What's new

Thin Cap Gillette Old Type - most technically correct design ever?

Looks great and fits very well to the chrome finish of the tech.

May I ask you how much you have paid for it? would really be interesseted to have one of your razor heads. And I really like your idea of using a tech cap. Very impressing design, highly professional!

Sami
It was $7 to get the base plate printed in Nylon using the SLS (selective laser sintering) process.

I shaved with it yesterday and found it to be a little more aggressive than my Old Type. I rechecked the dimensions of it and found it to be undersized by around 0.15 mm in total width. This might not seem like a lot, but when I checked the design geometry this would be enough to increase the blade exposure from 0.07mm to over 0.1mm. This would be the equivalent of an extra setting step on a Gillette Adjustable, which is pretty much the way it felt when shaving with it. So imagine the Old Type as an adjustable, dial it up one notch, and this is what I've got.

I don't know if the slight under-sizing is typical for the SLS process, or whether the tolerance can swing the other way to slight over-sizing as well. I wouldn't want to adjust the design unless I knew if the printing tolerances were consistently one-sided or not.

But if you're willing to blow less than $10 to test it out, here's the zipped STL file that you need to get it printed. And another image of it.
 

Attachments

  • GILLETTE OLD TYPE TECH BASE PLATE.zip
    34.1 KB · Views: 4
  • Gillette Old Tech 3.jpg
    Gillette Old Tech 3.jpg
    2.9 MB · Views: 20
If you need a STEP file instead of an STL file in order to get it printed, here is a zipped STEP file as well.
 

Attachments

  • GILLETTE OLD TYPE TECH BASE PLATE - STEP FILE.zip
    55.1 KB · Views: 3
If you need a STEP file instead of an STL file in order to get it printed, here is a zipped STEP file as well.
Thanks for the update! Shame about the 0.15mm difference. There’s a bit too much blade gap and guard span on the printed baseplate to be an Old—almost looks like a New SC from the side view. However, this is an interesting Old-New-Tech hybrid. You should make a thread with any future designs! The Razorock BBS seems like an updated Old type but with more blade bend for rigidity and a steeper shaving angle—both have positive exposure. Not sure about the guard span. Seems like the Razorock BBS has little blade gap from what I can tell from pictures online.
 
It was $7 to get the base plate printed in Nylon using the SLS (selective laser sintering) process.

I shaved with it yesterday and found it to be a little more aggressive than my Old Type. I rechecked the dimensions of it and found it to be undersized by around 0.15 mm in total width. This might not seem like a lot, but when I checked the design geometry this would be enough to increase the blade exposure from 0.07mm to over 0.1mm. This would be the equivalent of an extra setting step on a Gillette Adjustable, which is pretty much the way it felt when shaving with it. So imagine the Old Type as an adjustable, dial it up one notch, and this is what I've got.

I don't know if the slight under-sizing is typical for the SLS process, or whether the tolerance can swing the other way to slight over-sizing as well. I wouldn't want to adjust the design unless I knew if the printing tolerances were consistently one-sided or not.

But if you're willing to blow less than $10 to test it out, here's the zipped STL file that you need to get it printed. And another image of it.
Yes, thermal contraction at play here, process-inherent of course; normally, even though it is usually baked-in the model, can be compensated for. There's a whole suite of software packages with that in mind. Of course that implies knowledge of the printer model and materials used.
 
For such low printing costs the best way to do this is probably to get one printed, measure it and then apply a small scaling factor to the next print in order to compensate. By my calculations the additional scaling factor should be around 0.5% if I were to print again. So small that I wouldn't need to adjust the rest of the design at all, as smaller features would hardly be affected.
 
For such low printing costs the best way to do this is probably to get one printed, measure it and then apply a small scaling factor to the next print in order to compensate. By my calculations the additional scaling factor should be around 0.5% if I were to print again. So small that I wouldn't need to adjust the rest of the design at all, as smaller features would hardly be affected.
Provided thy use the same printer and polymer... Ah, the joys of AM.
 
This will be easier. Here's three versions. Aggressive, Medium and Mild. STEP files and STL files. Aggressive is the same data as previously supplied. The other two have been scaled in steps of an additional 0.4%, with the Mild having essentially zero blade exposure by design. But of course you could end up with a small amount of blade exposure due to the aforementioned printing tolerance and thermal contraction. Get the same printer to print all of them in the same material and then choose. Or print a Medium and see which direction you want to go from there, unless you're happy with the Medium of course.
 

Attachments

  • GILLETTE OLD TYPE TECH BASE PLATES.zip
    277.9 KB · Views: 4
Apologies, but I’ve just realised that the files in the post above will only suit a Tech Cap that has the short blade alignment tabs.
I will post another set of files in the next few days that will take into account the longer blade alignment tabs that actually connect with the threaded cap stud.
 
It was $7 to get the base plate printed in Nylon using the SLS (selective laser sintering) process.

I shaved with it yesterday and found it to be a little more aggressive than my Old Type. I rechecked the dimensions of it and found it to be undersized by around 0.15 mm in total width. This might not seem like a lot, but when I checked the design geometry this would be enough to increase the blade exposure from 0.07mm to over 0.1mm. This would be the equivalent of an extra setting step on a Gillette Adjustable, which is pretty much the way it felt when shaving with it. So imagine the Old Type as an adjustable, dial it up one notch, and this is what I've got.

I don't know if the slight under-sizing is typical for the SLS process, or whether the tolerance can swing the other way to slight over-sizing as well. I wouldn't want to adjust the design unless I knew if the printing tolerances were consistently one-sided or not.

But if you're willing to blow less than $10 to test it out, here's the zipped STL file that you need to get it printed. And another image of it.
How did I miss this post! I will have to print this baseplate at my first opportunity. Thanks for posting this.
 
How did I miss this post! I will have to print this baseplate at my first opportunity. Thanks for posting this.
Wait until I post the files that suit all the Tech Caps designs, otherwise you might have to use a hacksaw or file to extend the blade alignment slots all the way to the central hole.

I will also start a separate, appropriately titled thread on the subject so that those who might be interested and have missed this one will have a better chance of seeing it.
 
OK. Here is the ZIP file containing STL files of the Mild, Medium and Aggressive Base Plates. These will fit all Gillette Tech Cap variants. SLS (selective laser sintering) in PA (nylon) should give you the best accuracy, in a suitably robust material.
GILLETTE OLD TYPE TECH BASE PLATE.jpg
 

Attachments

  • GILLETTE OLD TYPE TECH BASE PLATES.zip
    114.8 KB · Views: 5
OK. Here is the ZIP file containing STL files of the Mild, Medium and Aggressive Base Plates. These will fit all Gillette Tech Cap variants. SLS (selective laser sintering) in PA (nylon) should give you the best accuracy, in a suitably robust material.
View attachment 1352905
Great work! Hmm which kind of Nylon would you recommend from this site? SLS Printing

Says they do nickel plating, which adds a “standard finish with a secondary copper + nickel plating processes adding 0.004"-0.006" nickel coating.” Is that small enough not to affect the cap tabs tightening correctly?
 
Great work! Hmm which kind of Nylon would you recommend from this site? SLS Printing

Says they do nickel plating, which adds a “standard finish with a secondary copper + nickel plating processes adding 0.004"-0.006" nickel coating.” Is that small enough not to affect the cap tabs tightening correctly?

The standard Nylon 12 is probably fine strength wise. But it would be worth asking them what they would recommend for something like this, as the finish will be important too, and they will all have a slightly different feel.

0.006" is approximately 0.15mm. This means that the slot for the blade alignment tab would close up by double that, 0.30mm, once coated. As designed, the blade alignment tab slot is 2.4mm wide, so it would reduce to 2.1mm. The Gillette Tech Cap blade alignment tabs are 1.9mm wide, so it should still fit together, but may be tight if you're unlucky with the tolerances.
 
Coating thickness added on might compensate for the printing tolerance too, if it tends to be slightly undersized. Could give you the correct width back, and a little more. Only one way to find out I guess.
 
I printed a couple of Medium baseplates in Proto Pasta Stainless Steel filament with the latest STL files posted by @RDM. My printer is currently outfitted with a massive tool head with 0.8 mm nozzle and 3 mm filament. So I cant really get the fine detail this baseplate deserves. But that is the hardened tool head that I need to print with stainless steel infused filament, carbon fiber, etc. I am going to change to a finer tool head shortly, and will print again in a more standard filament, but for right now, this thing is cool in the stainless filament. It has weight and feels solid. I used 100% infill and the finest layer height I could muster with this huge nozzle. Even so, the layers are quite distinct. It took a couple of tries, but I have something decent and shave worthy.

This one is the medium baseplate. I did a 3 pass shave, and there was a metric ton of blade feel. However the shave was impressively close. I did get a couple of weepers / nicks in the process. Expected for this type of experiment. Overall a very good shave. I am going to have to print out a Mild one now before I switch out of the stainless filament.

@RDM, this is some fantastic work you have done here. And to think this was spawned from a rudimentary discussion about how great the OLD Type is. What a great thread!

2021-10-27 07.14.25.jpg


2021-10-27 07.16.33.jpg


2021-10-27 07.16.09.jpg 2021-10-27 07.16.24.jpg
 
I printed a couple of Medium baseplates in Proto Pasta Stainless Steel filament with the latest STL files posted by @RDM. My printer is currently outfitted with a massive tool head with 0.8 mm nozzle and 3 mm filament. So I cant really get the fine detail this baseplate deserves. But that is the hardened tool head that I need to print with stainless steel infused filament, carbon fiber, etc. I am going to change to a finer tool head shortly, and will print again in a more standard filament, but for right now, this thing is cool in the stainless filament. It has weight and feels solid. I used 100% infill and the finest layer height I could muster with this huge nozzle. Even so, the layers are quite distinct. It took a couple of tries, but I have something decent and shave worthy.

This one is the medium baseplate. I did a 3 pass shave, and there was a metric ton of blade feel. However the shave was impressively close. I did get a couple of weepers / nicks in the process. Expected for this type of experiment. Overall a very good shave. I am going to have to print out a Mild one now before I switch out of the stainless filament.

@RDM, this is some fantastic work you have done here. And to think this was spawned from a rudimentary discussion about how great the OLD Type is. What a great thread!

View attachment 1353123

View attachment 1353126

View attachment 1353124 View attachment 1353125
Wow! That didn’t take you long to get moving on. Great to get feedback on the different versions, although with the different tolerances with different print processes it may not be easy to draw the right conclusions about the sizings, and come up with a definitive snswer as to which version best replicates the Gillette Old Type.
 
Last edited:
Wow! That didn’t take you long to get moving on. Great to get feedback on the different versions, although with the different tolerances with different print processes it may not be easy to draw the right conclusions about the sizings, and come up with a definitive snswer as to which version best replicates the Gillette Old Type.
Yup, already printed the Mild baseplate too! I will give it a try in the next day or tow. Thanks again!
 
Top Bottom