I saw OMEGA EVO 2.0 on TRC. Anyone tried evo 2.0?
I wonder the difference between original evo and evo 2.0
I wonder the difference between original evo and evo 2.0
OMEGA EVO 2.0??
- Thread starter Kayanosoto
- Start date
From what I read it is just a fiber upgrade and different colors and styles of handle, but they also are a $30 upcharge which I think is a bit much!! I thought $59.99 was too much so $89.99 now tells me the same thing it did 3yrs ago, I won't be purchasing one!!
The $59.99 one is nice, but I have $20 and $21 synths that do that whole make and apply lather thing much better. APShaveCo Cashmere and Silksmoke knots. Even if the EVO 2 is nicer, it’s not the knot for me.
Chan Eil Whiskers
Fumbling about.
So far I'm having a huge problem figuring out which Omega Evo brushes are the 2.0 fiber as well as figuring out whether the 2.0 fiber is or isn't an advancement worthy of my money and time.
I have, use, and very much like my Omega Evo pictured above. It's an excellent brush, and not just an excellent brush for a synthetic. I'm not a synthetic fan at all. I have only one. This is the one. It's like a soft three band in its performance characteristics.
The above thumbnail is of a brush the vendor says is the Omega Evo 2.0. I do not disbelieve the vendor, but what about the brush indicates it's different other than their statements? It looks the same. The manufacturers numbering system don't tell me much if anything. (Or, I don't understand what they're telling me.)
Is Omega going to move to using only the 2.0 knots? Will the existing Omega Evo brushes be phased out? I find it all very confusing.
Why should I buy the 2.0?
Also, the prices seem all over the place in the few places I can find selling the 2.0 Omega Evo. Here's another vendor. These may be priced in Canadian dollars.
The handle variations may or may not justify the price differences. The purple handle is $110, maybe Canadian.
I'm looking around at the prices and offerings here and there.
Here's another vendor. Two. Three.
Playing around with the item numbers - E1858 - on the Omega website tells me nothing. If I had to guess Omega is using the same item number for the original Omega Evo and for the Omega Evo 2.0. That is of course not entirely clear, but it seems to be the case. Meaning what exactly?
Again, I'm a fan of the original Omega Evo brush, and I might like the 2.0, but this is way confusing. Hopefully it will become clear over time.
Happy shaves,
Jim
I have, use, and very much like my Omega Evo pictured above. It's an excellent brush, and not just an excellent brush for a synthetic. I'm not a synthetic fan at all. I have only one. This is the one. It's like a soft three band in its performance characteristics.
The above thumbnail is of a brush the vendor says is the Omega Evo 2.0. I do not disbelieve the vendor, but what about the brush indicates it's different other than their statements? It looks the same. The manufacturers numbering system don't tell me much if anything. (Or, I don't understand what they're telling me.)
Is Omega going to move to using only the 2.0 knots? Will the existing Omega Evo brushes be phased out? I find it all very confusing.
Why should I buy the 2.0?
Also, the prices seem all over the place in the few places I can find selling the 2.0 Omega Evo. Here's another vendor. These may be priced in Canadian dollars.
The handle variations may or may not justify the price differences. The purple handle is $110, maybe Canadian.
I'm looking around at the prices and offerings here and there.
Here's another vendor. Two. Three.
Playing around with the item numbers - E1858 - on the Omega website tells me nothing. If I had to guess Omega is using the same item number for the original Omega Evo and for the Omega Evo 2.0. That is of course not entirely clear, but it seems to be the case. Meaning what exactly?
Again, I'm a fan of the original Omega Evo brush, and I might like the 2.0, but this is way confusing. Hopefully it will become clear over time.
Happy shaves,
Jim
Last edited:
According to the description of the italian vendor the main difference is a new type of fiber which is wavy instead of being straight.
There are a couple of reviews around, on the vendor's site, on an italian shaving forum and there's a video of an italian youtuber that compares directly the new version with the older one and shows a little bit more and in depth the knot and the hair differencese.
What seems to be the main takeaway is that it's better than the old version, but is not a revolution, so if you have the old version you don't really need the newer one, but if you don't have any, the newer one is definitely better.
The wavy hair makes the brush (according to the various reviews) more badger like, has less of a springy effect with the soap, has a more glove like feeling on the skin, it stays closer to the skin when splaying, since the hair bends, instead of being straight. Some says it holds the water a little better and it's easier to load, hold and build the lather.
This is what the first consensus seems to be like in the italian community anyway.
The photos don't show very well how wavy the fiber actually is, for that I suggest to watch the youtube review, since he splays the knot and has various close up, but that's the gist of it.
TL;DR: The new version has a new wavy fiber, better, but 10€ better, not 70€ better.
I apologize if I'm not clear or if I made some mistakes, I'm not a native english speaker.
There are a couple of reviews around, on the vendor's site, on an italian shaving forum and there's a video of an italian youtuber that compares directly the new version with the older one and shows a little bit more and in depth the knot and the hair differencese.
What seems to be the main takeaway is that it's better than the old version, but is not a revolution, so if you have the old version you don't really need the newer one, but if you don't have any, the newer one is definitely better.
The wavy hair makes the brush (according to the various reviews) more badger like, has less of a springy effect with the soap, has a more glove like feeling on the skin, it stays closer to the skin when splaying, since the hair bends, instead of being straight. Some says it holds the water a little better and it's easier to load, hold and build the lather.
This is what the first consensus seems to be like in the italian community anyway.
The photos don't show very well how wavy the fiber actually is, for that I suggest to watch the youtube review, since he splays the knot and has various close up, but that's the gist of it.
TL;DR: The new version has a new wavy fiber, better, but 10€ better, not 70€ better.
I apologize if I'm not clear or if I made some mistakes, I'm not a native english speaker.
Hey Jim, you know what this reminds me of? I don't know if you follow the computer industry, but as well as a mechanic <<<--- (Occupational), shaving, and photography enthusiast, I am also a tech nerd. One of the things I've noticed that companies are trying to do in the computer industry, is manipulate the USB standards, all for marketing purpose's.
They are trying to say stuff like, now with USB 3.1 or USB 3.2, it can do this fast fast fast. But if you actually benchmark the USB ports, you discover, that USB 3.1 and USB 3.2 operate at the same exact speeds! In essence, its a marketing ploy, with no real hard data to back up their claims! Now what I have seen that is true, is if a USB port says 10 GbPs, vs a USB port that says 20 GbPs, there is a difference there obviously.
So my point exactly? I think that Omega might be stat padding to generate re-interest in their brushes, to increase sales. Most companies do this, companies are not saints like Mosas off of mount Syaney with the stone tablets from God. Companies are in the business to make money, and somtimes they lie to do it.
Until further evidence is brought fourth to this thread, that proves that Omega are not stat padding to generate interest in sales, then I am going to continue to believe that Omega are full of dogshweets.
Chan Eil Whiskers
Fumbling about.
A couple of years ago I tried to join an Italian shaving forum, but never heard back from the moderators so I guess I didn't make the cut.
Not that I speak Italian but I have Google translate.
I thought it would help with questions such as mine, and I appreciate your answer which helps a good bit. Thanks.
Hey Jim, you know what this reminds me of? I don't know if you follow the computer industry, but as well as a mechanic <<<--- (Occupational), shaving, and photography enthusiast, I am also a tech nerd. One of the things I've noticed that companies are trying to do in the computer industry, is manipulate the USB standards, all for marketing purpose's.
They are trying to say stuff like, now with USB 3.1 or USB 3.2, it can do this fast fast fast. But if you actually benchmark the USB ports, you discover, that USB 3.1 and USB 3.2 operate at the same exact speeds! In essence, its a marketing ploy, with no real hard data to back up their claims! Now what I have seen that is true, is if a USB port says 10 GbPs, vs a USB port that says 20 GbPs, there is a difference there obviously.
So my point exactly? I think that Omega might be stat padding to generate re-interest in their brushes, to increase sales. Most companies do this, companies are not saints like Mosas off of mount Syaney with the stone tablets from God. Companies are in the business to make money, and somtimes they lie to do it.
Until further evidence is brought fourth to this thread, that proves that Omega are not stat padding to generate interest in sales, then I am going to continue to believe that Omega are full of dogshweets.
It's not like I'm in any hurry here. Just trying to gather information.
Happy shaves,
Jim
I looked at the Omega site yesterday for a while.... It was translated into English and I still couldn't tell what the actual products were... just some pretty bad photos of handles with some sort of synthetic knots in them (I only searched for their synthetic offerings).
Wow just when I thought my Evo couldn't get any better they make a 2.0!!! Very interest in seeing how much better they are.
My opinion? Big meh. 
My EVO works just fine. No complaints. Since the 2.0 is not being billed as an earth shattering improvement, I think I'll wait until this shakes out a bit before I decide whether or not to get a new EVO 2.0.
My EVO works just fine. No complaints. Since the 2.0 is not being billed as an earth shattering improvement, I think I'll wait until this shakes out a bit before I decide whether or not to get a new EVO 2.0.
Almost three months and no new word from the street?
I found this thread searching for any information on comparing Omega's Evo (2 now I guess) knot with AP Shave Co.'s G5C knot.
If any of you happen to have both, please share your thoughts.
I found this thread searching for any information on comparing Omega's Evo (2 now I guess) knot with AP Shave Co.'s G5C knot.
If any of you happen to have both, please share your thoughts.
Bumping this thread. I do like the blue and veteran purple handle of the 2.0 more than the stone like finish off the white and grey 1.0 evo s
That's a beautiful handle... I ended up just getting the Evo original in the Sapphire Blue handle. It's at the very top of my synth brushes.
Chandu
I Waxed The Badger.
Just????
The Fiber is everything, especially in synths which most are more glorified make up brushes than a true stand in for boar or badger.
I'm anxious to see what people say about the new fiber. I've used Simpson Trafalgar and Chubby, Plisson, Razorock Plissoft, One Blades synth, the Supply Synth, 3 PAA, and a Muhle and Shave Mac.
The Muhle and Shavemac are the only ones that enter into what I consider a good brush for shaving territory. The others are too soft, but yet don't splay well in some instances or will actually knot if swirling (PAA and Razorock, I'm looking at you) in others.
I'm patiently waiting a great synth. For me, we're only at good and darn few of those.
The odd thing that makes no sense is the original EVO has one of the best synthetic knots. Usually when things aren’t broke they shouldn’t be trying to fix it. There was no reason for them to mess around with a 2.0 for several years
Chandu
I Waxed The Badger.
I can't say. That is one I never tried. I think the main reason was I could never locate one with the handle I wanted. Reading more of the post, I think crooked fibers are probably a step in the right direction.
I think what is also needed is a mixed synth, just like we have badger and boar combos. We need one with different diameter fibers, stiffness of fibers and perhaps straight and wavy.
If someone can come up with a fiber(s) that make a 24mm knot with a 50 to 52 mm loft that splays enough, doesn't spring, etc they would have the perfect fiber (IMO). As it is they are mostly 26+mm knots and 55+mm loft because they don't have the proper qualities to make a decent smaller brush.
The EVO 2.0 has a 28mm knot and the loft is only 51mm which is right up my alley as i prefer shorter lofts. I can’t recall right now but I’m aware there is a synthetic knot that incorporated different size hairs and a mix of wavy and straight hairs. I’m thinking it is the G5A knot.
Chandu
I Waxed The Badger.
I like shorter lofts for badger, to me, that is a lot of diameter for that short of knot in synth. I'm a proponent of the 1:2 ratio that Simpson tends to follow. Things tend to be different though in synth. To me it seems like you need 1:2.5 otherwise you end up with a stiff brush.
The other problem with synths in general is they give you a 55 mm loft because the damnable glue bump robs you of 8mm. Not sure why they don't just use a longer fiber and recess the knot further in the handle.
