering, test marketing, studies, and cost benefit analysis. If they wanted too they could have just pushed the bottom dial into the market and have been done with it. They would have still sold millions of them.
They still probably would have ended up with the slim. And eventually the super. And cost cutting from there until the demise of the safety razor. The toggle was actually successful but cost more for them to make vs the $1.95 "Fatboy" and phased it out. The Red Dot didn't last because people didn't want to spend the extra buck for it.
The bottom dial never really made it past test groups and test markets. If anything was a failure it was that but I still wouldn't call it a failure on Gillette's part as they successfully found what the market wanted and didn't want.
The Gillette Adjustable or 195 Adjustable was essentially a perfected design.
The Slim or Gillette Adjustable Mk II was merely a cleaned up design, which attempted to cut weight (although not by much), lengthened the handle and made it slightly thinner. The head also was made slightly lower.
I find the Gillette Adjustable to actually suit my ergonomic requirements slightly better than the Mk II. I prefer the shorter handle, and I find it is balanced slightly better, thought this is just a personal thing. Both are superb designs.
I think the Gibbs was a niche design in terms of what Gillette were trying to compete with and saw as a potential threat specifically in the European market. I suspect the target of the Gillette Adjustable was the Merkur Progress which was introduced in 1955-6 which was being exported to the US market at the time.
The Gillette Adjustable on settings 6-9 is actually remarkably similar to the Progress, and was the highest blade gaps that were ever attempted by Gillette for DE designs. This continued with their later adjustables.
Double-Edged Safety Razors Ranked by Blade Gap - https://www.badgerandblade.com/forum/wiki/Double-Edged_Safety_Razors_Ranked_by_Blade_Gap
Last edited:
I'd like to also think that they wanted to get back to adjustability shortly after they started down the TTO path. No longer were they able to say their razors were adjustable with a simple twist. The blue and red tips tried to fill a gap but their single piece adjustables fulfilled their dreams.
Things develop over time just like with the Old Types where Gillette learned that the teeth bend and break and the hollow handles crack very easy. Or when they've made their first TTO, the 34 Aristocrat. Those models had a lot of issues that were solved over time and that's normal. You can't expect a company to come up with their fully functional and upgraded model with their first release. Like Matt from Razor Emporium likes to say, that's like Apple releasing Iphone 10 at the very start as their first model.
Yes, but never mind all that technical talk, or your fancy French and German razors. Gillette reached the summit with that 60s Life Magazine photo essay featuring Frank Sinatra shaving with his Slim. Period.
- Thread starter
- #96
Because I want to expand my little Gillette Universe: Can a Gillette Super Speed be considered a Gillette adjustable “stucked” on whatever settings? What would be the difference between a Gillette Super Speed “flare tip” and a Gillette Super Speed black handle in terms of shaving experience?
I think they are considered to be equal and share the same head with the same blade gap and blade exposure. The weight of the handles might have a slight effect on overall performance, but if the heads are indeed the same, then that's all that it matters.
I don't think there is a consensus as to what is the best Gillette razor. But in my opinion, there are quite a few that are better (meaning more efficient & smoother) than the Fat Boy or Slim. Some of my preferred Gillette razors are:
1934 Aristocrat
RFB
Goodwill #160
1934 Aristocrat
RFB
Goodwill #160
Razorock has a clone also.
Similar threads
