What's new

Sloppy blade placement, bleeding to death

Dave himself

Wee Words of Wisdom
Tolerance stacking. If you had a DE razor with 0.002 clearance, you would be decidedly unhappy- there would be a fair number of blades which would "spring" when removing them. One good cut squeezing your fingers around a DE blade would require stitches.

I know this because some of the pre-/peri- Gillette vintage razors have slightly larger posts, to fit some of the similar profile, but not to same spec, vintage blades.

So the question is- does the clearance fit trigger your OCD, or do your blades move substantively when nominally clamped?

I'm suspecting your blades are pretty secure, when clamped?😉
That's what I was thinking by the way the OP was putting it. By the way you answered it better than I ever could 👍.
That's what I was thinking by the way the OP was putting it. By the way you answered it better than I ever could 👍.
I can see how coming from the cartridge world that a little wiggle could be concerning. With cartridges, you get a satisfying click when you load one up, but with a DE razor, they move around until you clamp them down. Good razors self-align the blade when tightening, like the 89 head, Henson head, and Rockwell head (and I imagine Razorock, but I've never had one in hand). Poor razors like Parker have a lot of play and require a few attempts to properly align the blade. That was one reason why I gave up on Parkers years ago and actually went back to cartridges until recently.
King C. Gillette.
BTW, I also have a KCG razor that I purchased on a whim when I started my journey. I don't talk about it much because I never use it, and I never intend to use it again after a few shaves. There are a lot of claims that it is an 89 head clone made by Muhle. It may in fact be made by Muhle, but it's a poor clone, IMHO. It has way more slop in the cap and baseplate alignment than my true EJ 89 and true Muhle 89 heads have. As a result, it's a struggle to get proper blade alignment. In contrast, I can change the blade blindfolded in my real 89 heads and get perfect alignment 99 out of 100 times. Those heads have better tolerances.

When you look at the caps, you can see the mold number. My true EJ and Muhle have a single number. In contrast, the KCG has a G in front of the number, which I believe specifies Gillette. The alignment posts are also different, and they have a smaller diameter (to my eye, I've not taken a calipers) that results in more slop in the alignment. It's a different cap and baseplate system, and they're not as good as the originals.
If lighter weight is what you seek, I heartily second the recommendation for the aluminum Above the Tie Windsor. It is my favorite aluminum, with the Timeless aluminum a very close second. The Timeless has a little more blade feel and aggression to me, but still a favorite.


This is the GC 84-P head. As you can see, the Alignment Posts are on the 'Bottom Plate', different. I now prefer that design. People complain about how snug the blade is on the 'posts', they have to 'bend' the blade to remove it. I dont have a problem with that, I like tight tolerances. I actually wish RazoRock had used this 'system' on their "Lupo" razor. But, instead they went with the Rectangle posts and slots, like the Wolfman razor. The Lupo is a copy.

I've been DE shaving for over 40 years and not once have I cut myself removing a blade requiring 'stitches'. But, everybody's different.

IDK if this helps, or just adds noise to your issue?


One of my favorite razors is the RazoRock Mentor, a cheap zamak head with positively atrocious alignment.

While the issue is certainly annoying I've become accustomed to it over time as the head is a great fit for me in every other way.

My workaround for it is to pull the blade all the way to one side and then clamp down. This obviously ends up giving two different blade exposures but at least prevents the blade from being askew.

During the shave I simply pick the side that seems most appropriate just then. Almost like having a sort of mini-adjustable.

Mind you, I'm not suggesting that this will be the way forward for you. Just sharing my own experience.

Good luck! 😎👍
Razorock makes some machined aluminum razors. The Lupo Al I have is _very_ precise in its blade alignment, and has mild-to-moderate blade gap (0.58mm, I think), and is quite light (both handle and head are aluminum).

It might suit the OP pretty well, and it's inexpensive (as machined-from-billet razors go).

. Charles
@Dobric ...now, that's an interesting design. If, anything could lure me into the 'collecting' side of the razors, it might be variations of well-designed Alignment Pins and/or methods of locking down the blade. IDK, but it would have to be a design that improved overall blade alignment. And, AFAIK, because of the materials used, e.g., brass, zink, etc., 'vintage' razors would be off my list. I understand all material eventually wears with time, but the current use of high-grade stainless and Ti, makes that a multi-generational proposition.


I have a Henson Mild and loved the machining of it. The blade lock up and exposure were great. Unfortunately the mild version didn't seem to work for me either. I needed an extra pass to get a DFS. The extra pass caused me a fair amount of irritation. I likely would have been better off with the medium or aggressive versions since the GC .84 really hits the sweet spot.
"All lock-up solid, with no perceptible blade movement" All the razors I have lock the blades in place. The issue is when I drop the blades in, I can move them side to side before tightening.
Well that is great and is as it should be. One of the reasons that there is play before you tighten the razor is that each razor brand makes de blades to different specifications. I read a very informed and specific thread on this topic which I can not find. There is not 1 universal specification for a de blade there is a range. There are also posts here about how to reduce blade aliment issues. I have razors that I shave with that are 80 to 100 years old blade design has change some over that time. Also blades have to accommodate different razor head mechanisms. There are members more informed than I that may be able to give you a more specific answer. Also some great advice about aliening your blade in the posts above. Enjoy your shaving journey.
Last edited:
Going from throwaway Weighting nothing to a DE that even weight less the 2.0OZ is drastic. If you bear down like with say a BIC Black that was One Blade disposable. You have good chance of being BLOOD Donor.

I grew up before THROWAWAY were invented, so even I had a learning cure, and some blood letting.

Go slow, take time, DO NOT USE Pressure and let TOOL akaRazor Weight do work. Ti me is what you need, and soon you will build Mussel Memory, and be an EXPERT.
Looks like the 84-P head is what I'm looking for based on the pictures. All the razors I own are crazy sloppy and all with the same gaps. The 2 pins that line up the blades before clamping are around 0.180", yet the opening in the blades are 0.200. I still don't understand why they allow for such a huge clearance and blade moving 0.020. The two I own with edge alignment are no better as all blades are 0.499 yet the opening are 0.518. Like I said, they can cast these within 0.002 but choose to be way underside with blades just flopping around side to side. All blades no matter the brand are super accurate with same cut out inside and on edges. You can stack 20 different brands and there isn't 0.001 difference between them.


  • Head 5.jpg
    Head 5.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 27
  • Head 4.jpg
    Head 4.jpg
    964.8 KB · Views: 24
  • Head 3.jpg
    Head 3.jpg
    970.5 KB · Views: 22
  • Head 2.jpg
    Head 2.jpg
    879.1 KB · Views: 24
  • Head 1.jpg
    Head 1.jpg
    976.3 KB · Views: 21
  • Blade 1.jpg
    Blade 1.jpg
    966 KB · Views: 22
  • Head 6.jpg
    Head 6.jpg
    838.8 KB · Views: 29
Thank you for your pictures. I understand your frustration about the blade vs pin tolerances. Blade exposure and angle curvature of blade by the head design are why the top caps are different widths.
Top Bottom