What's new

Simpson Chubby 2 Shedder

I have owned many brushes and have encountered only a few true shedders. Only one of these was a Simpson, a CH2 Best, in fact. That brush was promptly replaced by the manufacturer, no questions asked.

I see a couple different attitudes toward this situation whenever a brush shedding thread appears. Some feel that shedding should never happen, especially in a brush that costs as much as a CH2, and head toward the conclusion that Simpsons brushes aren't worth their time or money.

Others point out the sheer volume of Simpsons sold compared to other brands, the handmade nature of these brushes, and the customer service provided by Simpsons. And they head toward the conclusion that Simpsons are worth their time and money.

Is this a glass is half empty/half full difference? I won't say, but I'm in the second camp. I also wonder if the sheer volume of hair packed into some of their knots influences the occurrence of shedding? Either way, Simpsons provides excellent customer service and stands behind their product. And I prefer their brushes to any of the many others I have used. For me, nothing comes close to the experience of lathering up a Chubby 2.

Please let us know how your new CH2 works out.

I can't speak first hand, but I ordered a custom made brush from someone who seemed to me to be a true artisan craftsman. He was knowledgeable about brushes, and he worked directly with the "badger farmer" where he sourced his hair.

He told me pointedly that he could pack 5g of extra hair into the knot, but that the side effect would be more shedding. He said that the epoxy used to hold the knot together flows through the hairs. If you squeeze the knot to fit more hairs in, it reduces the amount of epoxy holding the knot together.

It seems perfectly logical to me. I had him do it anyway, and the brush I got is great. A couple stray hairs here and there, but thick and luxurious. At a rate of a couple hairs a month, it'll be centuries before it's down to a normal non-packed level.

Simpsons is known for their densely packed knots. It's one of the things that makes a Simpson a Simpson, especially a Chubby. The sell a lot of brushes. It stands to reason that they might have more shedding issues than other vendors. However, if the solution to fix it is to make a Simpson brush not a Simpson, then is that really what you'd want?

I'm not saying that the level of shedding demonstrated in this thread is acceptable. Clearly it is not, and the retailer and manufacturer knew that, and took care of it. There are most definitely people who freak out when even a single hair is shed, especially when they pay a lot of money for a brush.

So that, plus the volume of brushes, plus the handmade nature of each brush, plus the density of the brushes leads me to believe that maybe a little more shedding, within reason, is to be expected from Simpson brushes, but that it's not something to be terribly worried about, unless you are having massive sheddage.
 
You have Rooney, M&F, thater & shavmac who also produce densely packed brushes & very rarely do you hear of a shedding problem. You hear about Simpson on a regular basis & I have had one so I for one am not buying all the excuses for Simpsons.
 
It's a simple matter of numbers. How many issues do you hear about Macs (the computer)? Or Linux? Not many, not many at all. How many issues do you hear about Windows? TONNES. Why? Is it because Mac systems or Linux or anything non-Windows are better? As an IT Security professional who specializes in Enterprises (including deploying mass quantities of various workstations) I can give you my expert option - All of them are EXACTLY as good as each other. They all have faults, and quite a few in fact. The reason you hear so much about Windows issues is because 80-90% of the world is currently using a Windows based machine. The sample size is so much greater.

Are Simpsons knots more prone to shedding than other makers? Maybe, I have very strong doubts though. I think it's more that they sell so many more brushes that their issues are simply more public. That and for some reason, much like the TWSBI pens, people seem to almost enjoy it when something goes wrong.

If you want something, go buy it. Don't let someone else's experience be the reason for or against something. Just go try it for yourself and make up your own mind.

Good luck.

Cheers,

M.
 
It's a simple matter of numbers. How many issues do you hear about Macs (the computer)? Or Linux? Not many, not many at all. How many issues do you hear about Windows? TONNES. Why? Is it because Mac systems or Linux or anything non-Windows are better? As an IT Security professional who specializes in Enterprises (including deploying mass quantities of various workstations) I can give you my expert option - All of them are EXACTLY as good as each other. They all have faults, and quite a few in fact. The reason you hear so much about Windows issues is because 80-90% of the world is currently using a Windows based machine. The sample size is so much greater.

Are Simpsons knots more prone to shedding than other makers? Maybe, I have very strong doubts though. I think it's more that they sell so many more brushes that their issues are simply more public. That and for some reason, much like the TWSBI pens, people seem to almost enjoy it when something goes wrong.

If you want something, go buy it. Don't let someone else's experience be the reason for or against something. Just go try it for yourself and make up your own mind.

Good luck.

Cheers,

M.

As a fellow IT professional, this is exactly analogy I thought of.
 
I doubt that Simpson sells more brushes than the four I spoke of in my above post. I don't see your analogy between shaving brush manufacturing & computer manufacturing. Shaving brushes are not near that complicated.
 
Thanks guys. I think in the end I'll use the new Chubby 2. The one good thing to come from the replacement process was using it faulty one every day for a week reminded me that it really is a great brush!

Travis.
 
I doubt that Simpson sells more brushes than the four I spoke of in my above post. I don't see your analogy between shaving brush manufacturing & computer manufacturing. Shaving brushes are not near that complicated.

I think the thinking behind the analogy is that people complain about Windows all the time, and many are convinced that Macs are perfect. (If I had a nickel for every time someone told me Macs "just work" I'd be rich.) Macs don't "just work." They have problems just like Windows. However, Windows has 90% of the market share, so almost all of the complaints you hear are about the dominant platform.

I won't claim to have any knowledge of sales numbers from Thater and Shavemac. I will say that I would guess Rooney/M&F sells a lot fewer brushes, because, to the best of my knowledge, they're all handmade by Mr. Sabini. I don't know how many people Simpson/Vulfix employs, but I imagine it's not a one-man operation. As such, I think they produce a lot more brushes.

Perhaps I'm wrong. It wouldn't be the first time. It wouldn't even the first time in this thread. :facep: But it seems that Simpson is the market leader in luxury brushes, so it stands to reason that there are more complaints on the boards about them.
 
I see your point & the last numbers I saw vulfix & Simpson had less than 20 full time employees on the isle of Mann. Going back five years or more, you didn't have these shedding issues that Simpson has been having. I think it has more to do with quality control than them selling more brushes.
 
I would argue that quality control of Simpsons brushes has improved considerably since Vulfix acquired the brand from David Carter, 2008 time frame. How do you make the claim that current Simpsons brushes have more shedding issues than they did five years ago under the previous ownership?
 
Last edited:
I have three Simpson brushes no shedders and everything looks perfect on them. These are handmade products and the hair is a natural product so there will be some faulty brushes. Even if 1 out of 1,000 are defective and you sell 1,000,000 your going to have some complaints. The question is will the seller and manufacturer make good and repair or replace.
 
If they had fairer prices I'm sure people would be more understanding. But when your prices are high so are the expectations.
 
David carter purchased Simpson in 1990 & I don't know exactly why he sold to vulfix in 2008. I know there were problems with Simpson brushes at that timeframe. I own a Simpson & its a great brush but my point was you very rarely heard of any issues with any of the high end players until recently. I have spoke with many owners of pre- vulfux brushes and all say they are better than what is being manufactured today.
 
Tonight I bit the bullet and decided I'd give the new brush a rinse out and made up one lather with it.

After letting it soak for 10minutes in warm water I lightly shook it out and gave it a gentle squeeze the I thought I'd try a bowl lather with my new DR Harris Arlington soap. It was a total failure, I didn't really load the brush enough and the minuscule lather I was able to whip up in the bowl just soaked into the brush. (I've only used this soap once before - yesterday and it was face lathered with a Classic 1 and it was awesome...) So I went with plan B, I rinsed out the brush and grabbed a trusty TOBS cream and promptly whipped up a nice huge creamy lather.

The brush feels great in my hands really soft tips and the initial shape of this brush seems slightly different to my old one, I'm looking forward to using it on my face but I'll let it dry and repeat a few more test lathers to de-stink it a little before shaving with it.

It lost 2x 1/2 length bits of hair and 4x 1/4 length bits of hair during this first lather.

Travis.
 
I've never used a Chubby 2 on a soap that I can remember so I attribute the Arlington failure on my lack of ability with such a big and dense brush.

Does anyone here use a Chubby 2 to face lather with soap, if so any tips would be greatly appreciated. I know for me to produce a good lather with my old brush I'd simply use 2x the amount of product (namely TOBS creams) and bowl lather.

Travis.
 
I've never used a Chubby 2 on a soap that I can remember so I attribute the Arlington failure on my lack of ability with such a big and dense brush.

Does anyone here use a Chubby 2 to face lather with soap, if so any tips would be greatly appreciated. I know for me to produce a good lather with my old brush I'd simply use 2x the amount of product (namely TOBS creams) and bowl lather.

Travis.

I couldn't build a soap lather to save my life until I watched this:

http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthr...Italian-Barber

I still prefer creams over soaps, but using the technique demonstrated I'm starting to gain a wonderful appreciation for the shaving mug.

Best of luck!

Rick
 
Thanks for the thought and link Rick. I've seen that video before and found it to be a great guide to lathering with a soap.

Ive been really happy with my lathers using all creams with all of my brushes Chubby 1 & 2 and Classic 1 (bowl lathering).

ive been really happy with my lathers using soaps with the Chubby 1 and Classic 1 (face lathering).

I've never been successful using the Chubby 2 with a soap and face lathering. I kinda thought the brush was simply to big and too dense for face lathering with a soap because it's very messy when trying to load the brush given it's size thus I don't load it up enough. And if using a shave stick I just find one cannot get enough soap on their face to satisfy the lather hungry Chubby 2.

Travis.
 
Marco Method worked for me just last night using a new Chubby 2 in Best for face lathering. Just load like there is no tomorrow and then get to your face. It will be messy. I shook a dollop of water out of the brush before starting given the density. You'll end up with plentiful lather - just sometimes requires getting some of it to surface from the dense knot!
 
I generally use my CH2 Best to face lather soaps, and I think it is ideal for this type of use. When I use my CH2 Best, I wet it then lightly shake some of the water out. CH2s hold a lot of water, which can require more product to keep from getting runny or over-hydrated lather. I like to start on the drier side and hydrate the lather as I build it. I prefer to use the CH2 Best with soap, but whether it's soap or cream, I load a lot of product. When building lather on my face, I find the brush already has most of the water I need to hydrate the lather in the knot. Painting strokes seem to release more water from the knot than circular strokes, so I build lather with circular strokes then mix in some painting strokes to hydrate the lather. I may or may not have to dip the tips of the brush in some water while building lather. The key to this whole process is loading a lot of product. I spend at least a minute on the soap before taking it to my face.
 
Top Bottom