Simpson by Vulfix - A Report Card

[oscarbowman]

I've been using a new Vulfix/Simpson Special in Best now for two months and have only lost 2 hairs! Very happy with it. It only cost £23 and the best is really soft but enough backbone to face lather. I was worried what the quality would be like but would quite happily buy again.

 

[jhclare]

I've been pleased overall. I do think there are still the odd QC issues though.

I still prefer the old handles more, and I preferred the old lampblack lettering and the lighter colour. The Chubby handle in particular - the newer shape is more 'square' where the older style had more of a tapered shape near the top half.

I think the recent brushes more closely resemble the originals in terms of spec, particularly the Duke. The first attempts had a much longer loft than the original.

 

[antoine1]

I still prefer the old handles more, and I preferred the old lampblack lettering and the lighter colour. The Chubby handle in particular - the newer shape is more 'square' where the older style had more of a tapered shape near the top half.

I think the recent brushes more closely resemble the originals in terms of spec, particularly the Duke. The first attempts had a much longer loft than the original.

What prefix Simpson's do you own?

I have an assortment of Chubby 1's and 2's, prefix and Vulfix, other than some small variation's in overall size, the actual profile of the handle hasn't changed.

In terms of spec I don't think recent brushes resemble the originals at all, if by original you mean Prefix. Vulfix have generally moved away from the fan shaped knot and that gives it different characteristics to the bulbish shape they seem to prefer nowadays. This is certainly the case for the Duke 3's I own, the prefix Duke 3 Best is really quite different to the Vulfix version, the loft is shorter (47mm) it's fan shaped as opposed to bulb, it's scrubbier and possibly denser.

Given the variations created by a hand made process and hair supply, it's still a deliberately different brush.

 

[Tanksfurnutin]

I own three Simpson brushes, two pre and one post Vulfix. The two prefix are a Polo 8 and a Persian Jar both in best. I bought the Polo 8 new and this brush is my favorite. It shed a few hairs the first week but hasn't since and I use it several times a week as my go to soap brush. The Persian Jar I got used off the BST and it is a very good brush that has performed well.

The Vulfix Simpson is a two band Tulip 2 which I bought in the initial wave. I have to say I was very disappointed in this brush. The knot shape of this brush was actually lopsided and in fact it had several hairs that I had to trim to the correct length. Performance wise it is very dense and has lost only a few hairs. The aesthetics have not kept me from using this brush as my backup. However, I feel that the quality control on this brush was a little poor and it would keep me from buying another Vulfix Simpson.

 

[ssultan]

Scott if you don't mind my asking, how long ago did you purchase your vulfix simpsons? I'm of the opinion that they had some significant issues with their initial quality control...this seems to have been corrected and their current quality appears extremely good. I just picked up two of them and I honestly couldn't be happier...quality is easily on par with my Rooney heritage, if not better...mine were purchased from two different vendors here in our forum and both came from current batches from Vulfix...

 

[jhclare]

What prefix Simpson's do you own?

I have an assortment of Chubby 1's and 2's, prefix and Vulfix, other than some small variation's in overall size, the actual profile of the handle hasn't changed.

I've only owned a prefix Polo 8 in Best. I wasn't that impressed by it. I looked great, but I wasn't that impressed with the knot - it seemed rather prickly to me. My Simfix Duke 3 in Best was much denser. It also had a 46mm loft (great), which is closer to the Somerset specs. I also had a simfix Chubby 1 Super, a CH 2 Super and a CH 2 Best.

The Chubby's handles were much squarer than the photos of all the Somerset Chubbies I've seen.

To satisfy my curiosity, I went to Trumper's today and looked at their branded Simpsons. All were Vulfix-made. I was very surprised by the variation and appearance of the brushes. Two CH 2 Bests I looked at had different handles! One had the square type, and the other a more Somerset shape. I wonder if this was an early (or later?) Vulfix version, or if they make them like this sometimes for the hell of it!

John

 

[Mr. Imperial]

I have a Chubby 1 in Best. Can't imagine it being any nicer. It's soft (very soft for a Best), very dense, no shedding, nice weight. No complaints here. It performs GREAT.

Same here with my Special. Even though it's Best, it's softer than a TGN two-band finest. The little guy's got spunk!

 

[johnniegold]

This gets a relevance-bump in light the current thread about the Simpson bulb/fan question.

 

[Loric]

This gets a relevance-bump in light the current thread about the Simpson bulb/fan question.

Good call on the bump. I have had 6 or 7 Simpson brushes and have liked them all, and thats saying something for a guy as picky as I am. Several of the brushes were not for me or just to similar to something else I have from them, but I cant say I thought any were bad. I enjoy my remaining Simpson brushes greatly and the Chubby is still more or less the bar that I judge other brushes by.

I think the bulb/fan issue is something that will work itself out. I have no problem with bulbs. Honestly I like the option of knot shape, if they just make them a bit less peaky I'd be more than happy to see them offered in the range. If the wet shaving community can give them some feedback and they step back the sharp tops we will all be the better for it.

Plus as stated elsewhere the fact that they participate in these descriptions speaks a lot about the company. It might be sparse participation, but I cant think of any other manufacturer who does this. Sure you can talk to a representative of most others, but Simpson come to us.

 

[Crixus]

However, I feel that the quality control on this brush was a little poor and it would keep me from buying another Vulfix Simpson.

Here's some feedback--both positive and negative. The comptroller can't increase margins on a brush he can't sell.

 

[Simpson Shaving Brushes]

Thank you Loric ...

Good call on the bump. I have had 6 or 7 Simpson brushes and have liked them all, and thats saying something for a guy as picky as I am. Several of the brushes were not for me or just to similar to something else I have from them, but I cant say I thought any were bad. I enjoy my remaining Simpson brushes greatly and the Chubby is still more or less the bar that I judge other brushes by.

I think the bulb/fan issue is something that will work itself out. I have no problem with bulbs. Honestly I like the option of knot shape, if they just make them a bit less peaky I'd be more than happy to see them offered in the range. If the wet shaving community can give them some feedback and they step back the sharp tops we will all be the better for it.

Plus as stated elsewhere the fact that they participate in these descriptions speaks a lot about the company. It might be sparse participation, but I cant think of any other manufacturer who does this. Sure you can talk to a representative of most others, but Simpson come to us.

 

[huntmol]

I stand by the knots on their Best and Super brushes 100%, I think that they are always of the highest quality.

However, I'm still a bit hesitant to recommend their Two-band, as it is very inconsistent in my experience. I've had three Two-bands with unsatisfactory knots.

In addition, I would recommend against ordering a custom brush from them. I ordered a Duke 2 in Two-band, and was really unhappy with it. It looked like this one (another custom ordered by another member), but was surprisingly pointy and scratchy. Although Vulfix offered to fix it, I declined, as I have other Simpsons that I enjoy, and I preferred selling it to having to send it back and wait for the "better" brush that I should have been sent in the first place.

 

[drumana]

I like all the Simfix brushes I own quite a bit (56 best, D3 best, CH1 two band, CH2 two band). They are all impeccably made - none are shedders, the lettering is great, the handles are even and perfect. I really have no complaints. Simpson puts out really nice brushes that are worth the coin.

(I have no experience with pre Simfix brushes)

 

[beginish]

At the beginning of the year, I had 0 Simpson brushes, and before giving away one in the Saint Sue PIF, I had 8, a 57, Milk Churn, Duke 3, Keyhole 2, Tulip 2 in 2-band, custom Eagle, Harvard H4 and a vintage X1L. All except the Tulip are in Best. These brushes run the gamut from floppy to dense, small knot to large knot. All are very high quality and I have enjoyed using them. I gave away the Keyhole because it was a bit too small and not dense enough for me. The knot shapes run from fans in the Harvard and Duke to semi-bulbs like the 57 and Eagle, to the bulb of the Tulip. They all work just fine for me. Importantly, the fans feel different from each other as do all the semi-fans. The quality is most important to me, and the current Simpson quality is stellar.

 

[john parker]

I stand by the knots on their Best and Super brushes 100%, I think that they are always of the highest quality.

However, I'm still a bit hesitant to recommend their Two-band, as it is very inconsistent in my experience. I've had three Two-bands with unsatisfactory knots.

In addition, I would recommend against ordering a custom brush from them. I ordered a Duke 2 in Two-band, and was really unhappy with it. It looked like this one (another custom ordered by another member), but was surprisingly pointy and scratchy. Although Vulfix offered to fix it, I declined, as I have other Simpsons that I enjoy, and I preferred selling it to having to send it back and wait for the "better" brush that I should have been sent in the first place.

I can certainly understand the pointy part. This is my my non-custom Colonel.

Doubt it will be fixed. Product of hand made variation.

 

[SliceOfLife]

I have a Prefix Chubby 2 and some Vulfix Silvertip brushes (given the density of the knots, I'm fairly sure they were Simpson knots and not made for the Vulfix lines, since I hear those are rather sparsely packed). The Somerset (Prefix) three band Super is softer dry. But the PostFix three band has more backbone and is as soft once both are soaked, so I consider it a little bit better in my opinion.

As for design, I don't feel as strongly as some about Fan vs Bulb, but I do find my collection gradually moving towards fans for whatever reason.


I will say this though, compared to my vintage Kent, Vintage (butterscotch) Simpsons Best hair has been unimpressive in the half dozen brushes I've picked up. So if you're willing to go back a couple decades then the quality of the Best now vs then is greatly improved. I haven't used a recent prefix Simpson Best. How do they compare with the current Simpson Bests?

 

[Mr. Scruffy]

I have three Simpsons - The Astor 90th Anniversary edition, the Eagle G3 and the Wee Scot. Each of these I purchased post Vulfix. I have no experience with a pre-Vulfix Simpsons so I won't speak to that.

Each brush has its pros and cons.


View attachment 133097


Astor - This brush was a shedder losing almost 75 hairs in the first month. Nevertheless, the Astor has yet to meet the puck of soap it can't spank. The bulb shaped knot has the backbone to pick up more than enough product in a short period of time, yet it is very soft and splays quite nicely without being skritchy when face lathering.

Eagle G3 - Wow. This extremely dense brush can maul the hardest soap in a nanosecond. I swear I can hear the MWF whimper as the Eagle approaches. This brush will hold a lot of water so you really need to squeeze the knot dry after soaking. More of a fan shape than the Astor, it's a joy to face lather even if it is a bit of a lather hog.

Wee Scot - A pound of performance in a one ounce package. Purchased as a novelty, the Wee Scot quickly showed it could earn a spot in the daily rotation. Like its larger cousins, this mighty mite can absorb enough product for three passes. It's my road warrior and we're headed north together this Thanksgiving.

Now.. having said all that, none of these brushes has been successful in dethroning the number one brush in my rotation. My precious... the B&B '09 LE.

But, by God, they are each a close second in their own right.

 

[Mr. Scruffy]

Relevance bump.

 

[Greglam]

I am the proud owner of a Duke 1 in Best that I purchased about 6 months ago. It was a significant upgrade, to say the least, from the pure badger Col. Conk (by Vulfix) that I started with in August/Sept 2009.

In the last week I bought a Vulfix 404 'Grosvenor' boar/badger blend ($25 US). I have to say that this brush is simply outstanding and may well in fact be better than my Duke. It is at least every bit as good as far as I'm concerned.

I would say that a chap who owned any brush under $60 could fairly well "upgrade" by investing the meager $25 US in the 404.

I don't have a single complaint about the quality or performance of either brand.

Thanks for a great thread. Very informative.

Cheers!
-Greg

 

[SliceOfLife]

I should note, my vintage simpsons Bests were poor examples. One was very scritchy for reasons I don't know, most of the rest were heavily thinned out from age. I've gotten some GOOD vintage Simpson bests lately and it's like a nice three band, though the backbone is a bit less than you might expect (probably from aging).

Current Simpsons best is one of my favorite hairs.

Franky, vulfix seems to make good brushes but have rather poor designs (for a soap user) and density. Simpsons has great designs and density, so vulfix made simpsons are very good brushes in my experience. I wish they'd at least open themselves up to making flatter 2 band knots though. A fan shaped Chubby 1 in 2 band would be pretty neat to have.