Growing Gillette TTO razors!

[Goatrope]

I have several vintage Gillette TTO safety razors and thought it seemed like the size of them got bigger over time when each new model was produced. So, I decided to line them up for comparison, and sure enough, they did get bigger with each successive model.

Left to right: 1941 Ranger Tech, 1959 Fat Boy, 1962 Slim Adjustable, and 1973 Super 84 adjustable. The Super 109 was even taller, of course.


The 1941 Ranger Tech is 82mm tall and the Super 84 is 95mm tall. I don't own a Super Speed (circa late '40's - early '50's), so it's missing from this comparison.

The Ranger Tech seems almost 'petite' compared to the Super 84 at the other end of the spectrum.

Just thought you all might find this interesting.

 

[lasta]

And the trend continues. 85mm is considered medium-short by modern standards.

Human fingers must be getting longer.

 

[Goatrope]

I have average size hands, but I actually prefer short heavy handles. Thus, the Ranger Tech & FB seem to 'fit' my grasping technique better, whereas the slim and super adjustable handles tend to get in the way for the way I shave. In spite of that, I will probably hang on to the latter two, just because I appreciate the old school Gillette engineering and enjoy the way they look.

 

[CCS]

I think my glove size is 8.5 and I prefer shorter handles in the 3"ish range.

 

[HazMat Shaver]

I enjoy the first two myself. Longer handles are fine but not needed in my opinion

 

[luvmysuper]

Some minor issues with the assumption.
The Super Speed from the 80's is virtually identical in size to the 1941 Ranger Tech, so that kind of takes it out of the picture as a starting point.
So if we limit it to Adjustables, it works except:
The Toggle came out by 1957 and was considerably taller than the Fat Boy that came out in 1958 and even taller than the Slim which came out after the Fatboy.

 

[Frank Discussion]

I find the handles on my ball end handled Techs and TTO flare tip razors to be the right length for my hand.

From left to right: 2020 Wilkinson Sword TTO, 1951 Gillette Tech, 1954 Gillette flare tip, 2021 Assurance for Men Dollar Tree TTO

I find the Wilkinson Sword razor is long but heavy and still comfortable to use.

 

[Goatrope]

Some minor issues with the assumption.
The Super Speed from the 80's is virtually identical in size to the 1941 Ranger Tech, so that kind of takes it out of the picture as a starting point.
So if we limit it to Adjustables, it works except:
The Toggle came out by 1957 and was considerably taller than the Fat Boy that came out in 1958 and even taller than the Slim which came out after the Fatboy.

Thanks for clarifying @luvmysuper. I knew someone else would fill in details that I may have overlooked.

 

[dmshaver]

And don't forget the true short ones like the Travel Tech or Milady Decollete.

 

[RayClem]

I have XL hands and dislike razors with 3" handles. One of the first DE razors I purchased was a Van der Hagen (Weishi) TTO razor with a 3" handle and overall height of 85 mm. I no longer use it. However, I have the same razor with a 4" handle and overall height of 110 mm. I use the second razor almost every day for my final shave pass.

For 3-piece razors, my favorite handles are 3 1/2 " in length. The reason I like the handles on a TTO razor to be longer is to avoid the open/close knob at the bottom.

 

[Medivh]

I think the way everyone holds the razor is unique to him as well as his preference for the size, weight and shape of the handles. I think the size of my hands is either average or slightly above average with a little bit thicker fingers and I find medium size handles much better.

I hold the razor with three and sometimes with four fingers and I really don't understand how folks who find 80-90mm handles too small hold those razors. Maybe some folks grab their razors with full hand, who knows?

Anyway, use what you like and what works for you.

 

[luvmysuper]

I think the way everyone holds the razor is unique to him as well as his preference for the size, weight and shape of the handles. I think the size of my hands is either average or slightly above average with a little bit thicker fingers and I find medium size handles much better.

I hold the razor with three and sometimes with four fingers and I really don't understand how folks who find 80-90mm handles too small hold those razors. Maybe some folks grab their razors with full hand, who knows?

Anyway, use what you like and what works for you.

I need really long handles because I hold my razors with two hands like a baseball bat.

 

[luvmysuper]

I've been searching without success for this long handled razor.

 

[Medivh]

I need really long handles because I hold my razors with two hands like a baseball bat.

I think you're a perfect candidate for a lightsaber. Shaving with a straight razor is dangerous, because you might cut yourself or your ear? Amateurs! You can cut your whole head if you do the slightest mistake while shaving with a lightsaber. This takes the ''I'm a very skilled shaver'' to a whole different level.

 

[ctr]

And the trend continues. 85mm is considered medium-short by modern standards.

Human fingers must be getting longer.

...or fatter.

 

[Blasthoff]

I've been searching without success for this long handled razor.

View attachment 1539403
View attachment 1539404

I was going to make a joke about handles not being too long as long as you're not poking yourself in the eye. Then I saw THIS picture!! I think that is a garden tool!! That or it's designed for shaving the tongue down to the tonsils!!!

 

[BigJ]

I have several vintage Gillette TTO safety razors and thought it seemed like the size of them got bigger over time when each new model was produced. So, I decided to line them up for comparison, and sure enough, they did get bigger with each successive model.

Left to right: 1941 Ranger Tech, 1959 Fat Boy, 1962 Slim Adjustable, and 1973 Super 84 adjustable. The Super 109 was even taller, of course.
View attachment 1538616

The 1941 Ranger Tech is 82mm tall and the Super 84 is 95mm tall. I don't own a Super Speed (circa late '40's - early '50's), so it's missing from this comparison.

The Ranger Tech seems almost 'petite' compared to the Super 84 at the other end of the spectrum.

Just thought you all might find this interesting.

Great line-up!!