Question About Razor Head Geometry

[Jay21]

I have a question regarding razor head geometry that I'm trying to wrap my head around. I apologize if this has been discussed here previously, but my search here and on Google didn't yield any significant results. Maybe I'm not using the correct keywords and/or have too poor of an understanding of the concept to properly search for it.

Excuse my poor drawing abilities, but it was the best I could do on my computer with a mouse. I'm not Picasso! I also didn't want to use pictures without permission, so I drew my own, and poorly at that.

In my mind, it seems like we can divide DE razor heads into two major categories, which I feel are "new" and "old." I hope this makes sense, but it's how I've been visualizing things. I hope I'm not totally missing the mark here.

In the "new" design, the base plate is flat and the cap is curved. The blade is exposed in an open channel, which can either be a closed comb or an open comb. Take the RazoRock Game Changer, for example. It can have the same blade gap but be either closed or open comb. However, there is still a channel that exposes the blade. If understand it correctly, while the gap is the same, the open comb lets in more hair and lather, whereas the closed comb lets in less, but keeps the skin more taut.

In the "old" design, both the base plate and cap are curved. The blade is very rigidly placed and it rides very closely along the base plate. There is no channel that exposes the blade, if this makes any sense. The blade rests on top of the comb, no channel needed for blade exposure. The blade is sort of just sticking out in space without any sort of guard blocking it.

Anyway, it seems like in the "new" design, the channel has the same gap regardless if it is a closed or open comb. For whatever reason, this design doesn't shave my beard very well, which grows almost parallel to my skin in various places. The blade can't "lift" the whiskers or whatever magic gremlin physics is involved.

In the "old" design, since there is no channel, there is more direct blade contact with the skin. For whatever reason, this design shaves my face much better. Perhaps it's able to "lift" the whiskers a little better. It seems like this design only comes in open comb. This is the design you see in Fatips, Merkurs, RazoRock Old Type, Pearls, Yaqi clones, and SLOCs and their relatives.

My questions are:

1. Does this make sense at all and am I understanding this correctly?
2. Are there any significant differences in how open combs in either the "new" or "old" type shave faces? It seems so on my face, but maybe I'm imagining things.
3. Are there any closed comb designs in what I consider the "old" type? Would such a design even be possible? If so, I might like to try some.
4. Are there any "modern" open combs in the "old" type other than the ones I listed above?

Thank you in advance.

 

[Wgg2017]

I don't really understand razor design and history well enough to answer your specific questions, but as someone who also has whiskers that lay flat against my neck, I can tell you what has worked for me and what hasn't.

The bottom line for me is that any razor designed like your "new" type drawing, which do not clamp down snugly on the length of the blade, always result in a great deal of skipping/blade chatter where my whiskers lay flat. Specific razors of this design that I've tried and do not work for me include Charcoal Goods, Blackland Blackbird, Feather AS-D2, and others of this design type.

Razors that do work well for me and are more like your old type drawing, and clamp down snugly on the length of the blade, include the Timeless original Titanium, CB Karve, and Tatara Masamune (although this razor resulted in many weepers for some reason).

In single edge blades the Blackland Sabre and Vector work very well because of the inherent blade rigidity.

And that's what it really comes down to for me. If the blade is held very rigid, the razor is smooth and works every where on my face. If it isn't held rigid, I'm going to have trouble around my neck where the whiskers lay flat.

Hope this helps.

 

[Guido75]

Does this make sense at all and am I understanding this correctly?

I do see what you are getting at, and I can get soapy good shaves with both types. If it’s a lesser it usually falls in the new category.

I am not an expert on razor design, but I think the difference you are pointing to is the blade exposure relative to the cap and baseplate. There is an imaginary line between the end of the baseplate and the end of the cap. If a blade crossed that line we call it positive blade exposure. If it’s on the line it’s neutral and behind the line is negative.


Take for example my Greencult or Ti95 - both fall in the new type category but because of the positive blade exposure give me really close shaves.

Lifting of skin I associate with old Gillette commercials for cartridge razors. With DE I believe it’s more about reduction than it is about lifting and cutting. Hence the reason for more than one pass. At least that’s how I see it.

Are there any closed comb designs in what I consider the "old" type? Would such a design even be possible? If so, I might like to try some.

Yes there are. Swedish razors like the Swing and Matador are like this and so are a number of older German razors. The Swing has a blade gap larger than my Ti95.

Are there any "modern" open combs in the "old" type other than the ones I listed above?

Depends on your definition of modern and if hybrid combs are allowed. The R41 is by design more an old style in your context than a new style. The Eclipse Red Ring comes to mind (still vintage). And I would say the Lambda Athena is curved downward as well.

Fun questions!

Guido

 

[NorthernSoul]

Well,there are many variations in head design, not just two. What you are calling 'new' is the cantilever type design, which is found on many Merkur and Muhle razors, among others.

If you're looking for a razor that has a safety bar, yet supports the blade out very close to the edge, one modern possibility would be the Henson:

There's also Razorock (Game Changer, Lupo), Blackland and many others.

In vintage razors, you could look at the post-war Gillette Tech or one of its variations. Notice a slightly curved base plate that supports the blade out close to the edge.

 

[Jay21]

Thank you for the wonderful and detailed answers. They are helpful and informative.

 

[Jay21]

The bottom line for me is that any razor designed like your "new" type drawing, which do not clamp down snugly on the length of the blade, always result in a great deal of skipping/blade chatter where my whiskers lay flat. Specific razors of this design that I've tried and do not work for me include Charcoal Goods, Blackland Blackbird, Feather AS-D2, and others of this design type.

Razors that do work well for me and are more like your old type drawing, and clamp down snugly on the length of the blade, include the Timeless original Titanium, CB Karve, and Tatara Masamune (although this razor resulted in many weepers for some reason).

Thanks for the explanation. It makes sense. It's also sort of a validation of my opinion about my shaving struggles. I FEEL SEEN!

Yes there are. Swedish razors like the Swing and Matador are like this and so are a number of older German razors. The Swing has a blade gap larger than my Ti95.

Depends on your definition of modern and if hybrid combs are allowed. The R41 is by design more an old style in your context than a new style. The Eclipse Red Ring comes to mind (still vintage). And I would say the Lambda Athena is curved downward as well.

Fun questions!

Guido

I'll have to look at those razors. I have the r41 as well. It shaves me super clean but I haven't yet mastered it as it causes me irritation. More practice is ahead of me.

Well,there are many variations in head design, not just two. What you are calling 'new' is the cantilever type design, which is found on many Merkur and Muhle razors, among others.

If you're looking for a razor that has a safety bar, yet supports the blade out very close to the edge, one modern possibility would be the Henson:

There's also Razorock (Game Changer, Lupo), Blackland and many others.

In vintage razors, you could look at the post-war Gillette Tech or one of its variations. Notice a slightly curved base plate that supports the blade out close to the edge.

I have the Henson, and it shaves me like a wood planer. It seems to scrape more than it shaves, causing me irritation. It's a fine design, but it doesn't seem to like my whiskers that lie parallel to my skin.

I've had my eye on the GC OC.

I'm definitely going to check out the Tech and its clones. I read a lot about those last night when I went down a rabbit hole before bed.

 

[NorthernSoul]

...I have the Henson, and it shaves me like a wood planer. It seems to scrape more than it shaves, causing me irritation. It's a fine design, but it doesn't seem to like my whiskers that lie parallel to my skin.

...I'm definitely going to check out the Tech and its clones. I read a lot about those last night when I went down a rabbit hole before bed.

For the Tech, I'd see about getting a vintage one from years 1946-1951 or so. These are all-brass and provide the kind of blade support I think you're looking for. There's no date code on them, but you can learn to ID one by sight. Early 1950s are usually good, too. It is a fairly mild razor, but can still give a close shave with practice. Clones are not all-brass and may not shave as well.

For the Henson, it's hard to say, but many people do get good results with them. The shaving angle is unique and there is very little blade exposure. Only a small amount of pressure is needed when the angle is right.

 

[Patrice]

In close comb, you have the fatip piccolo. Otherwise, from what you describe I think you could like the superslant.

 

[romsitsa]

Gillette short comb New.

 

[nemo]

... the "old" design, both the base plate and cap are curved. The blade is very rigidly placed and it rides very closely along the base plate. There is no channel that exposes the blade, if this makes any sense. The blade rests on top of the comb ...

No, it does not sit on the comb. There must be a gap! It would not cut anything but stripes if so. Common misconception.
It will touch the baseplate but not the comb portion.
Look closely, magnify it, stick paper in between, whatever -- you will see a gap. If not, there is a big problem.

 

[Jay21]

No, it does not sit on the comb. There must be a gap! It would not cut anything but stripes if so. Common misconception.
It will touch the baseplate but not the comb portion.
Look closely, magnify it, stick paper in between, whatever -- you will see a gap. If not, there is a big problem.

Perhaps a poor choice of words on my part.