Is there a Q date code?
- Thread starter sodajerk
- Start date
To me this looks like an "O" with a pit nearby. This may be why Gillette didn't use "Q" - it's hard to disambiguate.
I thought there were a few Super Adjustables with date code Q?
That looks like an "O" to me. IIRC, "Q" was not used so as to avoid confusion.
Unless, of course, this guy was involved somehow:
Unless, of course, this guy was involved somehow:
I mis-remembered. But now I re-remember that the Supers had date codes of O and P.
That would be fascinating.
Here's a related thread: http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?p=2074460
http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?t=22519 suggests that there may have been a short run. I'd like to see more examples.
So I mis-mis-remembered. After all.
I think I may have had one that I sold off a while back-- I had two really nice ones, one was date code P. The only thing is, I didn't think that Gillette was still making these in 1971.
Not only is the Q hard to read but deleting it leaves 25 letters 1/4 of a century.
- Thread starter
- #9
I'm really curious how you found those posts. I searched for Q date code and came up empty handed! (
I was looking for an answer because I'm about to list it on BST and want to be sure it is described properly.
Interesting. The picture at the beginning of the thread definitely looks like a Q to me, and I've seen a similar picture on an eBay listing (no I don't have the link, although I believe it's over, and would post it if I had it). I don't know the answer, but it's just another reminder not to be too certain about anything.
My secret is to ignore the built-in search function. It is a waste of time. Here's what I used:
http://google.com/search?q=site:badgerandblade.com+date+code+Q+super+adjustable
Good point, Bob.
I also have a Q1 date coded adjustable that looks identical to the one in the first photo. Considering that, I think they did make Q1 dated coded razors for a short period of time. Probably very rare and worth $1000s. 
Beav, thanks for that picture. Zooming in on both pictures, it bothers me that the down-stroke on the "Q" is so short. It looks shorter than the top-stroke on the "1", and I feel like it ought to be at least as long. But it could be a "Q", and the story about a short run of mistakes does make sense.
I wonder if any of our resident experts will chime in? I'd love to hear what Achim has to say.
I wonder if any of our resident experts will chime in? I'd love to hear what Achim has to say.
CFM listed a "Q" code a few months ago, claimed it was used for only a few months.
Well, when I bought mine a few weeks ago I wasn't sure if it was a Q or an O. Guess I should get a loop and see what it looks like under magnification. Anyway, I have no idea why the stroke is so short unless it was to compensate for being so close to the handle.
I'd like to hear from Achim as well.
Both of those look like a "Q" to me.
Curious.
They all seem to be Q1, never a Q2, and dings in precisely the same place.
Starting to look less like coincidental damage and more like an actual letter.
edit: by 'all', I mean the ones pictured above, and the one that appeared on eBay
They all seem to be Q1, never a Q2, and dings in precisely the same place.
Starting to look less like coincidental damage and more like an actual letter.
edit: by 'all', I mean the ones pictured above, and the one that appeared on eBay
Last edited:
This was a clear Q on a British razor
http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?t=100014&highlight=date+code+british
http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php?t=100014&highlight=date+code+british
Similar threads
