Simfix question

[maxman]

So did Vulfix make Simpson worse or did Simpson make Vulfix better?
I have no interest in purchasing a Simpson or Vulfix.
Just curious what you all think.

 

[Mpugh77]

I was wondering the same. I don't own a Simpson currently, but I am looking to buy one. I just grimace when I hear horror stories.

 

[Tha Baron]

I think from what I can gather is that there were some initial QC issues after the acquisition. The current Simpsons may not be as good as the pre-vulfix brushes, but I can say that I am pretty happy with the PJ2 2-band I've had for a while now... To tell you the truth, I've had more problems with two Ronneys (one was a replacement) that I bought.

 

[beginish]

I currently have 3 Simpsons, all post Vulfix ("57", Milk Churn and Keyhole 2). They have really been outstanding brushes, and of the 3, they have lost a total of 4 hairs. I think that whatever QC issues there were initially, are remedied. I can't wait for the custom B&B Eagle!

 

[Isaac]

I would say different. I have about 8 Simpson brushes and 6 vulfix made simpson brushes. I like that Vulfix started offering 2 band in the supers, but hate the fact they rid the line of the fan shape. Everything is so bulbous in shape. Another thing I dont care for is the laser engraving without filling it with something black.

All in all, I would say that it was a good takeover. If they could just return to the fan shape that simpson was known for, the stars would probably allign.

 

[Mpugh77]

I like that Vulfix started offering 2 band in the supers, but hate the fact they rid the line of the fan shape. Everything is so bulbous in shape.

What about the shape of the Duke series? They seem to be more "fan." I do wish the Ehsan was more fan. I don't have one because its aesthetics are holding me back.

 

[Hodari D.]

i think they were great brushes pre-vulfix and post-vulfix. it is still a crapshoot and the brushes still vary. definitely more bulb shaped now than before. i think the pre-vulfix had a little something that the vulfix brushes don't have. with that said, i absolutely love my grosvenor LE.

 

[Isaac]

What about the shape of the Duke series? They seem to be more "fan." I do wish the Ehsan was more fan. I don't have one because its aesthetics are holding me back.

I havent noticed the Dukes being that fan shaped. I can tell you the Chubbies/PJ's/Emperors all seemed to turn to a bulb shape.

 

[huntmol]

I'd say better.
Brushes look and feel more consistent all across the board, and handle shapes are now standardized, so you know what you're getting.
I think the new Best and Super are far superior to the old. Now the old Two-band, that was something special. I wouldn't mind trying a few more of those out.

 

[SiR-ed8]

So did Vulfix make Simpson worse or did Simpson make Vulfix better?
I have no interest in purchasing a Simpson or Vulfix.
Just curious what you all think.

I haven't used Simpsons badger long enough to make valid arguments. However I will say that the few times I've used B4 Pure, it has shed only once.

I picked up some Omegas and never looked back. My curiosity didn't stop me from picking up few badgers though.

Anyway, 3 years ago or so some people have reported their Chubby 1 or 2 I think it was to have shed profusely. Others did't have problem. I'd link you to the thread at SMF but I know the link will be removed with the quickness by powers that be. Just do a search under "Simpson's Brushes" under author rustyblade.

As far as my Vulfix are concerned these shed:

2006 > 0x

404 Grosvenor > 0x

514 Hyde Park > 2x

405 Strand > 1x

2234H > 2x

2273 0x

Bear in mind these haven't been broken in.

 

[Gruder]

I'd link you to the thread at SMF but I know the link will be removed with the quickness by powers that be.

??? We're not that way here. So long as it's not done to incite controversy, an occasional link to good information is fine.

 

[SiR-ed8]

??? We're not that way here. So long as it's not done to incite controversy, an occasional link to good information is fine.

Now I'm confused there was an issue with Semogue 1305/2000 handle brought up by one of members on another forum. I merely linked it to one of threads here so no one would think I was putting words into Leon/Bruno's mouth. Apparently the members here didn't like that because the thread in question was "drama" from another forum and the link was removed and thus was left with Leon's quote. No big deal but I'm just not comfortable citing someone without facts to support evidence. Thanks

Come to think of it I think part of the reason members here thought it was "drama" was Teiste getting on everyone's case because he's such a Semogue fanatic. To each his own.

 

[johnniegold]

. If they could just return to the fan shape that simpson was known for, the stars would probably allign.

Hopefully, a more fan-shaped loft for the customized Eagle, as we requested, will come to fruition.

 

[Marco]

So did Vulfix make Simpson worse or did Simpson make Vulfix better?
I have no interest in purchasing a Simpson or Vulfix.
Just curious what you all think.

I have four brushes made by Vulfix (2233S, 2234S, 2235S and 18P) and I have two Simpson brushes made by Vulfix (The Duke 3 Best and Chubby 1 Super).
I love all of them.
Vulfix Old Original, in my opinion, simply produces very high quality brushes.

 

[BroJohn]

Simpson suffered some poor quality issues in 2006~2007, particularly shedding problems. Their response was to shed blame, avoid responsibility, and blame their customers, who they claimed were 'misusing' the brush. As you can imagine, this didn't sit well ...at all...

Ultimately Simpson resolved the issues, and they were later acquired by Vulfix. There was a concern at the time of acquisition that the densely filled Simpsons would become Vulfix-like. That hasn't occurred, and Vulfix seems to be making good on their commitment to retain the old, pre-shedding standards of Simpson.

-- John Gehman

 

[blantyre]

So did Vulfix make Simpson worse or did Simpson make Vulfix better?
I have no interest in purchasing a Simpson or Vulfix.
Just curious what you all think.

These are not mutually exclusive outcomes. I have never owned a Vulfix brush so can't comment. I have several Simpsons and think that they are somewhat better than they were just before the take over but probably not as good as in their heyday. If Vulfix had not acquired Simpson, it would most likely be gone by now. They have tried to be true to the old line brushes and have good customer relations and seem to respond to popular requests like all the 2-band stuff. I'd like to see more fan shaped knots like the classic Simpsons had. Since brush making craft is fairly basic and low tech, I doubt that Vulfix has learnt much from the Simpson archives that would affect their own brand products.

 

[HoratioCaine]

One of my two favorite brushes on the planet is my pre-Vulfix Simpson CH2 Super two-band. (The other is my Plisson 16 HMW two-band, in case anybody is curious.) I bought a Vulfix-Simpson version of same in the hopes of having it as a back-up/alternate, but it really isn't in the same league, in my opinion. I know it's unfair to impugn an entire company range on the basis of one specimen, but the brush I got was enough to convince me that I don't want to keep spending money to see if any of their other brushes are more to my taste. My next brush will likely be a replacement for my Plisson, which hopefully won't be needed for a number of years yet.