Gillette Tech: Pre-war Vs. Post-war shaves

[Timeclo]

I was not a big fan of Gillette Tech at first because of its mildness but the more I shave with it, the more I enjoy it. It is still mild and needs buffing but it gives me a comfortable shave without the extra redness and irritation. I only had couple of post-war techs to shave with so I've been meaning to pick up a pre-war tech. I saw reviews saying that pre-war tech is more efficient and some people prefer it over the post, so I got one to try out.

SOTD - 28 NOV 2020

I did a full shave with the Pre-war tech yesterday. My finding was that it felt mild and felt same or similar to the post-war tech. Still did a good job.

Today's shave, I switched the blade after half a pass and shaved the other half of my face. My finding was that they felt very similar. I could not really tell a difference between the two but they both shaved well. Just a slight bit of blade feel to know it's cutting and my neck needed some buffing. However, the result was very close DFS without any redness or irritation. Finished the shave with alum and Brut and I was good to go.

In conclusion, in my two shaves, I couldn't tell any difference between the two techs. However, they both shaved well so I'll be keeping them. (I also enjoy the look of the Bakelite handle).

What has your experience been with Gillette Techs, pre-war and post-war?

 

[emwolf]

I wouldn't say there's a dramatic difference either. The one I felt a dramatic change was the flat bottom tech.

 

[Timeclo]

I wouldn't say there's a dramatic difference either. The one I felt a dramatic change was the flat bottom tech.

I heard that too. FBT seems like a rarity though.. I've seen maybe one in the postings going for quite a bit.

 

[never-stop-learning]

Congratulations on getting a nice Pre-war Tech. The Pre- and Post-war Techs are very similar, indeed

Small differences, in my opinion:

Pre-war has more audible feedback and seems to shave a bit closer.

Post-war has better blade support and control.

Both are in my rotation. Both are great razors that are very capable of great results.

YMMV

 

[Quaznoid]

I get a better shave w the postwar.

 

[GR5233]

I have both prewar and postwar techs and I can’t tell a difference between them. They both give excellent shaves

 

[ponykilr]

I don’t own any anymore, but the pre was slightly more efficient and close. It was closer than the 50s tech and the British Flat Bottom to me.

 

[Kyle89]

That's actually really good to know. Thanks for doing that and posting about it.

Dude I LOVE your razors.

 

[santamariasteve]

The pre-war Gillette Tech is slightly more aggressive and efficient. I have tough "old man" whiskers.

 

[Spang]

Like you, upon first trying the Tech I thought it was inefficient; too much so for my taste. That was fairly early in my DE experience, and I've since come to my senses. I enjoy the Tech now. I find it plenty efficient and easily get close comfortable shaves with it. As for pre-war and post war, I have and use both and I can't perceive any significant difference. I know that there is a lot of informed opinion that the pre-war is a bit more aggressive and efficient, but I honestly can't tell the difference.

 

[luv2shave]

This tech compare might probably be the most discussed topic here at B&B after the can-you-or-can-you-not lather modern Williams !

My two cents - I like the triangular slots techs better due to the blade feel

 

[Benzadmiral]

Never tried a pre-war; I suppose I need to hunt one up. The bakelite handle looks cool.

My postwars are both superb shaving tools -- no irritation, no trouble, just a clean face.

 

[NPK]

Pre-war has more audible feedback and seems to shave a bit closer.

Post-war has better blade support and control.

I found these two point to describe my findings as well, especially the second point. For me I found feel the blade resonating as I drew it across my face. Whereas the post war had none of that and held very firm.

My brother likes the pre-war because it is slightly more aggressive and the triangular slots move the spent whisker filled lather away from the blade better leading to less clogs. I never had an issue in that regard however.

I have tried both and much prefer the post-war and only have them.

 

[kingfisher]

What do you feel is the difference between the shave of the flat-bottom Tech versus that of the others? Just curious.

 

[BigJ]

Never owned a pre-war, but the post-war versions I have tried were very comfortable shavers!

 

[Chaucer]

I use a pre-War Tech with the wide handle and a 1970 Tech with ball-end handle. There isn't a lot of difference, but. if I had to choose between them, I'd choose the pre-War version of the head. It seems a bit more agile and efficient without losing any of the smoothness. I'm not sure which handle I would choose.

As for the Flat Bottom Tech, I had one and sold it. For me, it was less smooth and no more efficient than either of my other Techs. Others love them, and good for them!

I still haven't found a Hybrid Tech, in the wild or otherwise. I'd really like to try one.

 

[Umma2gumma]

I have a 1960 Post-War and just used a triangular slots Pre-War.

The Pre-War is certainly noticeably more aggressive and efficient. Still feels mild, as the audible feedback is muted and the blade feel is subdued (compared to my modern razors). But it's a very close shaver, especially compared to the post-war.

 

[packtray]

I have only one: it's an issue WW2 model. I like using it, but I don't like that it seems more finicky on blades than, say, my '49 Super Speed.

 

[JackDuggan]

I prefer the pre-war/wartime with the triangle slots. The postwar version seems milder to me. I usually only do a one pass shave so I usually either use the pre-war tech or the old style WWI open comb thin cap. The WWI version was designed for different, thicker, blades so with modern blades I have to be careful, but it gives me a great one pass shave. If I don't feel like taking my time and being careful I'll use the Tech.