Razors Under a Microscope

[Sal]

Gizmodo has an article today comparing different types of razors under a microscope at the University of Oregon's Bio-Optics Laboratory. Not the most in depth piece, but I imagine people here would be interested.

http://gizmodo.com/5472426/razors-under-a-microscope

Maybe some tools aren't old-fashioned. Maybe they're just perfect. The inevitable tapering toward only the necessary, the honing away of all distraction. The machine at its most simple. After that, what? Easy: mass production.

A razor is a wedge, one of physics' six force-multiplying "simple machines." Unlike the wedge used to split wood or hold a door open, a razor (and its father, the knife) do their work at their tip—the edge.

You know this intrinsically, but consider it again: The sharpest razor is just a few molecules wide at its edge, persuading the molecules it meets that it would be easier to decouple from their mates and let the razor pass through the space where they once twisted and wound together.

So if a razor is such a simple mechanism, why are there so many different types?

Perhaps the razor's simplicity lends itself to many configurations? A screw is a simple object, but there isn't just one type of screw, but countless variations to suit the needs of its user.

Or maybe there really is a difference between sharp and really sharp?

 

[baba]

Cool stuff, thanks for posting!

 

[berukblue]

Oh wow, I was just about to post this here.. Looks like you beat me to it

 

[Chimensch]

Excellent article, thanks for posting.

 

[Sledgehammer39]

Cool, thanks for the link.

 

[DunEdinRanger]

Thanks for posting. I would haved loved to have seen a DE blade included in that, as well as some more after shots taken after a few shaves with each blade.

 

[jrowen]

I don't know about you guys, but I thought that str8 looked way sharper than the carts. Just me?

 

[DiscoBubba]

Thanks for posting. I would haved loved to have seen a DE blade included in that, as well as some more after shots taken after a few shaves with each blade.

I second that. Nice idea but could have been executed better. I think I've seen posts on here with microscope shots that have shown a vast difference between blades. Plus I didn't agree with the conclusion the author reached towards the end in regards to durability of blades. I'd much rather have something higher quality that isn't gonna start off smooth and then dull halfway through.

 

[funkyb]

Squire over at SMF has also reviewed many blades under a scope. The list is here if you are curious.

 

[pruby]

Yeah, the straight looked way sharper to my amateur eye. That white band, indicating the extremely sharp edge, was incredibly wide, while the others were a thin line. Of course the lighting could be different there - it's not exactly a careful test. Don't know where the 'not much different' conclusion came from - looks really different to me!

 

[valmara1971]

Cheers Sal for posting a good read and the link posted to the blade review was great.

 

[moshulu]

I'm not convinced by the reasoning in the article, which is based on the author's ability to photograph the blades from one direction only. As he himself admits, it would have been better to take pictures from the front: a "hair's eye" view. But he didn't know how.

Surely what matters most is the THICKNESS and STIFFNESS of the leading part of the blade, not how straight or smooth it is seen from the top. In fact, a thin ragged edge is probably a wicked cutter, since only a fraction of the edge is involved (the bits that stick out), thereby amplifying the pressure at the points of contact with the hair.

The idea that something that looks good must perform well is not always correct (although it is in the case of Lindsey Vonn).

 

[valmara1971]

Oh now you have gone and done it. I'm going to have to find time to watch the olympics now!

 

[southernscribbler]

Great article! Thank you for this post!

 

[huntmol]

Saw this article and immediately thought B&B!

 

[htownmmm]

Saw this article and immediately thought B&B!

You and me both!

marty

 

[Mulie1]

Cool article. It was good to see the difference. I wonder what the Hart looked like...

 

[Drubbing]

Squire over at SMF has also reviewed many blades under a scope. The list is here if you are curious.

Interesting, if only to read how pointless a personal rating 'score' on each blade is, even more so when it's presented in a definitive way, as opposed to opinion. I didn't recognise any of the negative characteristics of my favoured blades as experienced by that poster.