- Thread starter
- #101
Simpson, I hate you #SBAD #BAD #MAD
- Thread starter awa54
- Start date
Did you reach out to Simpsons? They have excellent support/CS.
- Thread starter
- #103
They were both Specials, the one in pure held out for too long before disintegration to qualify for replacement and was subsequently re-knotted with a 20mm TGN finest/fan, but the best version was replaced by the vendor I bought it from. These were "made in England" brushes and the failures happened before Simpson had an easy way to contact them directly (at least I wasn't aware of it if they had a consumer oriented web site back then).
Since then all of the Simpson brushes I've bought have shed at least a few bristles in their first week of use and a few have continued to drop one or two per shave for up to a month after initial use. There are also a few that have only dropped a couple in total, but those are less common. While this is more on average than any of the TGN or Maggard knots I've used to make my own brushes, or my Vie Long, Shavemac and Omega brushes, I still consider it quite acceptable.
Since then all of the Simpson brushes I've bought have shed at least a few bristles in their first week of use and a few have continued to drop one or two per shave for up to a month after initial use. There are also a few that have only dropped a couple in total, but those are less common. While this is more on average than any of the TGN or Maggard knots I've used to make my own brushes, or my Vie Long, Shavemac and Omega brushes, I still consider it quite acceptable.
- Thread starter
- #104
CH1 Super has arrived!
Test lathers were extremely promising. The knot seems to be on the dense side of Simpson's offerings, with w/h dimensions being just a smidge shorter and broader than the Duke 2. I do however prefer the Duke handle over the Chubby pattern, but the CH1 handle is still far better than the CH2 synth in my mid-sized, non-arthritic hands.
I'm looking forward to shaving with it tomorrow morning!
Test lathers were extremely promising. The knot seems to be on the dense side of Simpson's offerings, with w/h dimensions being just a smidge shorter and broader than the Duke 2. I do however prefer the Duke handle over the Chubby pattern, but the CH1 handle is still far better than the CH2 synth in my mid-sized, non-arthritic hands.
I'm looking forward to shaving with it tomorrow morning!
Congratulations! I received mine a few weeks ago and have used it every day since. My other brushes are getting lonely.
The Chubby 1 Super is a fantastic brush!
- Thread starter
- #106
It's not *quite* as dense and springy as the Emperor 1, but it combines that feel with the enveloping cushiness of the bigger Tulip 3 in a way that works for me. The Chubby handle pattern may not be my favorite, but now that I've actually shaved with it, I have to say it's just fine ...not every brush can be a Beaufort or Emperor.
I've been on a pure badger kick lately, especially when I skip a day shaving. Here's my pure lineup. The keyhole is a Shavemac pure from Rudy Vey.
I find the keyhole shape just perfect. I've seen and noted the awesome one on right before!
What Simpson is No.2 from left? Thanks.
AA
It is the Beaufort B3 20mm knot approximately.
- Thread starter
- #110
Despite the recent focus on super bristle, I'm a big fan of Simpson pure as well, I have an Eagle 1, Beaufort 1 & 2, Berkeley and a Special in Pure and use them regularly, for their great combination of firmness and scrub, though I have run across a couple that were either prickly or too scritchy for even my tastes.
Completely different brushes. The Commodore is a much taller brush and not nearly as dense a knot As a Chubby 1.
So buying Simpsons brushes is like buying sheets, one with variable hair density and the other w thread count..... Only wish they would actually give a number (hairs per mm2)....in the old days one would have gone to a store and actually touch them....
- Thread starter
- #114
My Chubby 1 is in Super, so I can't be certain, but usually the loft dimensions hold true between hair types (as much as any Simpson brush, considering the sample variation that occurs)... The Commodore has a slightly lower ratio of loft to knot diameter, but the Chubby is definitely denser.
In use this means that my Commodore X3 is scrubbier and has about the same resilience when splayed as my Chubby 1, the Chubby is cushier and more "luxurious" feeling, but the X3 is slightly larger on the face and rinses out easier. Both great brushes, neither handle pattern is my favorite. The Commodore is definitely more brush for the buck, but if I had to choose between them I'd take the Chubby (in Super ...not certain if I'd make the same choice in Best, though I like my Duke 2 in Best better than the X3 as well and it's closer to the CH1 in knot dimensions than the Commodore).
In use this means that my Commodore X3 is scrubbier and has about the same resilience when splayed as my Chubby 1, the Chubby is cushier and more "luxurious" feeling, but the X3 is slightly larger on the face and rinses out easier. Both great brushes, neither handle pattern is my favorite. The Commodore is definitely more brush for the buck, but if I had to choose between them I'd take the Chubby (in Super ...not certain if I'd make the same choice in Best, though I like my Duke 2 in Best better than the X3 as well and it's closer to the CH1 in knot dimensions than the Commodore).
- Thread starter
- #115
It's even more complicated than that... a Simpson brush as seen in their ad copy is (in my experience) merely a strong suggestion of what to expect... they undoubtedly attempt to build the brushes to the given spec, but making the knots by hand, from a naturally variable fiber, almost ensures that the product will have significant batch to batch and individual sample variation.
That said, you'll *most often* get a brush that's within a few percent of true spec and failing that you'll almost certainly get an excellent brush that's type representative, though the knot may be somewhat taller/shorter/denser/thinner/softer/scrubbier/etc. than expected.
Don't take this as Simpson bashing... I'm actually a hard bitten Simpson fan, but the reality is there are brush makers that are more consistent and less expensive, some are even both at the same time, but none of them make brushes that are quite like Simpson's offerings and if you acquire the taste for what Simpson *does* do so well, then you'll probably wind up with several of their brushes before you're done
Also, if you're not an ultimate density fanatic, you'll probably be happy with the backbone and resilience that all of Simpson's mid to low loft brushes offer, none of them are at all floppy. I've never tried any of the taller lofted models, since I prefer dense and springy knots, but so far anything that's 1:2.3 (base to loft ratio) or under has been acceptable for my taste.
It's even more complicated than that... a Simpson brush as seen in their ad copy is (in my experience) merely a strong suggestion of what to expect... they undoubtedly attempt to build the brushes to the given spec, but making the knots by hand, from a naturally variable fiber, almost ensures that the product will have significant batch to batch and individual sample variation.
That said, you'll *most often* get a brush that's within a few percent of true spec and failing that you'll almost certainly get an excellent brush that's type representative, though the knot may be somewhat taller/shorter/denser/thinner/softer/scrubbier/etc. than expected.
Don't take this as Simpson bashing... I'm actually a hard bitten Simpson fan, but the reality is there are brush makers that are more consistent and less expensive, some are even both at the same time, but none of them make brushes that are quite like Simpson's offerings and if you acquire the taste for what Simpson *does* do so well, then you'll probably wind up with several of their brushes before you're done
Also, if you're not an ultimate density fanatic, you'll probably be happy with the backbone and resilience that all of Simpson's mid to low loft brushes offer, none of them are at all floppy. I've never tried any of the taller lofted models, since I prefer dense and springy knots, but so far anything that's 1:2.3 (base to loft ratio) or under has been acceptable for my taste.
Yes, Simpson’s uniqueness is a large part of the fun. Your brush is truly yours, no one else had one that’s the same.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Thread starter
- #117
Duke 1 inbound...
it really is a sickness
it really is a sickness
I’m with you. I have 4 Simpsons in the mail currently including a Chubby 2 synthetic. Sad part is that I forgot the I ordered the Chubby a few weeks ago and only only realized it was still on order after I got a shipping update.Duke 1 inbound...
it really is a sickness
Thsee will bring me to a dozen Simpsons then I’m done. Ok, maybe a Duke 3 synth and a Silvertip Classic or Tulip 1, but that’s really it and I mean it!
- Thread starter
- #119
I'm still liking my Tulip 1 2-band, but if the Classic 1 had been available when I ordered I'd have been sorely tempted!
In the end, I'm glad I got the Tulip though, since the Classic handle is so short that I constantly find myself wishing it was taller.
The CH2 synth is a pretty decent brush, but for my taste no synthetic I've tried is "there" yet. I also find the girth of the CH2 handle to be excessive
In the end, I'm glad I got the Tulip though, since the Classic handle is so short that I constantly find myself wishing it was taller.
The CH2 synth is a pretty decent brush, but for my taste no synthetic I've tried is "there" yet. I also find the girth of the CH2 handle to be excessive
Great reading your Simpson journeys guys :0)
