What's new

My Giant Tech comparison thread

Brass is a copper-zinc/nickel alloy so my understanding is that the brass at the various manufacturing plants may have had different copper contents whereby some had a more copper color than brass.

With some Gillette gold plated razors, If you see a copper cap, it could be the gold plating has worn or been polished off. I am no expert but have been researching vintage Gillettes some so please anyone, correct me if I am wrong.

I agree.

I have Gillettes where the top cap is mostly gold with a little copper showing,
or half gold with the rest copper showing,
or all copper except for the gold concealed parts.


DSCN1506b.jpg


From left to right:

1950's Tech
New Long Comb
Goodwill 160
New Short Comb
Pre War Tech
another Goodwill 160
 
Last edited:
I've read somewhere that the gold plated etched logo caps were Zamack -- is that a myth/misinformation? The seller told me this would be a Zamack cap but I thought zamack wasn't until the '64 and later carved logo caps?
That question had been burning in my mind too as the information about when zamak caps entered the line is spotty. Based on my research, the caps that have a sharp ridge on the underside of the cap are zamak. The ridge and grey dust on the threads where the plating has worn off are indicative of cast zinc products. The plain brass caps of prewar Techs have a smooth radius on the underside of the caps. Based on my findings, the etched caps are zamak/zinc (see below). The caps with the beveled ends and embossed or relief "Gillette" are also zamak with that information more readily available.

IMG_7380.jpg


I decided to sacrifice this etched cap from a supposed 1950s Tech, as the threads were in tough shape. Before I cut it, I carved out a corner with a utility knife which produced the telltale silver base metal. At that point I was shocked and needed to proceed to more destructive investigative methods. It was super tough to cut and the fact that it had lasted this long gives me a better appreciation for zamak. But I would prefer the brass caps if giving a choice.
 
Last edited:
Great thread from the OP! Good comparison and information. Thanks for putting that together.

That question had been burning in my mind too as the information about when zamak caps entered the line is spotty. Based on my research, the caps that have a sharp ridge on the underside of the cap are zamak. The ridge and grey dust on the threads where the plating has worn off are indicative of cast zinc products. The plain brass caps of prewar Techs have a smooth radius on the underside of the caps. Based on my findings, the etched caps are zamak/zinc (see below). The caps with the beveled ends and embossed or relief "Gillette" are also zamak with that information more readily available.

I believe you are right. I’ve been looking at a lot of images, eBay, etsy, elsewhere - and when you can get good pictures of the threaded area on the cap, and see that wear that indicates it’s zamak, so far, always has that ridge, and they were all the frosted etched top surface.

I have a mid 1950s tech with the same zamak cap. Has the ridge, and of course some areas where the plating wore off and the gray dust. Threads are on the start of going bad, would have to be protected somehow from here on out. I’ll use it until it’s no good anymore, the other parts are just fine and will fit on others.
 
Were the contract techs zamack top caps too? My black cap contractor tech is awfully zamack looking in the worn out areas
 
Contract Tech handles are a pot metal if I'm not mistaken. They're cast something.
That's an interesting point Doug.

That would be the fluted ball end handled ones?

Maybe any CT owners could chime in on that.

The survivability rate of those CT handles seems suprisingly good for 77-78 year old zamak, also the shape of the castings seem quite elaborate for the time and the quality of zamak?

Not doubting your point just thinking out loud.
 

nemo

Lunatic Fringe
Staff member
Here's my contractor tech. I had assumed the handle and top cap were zamak by the look of it and the bottom plate brass pre-war tech part.

I'm also curious why they had a S stamped under the bottom plate

View attachment 1666874
I've heard of Zamak top caps on contract techs and yours seems to be one with that white metal showing through.
I'll do a test someday (non-destructive!) on some of mine.
Handles are definitely pressure cast zinc alloy although I've heard there are some rare brass ones.

The S is for Service (wartime issue)

That would be the fluted ball end handled ones?
Yes, I just checked a couple in the museum -- zamak. They have a whitish color and tell-tale gray powder inside on the threads. No verdigris where there's worn plating.
 
I've heard of Zamak top caps on contract techs and yours seems to be one with that white metal showing through.
I'll do a test someday (non-destructive!) on some of mine.
Handles are definitely pressure cast zinc alloy although I've heard there are some rare brass ones.

The S is for Service (wartime issue)


Yes, I just checked a couple in the museum -- zamak. They have a whitish color and tell-tale gray powder inside on the threads. No verdigris where there's worn plating.
Greatly appreciated Doug.

Thanks for advancing my knowledge as always.

B&B and it's folks are world class in knowledge and above all courtesy!
 
Last edited:
Here's my contractor tech. I had assumed the handle and top cap were zamak by the look of it and the bottom plate brass pre-war tech part.

I'm also curious why they had a S stamped under the bottom plate

View attachment 1666874

I have one much like that.
It has the triangular holes by the safety bar.
The top cap on mine shows copper plating at the ends.
The middle of the top of the cap is obviously dished.
No S on the bottom of mine.
 
I guess I can ask here, I got a 1970s English Tech and it's a fine razor, it's very light and obviously in the budget category. It shaves okay, but it's a tad too mild for me. So I searched the depths of Youtube and found a video which claims that certain Techs had a slightly bigger blade gap, meaning they were more aggressive.

Now, he said that the English made Tech with an aluminum handle and baseplate had that bigger gap. So I was wondering can someone confirm that info? Much appreciated :)
 
I guess I can ask here, I got a 1970s English Tech and it's a fine razor, it's very light and obviously in the budget category. It shaves okay, but it's a tad too mild for me. So I searched the depths of Youtube and found a video which claims that certain Techs had a slightly bigger blade gap, meaning they were more aggressive.

Now, he said that the English made Tech with an aluminum handle and baseplate had that bigger gap. So I was wondering can someone confirm that info? Much appreciated :)
Here is a series of posts discussing this, with some examples measured. Courtesy of the inimitable @Rosseforp

I have two Tech's:
A post-war Gold ball end and a Silver ball end of the same era. I've shaved with them and put them both away. They are way to mild for my taste and require at least 3 passes to get any efficiency. For Gillette's, the winners for me are the Super Speed's & the adjustables. They do what I need in 2 passes! But I see that many love their Tech's!
I yet to try a pre-war Tech though which I've heard are slightly more aggressive and more efficient. I'm sure at some point I'll get one!
As @Alum Ladd says below, the English Flat Bottom Tech is completely different from all other techs. Get one.
Go for an English Flat Bottom. A different animal. Mild but extremely efficient.

Recently got a 1948 example and am totally blown away by it's performance, completely different to other Techs I've tried.

I have heard that Techs were made in .020, .025 and 0.30" blade gaps. Seems to depend on period. The 38-50(?) were 0.30", the 50's models went to .025" and there is complete confusion from then, with individual countries production diverging, the mildest gap seeming to dominate. Interesting info if true.
Here is a list of my Tech's with gaps, weights, and what I paid for them.

47 English Flat Bottom Tech
Cap-12.2g Baseplate-13.2g C&P-25.6 Handle-24.9g Total-50.5g
Gap= .028" $ Gift from Cal $

67 English Tech
Cap-10.2g Baseplate-10.2g C&P-20.4 Handle-11.5g Total-32g
Gap= .026" $ PIF from Mawashi $

67 Tech M4 Mar 3, 2019
Cap-10.2g Baseplate-10.4g C&P-20.6 Handle-12.2g Total-33g
Gap= .025" $5.00

PreWar Tech Apr 13, 2019
Cap-14.5g Baseplate-10.0g C&P-24.5 Handle-23g Total-47.5g
Gap= .019" $10.49

53 Tech Y2 Mar 5, 2019
Cap-11.4g Steel Baseplate-8.4g C&P-19.8 Handle-36.3g Total-56.2g
Gap= .021" $19.50

No Date (46-50) Tech
Cap-11.2g Baseplate-10.8g C&P-22.0 Handle-34.6g Total-56.5g
Gap= .024" $ PIF from Mawashi $

English Tech (Early)
Cap-14.5g Baseplate-10.8g C&P-25.3 Handle-37.0g Total-62.3g
Gap= .028" $ PIF from Mawashi $

~doug~

I think you saw the Tobins Throwbacks Video on YT. I tend to agree with his theory as well. The earlier Techs had a higher blade gap, then they seemed to settle to a .018"-.020" gap for the late 50's on, certainly for the US versions. I have an English Late 50's-very early 60's Aluminium handled Tech which is particularly efficient, and my EFB Techs are very efficient. I suspect the blade gaps of the English Techs are on the higher end.

Tech blade gaps appear to be all over the place depending on year of manufacture and country of origin it seems.
 
Tech blade gaps appear to be all over the place depending on year of manufacture and country of origin it seems.
Thanks for the info! Yeah, it was the Tobin's Throwbacks video and at the end of the video, there is a picture of an aluminum handle/baseplate English tech and it says it's 0.030 gap.

I found an French aluminum handle/baseplate Tech on Ebay and I'm thinking about getting it, that's why I asked. But it's not a flat bottom, it's a ball end, and the seller says it's from the 60s. Is the flat bottom the fat handled version?
 
Is the flat bottom the fat handled version?
Yep!

But the 50's-early 60's English Aluminium or ball end handled are worth a punt. (English slang for a gamble)

Go for the traditional earlier end cap models. I trust the earlier traditionally shaped brass caps more myself, the gaps seem to be higher.

Get one like this I would say
IMG_20221009_205543733.jpgBlade2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom