As some of you know, I’m not a fan of the Mach 3. My theory is that the placement of the pivot, at the base instead of the middle, makes for poorer shaves. I consistently get better shaves from my Sensor Excel than from my Mach 3. Still, my theory was just an assumption. I had conducted no tests to see if it were so.
That changed over a week ago. I was about to buy a bag of Gillette Sensor 2 disposable for a trip when I thought about the Sensor 3 disposables. These are the disposable version of the old Sensor 3 cartridges for the Gillette Sensor. Think Gillette Sensor Excel with an extra blade. I don’t get as good of a shaves out of the Gillette twin blade disposables as I do the Sensor Excel, and really don’t like them that much, so why not? I could test my theory and maybe get better shaves than I usually do with a disposable.
The Sensor 3 disposable compares well with the Mach 3. Both have three blades, a skin stretcher at the bottom, and a lubrication strip at the top. The color of the Sensor 3 strip is orange, making me think of some cartridges made overseas. The handle also gave me that impression Sure enough, these were made in Brazil. The blades looked like the ones in the Sensor/Sensor Excel cartridge. The pivot is on the sides in the middle, just like the Sensor. Other than the pivot point, the Sensor 3 disposable is practically the same as the Mach 3. I think we can safely attribute any difference in performance to the difference in pivot point. Little to no difference means the location of the pivot point doesn’t matter..
My face prep was the same as a “quick shave” with the Mach 3: Wash my face with hot water; apply regular Barbasol shaving cream, then shave. I noticed a difference with the very first stroke. The Sensor 3 disposable gave me a much better shave than the Mach 3. This held true for the remainder of the shave. I had a closer shave compared to the Mach 3, with less irritation. I continued to use the same razor for six days, and each shave was better than the Mach 3.
This has to be due to the different pivot point. Placing the pivot at the middle of the sides automatically places all three blades perpendicular to the face and evenly distributes pressure. A base mount gives the cartridge a tendency to tilt like a gate hinge, with the bottom blade closer to the face than the top one, and uneven pressure between blades.
That base mount pivot point is why I think I don’t get as good a shave from the Mach 3 as from the Sensor Excel. That doesn’t mean you can’t shave with the thing, just that it doesn’t shave as well as it would with a center pivot point.
Surely Gillette knows this. Gillette had a better solution with the Sensor 3, and could have fiddled with the handles if they wanted to phase it out, just as they did when they moved from the Atra to the Sensor. Nor do I see how it could have made for lower manufacturing costs.
I wonder what a Fusion would be like with a center mount. But, given my results with the Sensor 3 disposable, there wouldn’t be a compelling reason to try more blades. Would not be surprised if that’s why they moved away from center pivots in the first place.
That changed over a week ago. I was about to buy a bag of Gillette Sensor 2 disposable for a trip when I thought about the Sensor 3 disposables. These are the disposable version of the old Sensor 3 cartridges for the Gillette Sensor. Think Gillette Sensor Excel with an extra blade. I don’t get as good of a shaves out of the Gillette twin blade disposables as I do the Sensor Excel, and really don’t like them that much, so why not? I could test my theory and maybe get better shaves than I usually do with a disposable.
The Sensor 3 disposable compares well with the Mach 3. Both have three blades, a skin stretcher at the bottom, and a lubrication strip at the top. The color of the Sensor 3 strip is orange, making me think of some cartridges made overseas. The handle also gave me that impression Sure enough, these were made in Brazil. The blades looked like the ones in the Sensor/Sensor Excel cartridge. The pivot is on the sides in the middle, just like the Sensor. Other than the pivot point, the Sensor 3 disposable is practically the same as the Mach 3. I think we can safely attribute any difference in performance to the difference in pivot point. Little to no difference means the location of the pivot point doesn’t matter..
My face prep was the same as a “quick shave” with the Mach 3: Wash my face with hot water; apply regular Barbasol shaving cream, then shave. I noticed a difference with the very first stroke. The Sensor 3 disposable gave me a much better shave than the Mach 3. This held true for the remainder of the shave. I had a closer shave compared to the Mach 3, with less irritation. I continued to use the same razor for six days, and each shave was better than the Mach 3.
This has to be due to the different pivot point. Placing the pivot at the middle of the sides automatically places all three blades perpendicular to the face and evenly distributes pressure. A base mount gives the cartridge a tendency to tilt like a gate hinge, with the bottom blade closer to the face than the top one, and uneven pressure between blades.
That base mount pivot point is why I think I don’t get as good a shave from the Mach 3 as from the Sensor Excel. That doesn’t mean you can’t shave with the thing, just that it doesn’t shave as well as it would with a center pivot point.
Surely Gillette knows this. Gillette had a better solution with the Sensor 3, and could have fiddled with the handles if they wanted to phase it out, just as they did when they moved from the Atra to the Sensor. Nor do I see how it could have made for lower manufacturing costs.
I wonder what a Fusion would be like with a center mount. But, given my results with the Sensor 3 disposable, there wouldn’t be a compelling reason to try more blades. Would not be surprised if that’s why they moved away from center pivots in the first place.