What's new

Need help with razor identification

I am hoping that someone with more knowledge of older Gillettes can help me. I recently bought this razor as part of a larger lot of razors and brushes. I have cleaned and polished it, but have been unable to identify it, especially the handle.The head itself has the Gillette diamond logo, MADE IN U.S.A., and the serial number 7611033 (there are no letters in the serial number). According to the B&B Wiki on Gillette Dating Information, this would date the head 1906, but then the same guide says that the diamond logo did not appear until 1908. Also, in 1907 the serial numbers started to have a letter in addition to the numbers. So, that is the confusion with the head. $20140711_174819.jpg$20140711_174725.jpg$20140711_174738.jpg$20140711_174752.jpg

Now the handle is the real problem. I could not find anything that looks even remotely similar to this handle on any Gillette razor photo that I looked at, and I looked at a lot. The handle is a two piece, so I am thinking that it was a travel version. There are no marks of any type on the handle. The knurling is a simple spiral, again unlike any Gillette handle that I can find. I think this is a Frankenrazor, but I was hoping that someone with more knowledge and a greater breadth of experience might be able to shed more light on the subject.

Thanks,

Matt
 
That's a toughie. Just curious where you found it. I always love the background stories. I can't help with ID, but someone more knowledgable than me will be along soon.
 
Edgar, thanks for the link. Those handles are indeed similar in principle, but this one is just so thin, that it seems not to be a Gillette from everything that I have seen.

BSAGuy - This razor was in a lot of about 20 razors that I bought on eBay. There were several that I was actually interested in, and a number of others that I wasn't. This was pretty dirty and grimy, but cleaned up nicely, so I decided to research it, and only added to the mystery.

Matt
 
The head itself has the Gillette diamond logo, MADE IN U.S.A., and the serial number 7611033 (there are no letters in the serial number). According to the B&B Wiki on Gillette Dating Information, this would date the head 1906, but then the same guide says that the diamond logo did not appear until 1908. Also, in 1907 the serial numbers started to have a letter in addition to the numbers. So, that is the confusion with the head.

Any chance you could post a photo of the serial number? Gillette never did 7-digit serial numbers like that, so I would pretty much guarantee you that what you're reading there as a "7" is actually a letter prefix.

As for the handle, I've got nothing other than to agree that it's nearly certainly not from any Gillette. It seems much more modern to my eye than the Old Type head.
 
Any chance you could post a photo of the serial number? Gillette never did 7-digit serial numbers like that, so I would pretty much guarantee you that what you're reading there as a "7" is actually a letter prefix.

As for the handle, I've got nothing other than to agree that it's nearly certainly not from any Gillette. It seems much more modern to my eye than the Old Type head.

$20140715_195546.jpg

Here is a photo of the serial number. I took this with my phone, so the quality is not ideal. Even under magnification, I am pretty certain that the the "7" is actually a "7" and not a letter. According to the B&B Shavewiki on US Gillette Dating Information, http://wiki.badgerandblade.com/US_Gillette_Dating_Information, from 1904 to 1907 Gillette razors had a serial number that did not include a letter. the use of letters began in 1907 with prefix "A". Not having much experience myself, I can only rely on the references that are available, and this reference seems pretty detailed and presumably accurate. In fact, that is part of the confusion because the Diamond logo is present on the the same part, and supposedly that did not appear until 1908 according to the same reference. Something just doesn't jive. I can say this for sure, if this razor head is pre 1910, it is in remarkable, almost new appearing, condition.

Thanks for your interest and help. If you have any other thoughts, I am all ears.

Matt
 
Here is a photo of the serial number. I took this with my phone, so the quality is not ideal. Even under magnification, I am pretty certain that the the "7" is actually a "7" and not a letter.

Hmm... I really can't tell much of anything from that pic other than that there are 7 characters stamped there. The focus is back on the fabric and not at all on the razor. If you can get a better one, even if it has to be farther away from the guard than that, I might be able to help more.

According to the B&B Shavewiki on US Gillette Dating Information, http://wiki.badgerandblade.com/US_Gillette_Dating_Information, from 1904 to 1907 Gillette razors had a serial number that did not include a letter. the use of letters began in 1907 with prefix "A".

If you look closer at that info you'll see that they only went up to 999999 and then rolled over to the "A" series. A seven-digit serial number would be an unexplained oddity in and of itself.

Another clue is that In the time frame you're talking about Gillette hadn't yet started to make the Pocket-Edition-style razors at all yet. So you wouldn't have anything but standard style razors from that era. And the earliest Pocket Edition razors that were made didn't carry the diamond logo or "Made in U.S.A." inscriptions either. So since you've got those it really has to be from more like the mid '10s or later.

If it truly is a "7" then maybe there was a mistake setting the die for the stamp. That would be the only guess I'd have, really.
 
I can't make out the numbers at all from that pic. Maybe try taking one looking straight down at it. I'll be interested to see where this goes.
 
Hmm... I really can't tell much of anything from that pic other than that there are 7 characters stamped there. The focus is back on the fabric and not at all on the razor. If you can get a better one, even if it has to be farther away from the guard than that, I might be able to help more.


If you look closer at that info you'll see that they only went up to 999999 and then rolled over to the "A" series. A seven-digit serial number would be an unexplained oddity in and of itself.

Another clue is that In the time frame you're talking about Gillette hadn't yet started to make the Pocket-Edition-style razors at all yet. So you wouldn't have anything but standard style razors from that era. And the earliest Pocket Edition razors that were made didn't carry the diamond logo or "Made in U.S.A." inscriptions either. So since you've got those it really has to be from more like the mid '10s or later.

If it truly is a "7" then maybe there was a mistake setting the die for the stamp. That would be the only guess I'd have, really.

You know, I didn't even realize that I was looking at 7 digits, not 6.:blush: What a buffoon! Thanks for tactfully pointing that out. I will take a better photo today with my other camera and in good lighting.

Matt
 
Well, the new photos solve the "mystery" I believe. It seems clear to me now that the serial number on the razor is F691033, which would date it to 1918. What I was seeing as a "7" appears to be an incompletely imprinted "F". MacDaddy was spot on in his assessment and conclusion, and many thanks for the very educational input.:thumbup1:

$P1290480_0309.jpg$P1290481_0310.jpg$P1290482_0311.jpg

Of course, that still does not excuse my rather sloppy investigation. Even knowing what the number is, when I look at the razor with the naked eye, which in my case includes bifocals, I still see a "7". Time for another trip to the the ophthalmologist I guess. These 65 year old eyes are not getting any better, quite obviously.

Now if I could just resolve the handle issue.

Matt
 
Well, the new photos solve the "mystery" I believe. It seems clear to me now that the serial number on the razor is F691033, which would date it to 1918. What I was seeing as a "7" appears to be an incompletely imprinted "F". MacDaddy was spot on in his assessment and conclusion, and many thanks for the very educational input.:thumbup1:

Cheers! That definitely looks much better. Those initial characters are very often worn down and incompletely struck, especially through the middle of the letter, I assume due to that being the point of initial impact on the curved guard plate which would take more wear than the top and bottom of the die.

Looking at that first picture I can see what you were seeing, though. I think the striations in the metal are what's helping to trick your eye.
 
Top Bottom