Was the 2011 r41 a happy accident? Need help to find an interview.

[aimsport]

Okay. My confidence in Andreas Muller is a tad shaken.

I just read a recent interview with Andreas Muller where he states that weight of a razor doesn't have a "crucial influence" on the shave, and the comb design doesn't have "such a great impact on the performance" of the r41. He also insists elsewhere that the r41 had only one "minor" tweak recently.

None of these observations match my understanding of reality.

That brought to mind an old interview, years ago that also made little sense. It was announcing the then upcoming r41. I can not find the article, but the shocking upshot was that the r41 was not designed for close shaves but for maintaining three-day stubble.

Here are the main points of the interview as I remember: 1. not everyone wants a close shave. 2. Muhle follows fashion trends of men and many are sporting stubble intentionally and have facial hair that needs trimming. 3. Muhle wants to address all men's grooming market segments 4. They are addressing that market with a new razor specially designed for mustache trimming, sideburns, and maintaining stubble.... the "new" r41. I remember dismissing the r41 on that basis.

Think I'm nuts? Google "r41 for those who prefer to sport three-day stubble" and you will find multiple references. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=r41+for+those+who+prefer+to+sport+three-day+stubble . (Is anyone using an r41 for that purpose?)

After the r41 came out I think people just assumed it was a reguler DE and used it as such. Despite Andreas' thoughts that the comb design was mainly for "manufacturing and design reasons" not performance, DE shavers discovered that precise comb, blade exposure and cap configuration was an amazingly effective beast. But that discovery, my theory is, was a happy accident.

My theory is that based on feedback from experienced DE shavers, Muhle then pivoted their materials. The purpose was expanded to "experienced DE shavers with stronger beard growth" OR "for those who prefer to sport three-day stubble". Other text said it was ideal for removing three-day stubble, which is another pivot of sorts.

More fuel for the theory. If Muhle truly respected the subtleties of the 2011 r41 and viewed it as the razor that delivers the longest lasting BBS shaves, I don't think they would have gone and changed it so quickly. As great as the 2013 r41 is, it is NOT the 2011 r41.

I believe that even slight variations in cap/base/blade configuration separate the great from the just good razors. They make a razor suitable for one beard type and not for another. YMMV measured in thousandths of inches and hundreths of degrees. I'm not sure Muhle holds the same opinion based on Andreas own words.

The original article was in a pdf predating the launch of the 2011 r41 and I can not find it. I'm pretty sure it came out in 2010. I'm pretty sure it was on the left, bottom of the magazine page. Does anyone else remember it? Does anyone have early R41 announcement material before feedback from wetshaving reviewers?

Thanks.

 

[mblakele]

For the interview, are you looking for http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showth...-with-Andreas-Müller-General-Manager-of-MÜHLE from 2011-08-17? It seems consistent with the points you raised as far as the weight and comb, and I think it is the earliest discussion of the R41tc by Andreas Müller. Based on this, I think Andreas has made consistent statements for the past couple of years.

Looking at http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php/220831-News-Coming-Soon-New-Mühle-head from 2011, I do not notice any suggestions that the R41 would be good for maintaining stubble. There was a discussion at http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthread.php/253849-R41-Has-anyone-at-Edwin-Jagger-actually-used-it that might be relevant, but it seems to have been a misunderstanding that was quickly remedied.

I ask because THIS is part of their description on their website:

These razors will be ideal for anyone who prefers that 'designer stubble' or 'just out of bed' look!

The idea is that the 'open' comb edge to the razor lifts the longer beard hair and then trims off the hair ends to leave a tidy unshaven appearance.

Ummmm, I think someone over there is confused. The first paragraph is accurate, as Muhle itself said that the R41 is ideal for those who sport 3-day stubble. But what's with that 2nd sentence?

Hey, they changed it already. Good for them.


The safety razor with an open tooth comb is for well practised wet shavers; the construction, which features a special blade angle, allows vigorous, very direct shaving technique (some may call it aggressive).
As with closed comb safety razors the curved blade is exposed and clamped in place by the curvature of the top. The open comb razor ensure that cut stubble and shaving preparation are cleared away during the shave. Thus the cutting edge is kept free of residues which makes subsequent cleaning easier.

During shaving, the safety razor should at first be drawn across the skin without applying any pressure at all. Shaving with the grain is often sufficient and renders a second shave in the opposite direction unnecessary. The skin should be stretched taut or tight at all times.

So that might be the source of confusion. Another way to look at this is through past versions of the Mühle web site. At https://web.archive.org/web/*/http:...p/messer_und_hobel/1/rasierhobel/147/147/R_41 there are five archived copies from 2011-06-15 to 2012-01-07. I think https://web.archive.org/web/2011061...p/messer_und_hobel/1/rasierhobel/147/147/R_41 is the earliest one. It seems to have much the same text as the current product page:

The new safety razor is predestined for men with a denser, stronger beard growth or for those prefer to sport three-day stubble.

That sounds a bit contradictory, but I think the author was trying to say that the R41tc is a good razor for gents who only shave twice a week. Not sure if I agree, since such a person would only sport that coveted three-day stubble on the third day. But after all it is just marketing.

For what it might be worth, I also wondered if this might be a translation error. But the German version is fairly similar: "Der neue Hobel ist für Männer mit einem dichteren, stärkeren Bartwuchs oder Liebhaber des Drei-Tage-Bartes geradezu prädestiniert." Similar text appears at https://www.muehle-shaving.com/presse/de/PM.MUEHLE.2011.06.PDF from about the same time in 2011. And I see an article in a 2011 company newsletter that might be relevant: http://www.muehle-shaving.com/download/rasierspiegel-14.pdf (via google translate):

However, length and thickness of the beard growth for the quality of the result play a crucial role. Shaving a three-day beard, a planer represent the better shaving, because it is equipped with only a blade. When open, the planing angle also can not adjust. Maybe just try it with a change, if you do not shave daily.

In this translation a "planer" is a "Hobel", or razor handle - that is, a DE razor. This is not specific to the R41 but suggests how Mühle might think about these things.

Based on these sources from 2011 to the present, I think Mühle has been consistent with their comments on the R41tc. I do not see any evidence that Mühle ever recommended the R41 for maintaining a constant length of stubble. Rather they recommended it, and continue to recommend it, for removing multi-day stubble.

 

[aimsport]

Thanks mblakele for digging. The fog is still thick but you helped propose a reasonable alternative theory.

So The English Shaving Company had the same impression back then but quickly corrected it. They initially wrote of the r41:

These razors will be ideal for anyone who prefers that 'designer stubble' or 'just out of bed' look!

The idea is that the 'open' comb edge to the razor lifts the longer beard hair and then trims off the hair ends to leave a tidy unshaven appearance.

But then dropped that text quickly.

So two theories now.

Theory 1: Muhle meant that a razor capable of a close shave of three-day old beards helps those that like three days of stubble, but that was misinterpreted by The English Shaving Company and by me when I read the article before the r41 launch.

In rebuttal: A very close shave seems like an odd way to maintain stubble. A close shave works against that objective.
In support: Felling a three day beard is clearly a capability of the r41. The English Shaving Company stubble text was taken down quickly.

Theory 2. Muhle did intend to deliver a tool for people to maintain stubble.

In rebuttal: I don't know of anyone using it for that purpose. There are better designs to achieve that objective.
In support: the missing article... I'm not the only one that came to that conclusion back then.

you also wrote:

For the interview, are you looking for http://badgerandblade.com/vb/showthr...nager-of-MÜHLE from 2011-08-17?

Nope. It was earlier than that in print form via PDF. The 2011 r41 had not yet come out. I do not know if was Andreas or Christian who was quoted... or even whether the interview was a translation... which could have introduced the very same translation error you suggest.

Still looking. I had searched the wayback machine already but was blocked by too many broken links.

Thanks. Anyone else remember an article the mentions the 2011 R41 before its launch?

 

[Icebear]

FWIW:
The R41 is giving a super close shave and you will have to pay attention to what you are doing or have the band aid ready. The orig. slippery Muehle handle is a joke and I use a bulldog handle with the R41 2011 head. Not slippery and therefore much more relaxed grip and better handling.
Whatever misunderstandings happened before the actual launch and that might be due to translation inaccuracies are like the snow from last year. An academic discussion in my book

 

[alex2363]

Thanks mblakele for digging. The fog is still thick but you helped propose a reasonable alternative theory.

So The English Shaving Company had the same impression back then but quickly corrected it. They initially wrote of the r41:


But then dropped that text quickly.

So two theories now.

Theory 1: Muhle meant that a razor capable of a close shave of three-day old beards helps those that like three days of stubble, but that was misinterpreted by The English Shaving Company and by me when I read the article before the r41 launch.

In rebuttal: A very close shave seems like an odd way to maintain stubble. A close shave works against that objective.
In support: Felling a three day beard is clearly a capability of the r41. The English Shaving Company stubble text was taken down quickly.

Theory 2. Muhle did intend to deliver a tool for people to maintain stubble.

In rebuttal: I don't know of anyone using it for that purpose. There are better designs to achieve that objective.
In support: the missing article... I'm not the only one that came to that conclusion back then.

you also wrote:


Nope. It was earlier than that in print form via PDF. The 2011 r41 had not yet come out. I do not know if was Andreas or Christian who was quoted... or even whether the interview was a translation... which could have introduced the very same translation error you suggest.

Still looking. I had searched the wayback machine already but was blocked by too many broken links.

Thanks. Anyone else remember an article the mentions the 2011 R41 before its launch?

Here is a link to Jim/ B&B Codfish, Jim is constantly in touch with the Muhle brothers and can help you with any further questions from past archives to new. This way you can get your answers straight up with no theories or uncertainties.
http://badgerandblade.com/vb/member.php/26213-Codfish

 

[aimsport]

I respect Codfish's Muhle knowlege. Great idea.

So the remaining questions are:

Is razor design arbitrary enough at Muhle so that:

1. Andreas' statement that weight is "not crucial" has resulted in premature cancellation by redesign of the 2011 r41
2. Andreas' statement that "comb design doesn't have such a great impact on performance" has resulted in premature cancellation by redesign of the 2011 r41
3. And the biggie: How can changing the baseplate length, width, and weight, the cap length, width and weight, the razor length width and weight be considered one "tweak", and not be worthy of a new model designation.
4. Since that philosophy spill over to brushes, where changing something major as the generation of synthetic hair doesn't prompt a model number change, why is this so?
5. Was the R41 ever meant to maintain stubble, rather than just be able to shave stubble effectively.

Why does this matter?

Try recommending a Muhle product you love to a friend... Oooooh, make sure you get one where the cap is narrower than a penny. Or the V1 kinda looks like this, the V2 kinda looks like picture. And I think this vendor is shipping V2 but not designating it as such, that vendor is designating but out of stock, but wait I got two of the same Muhle model in the mail and they're different, argh.

If Muhle didn't make outstanding product, I wouldn't care. But since they make nice products I would like to be able to recommend them and re-buy them without so much confusion. I have proven to myself that the metal Muhle uses is breakable... so that makes it even more important to be able to have the option to rebuy a design that works for you without getting a different product than you had.

 

[aimsport]

In another forum I just learned of another quote attributed to Andreas that gives me pause:

Andreas also accounts for other measurements occurring when comparing R41 razors..."differences are caused by unintended variations during the manufacturing process."

Unintended variations that huge... Really?

And while it took some time, there are now rapidly more and more people that have gotten past the learning curve and have come to appreciate the 2011 r41, even declaring it as the razor which delivers their best shaves ever. So, now what. How does the wetshaving community deal with all the confusion in their pursuit of acquiring the tools for an even better shave?

So please add the following questions to the list for Muhle:

Is the most aggressive r41 the community calls the "2011" still in production? If not will it be put back into production? Can it be given a new designation?

 

[alex2363]

In another forum I just learned of another quote attributed to Andreas that gives me pause:


Unintended variations that huge... Really?

And while it took some time, there are now rapidly more and more people that have gotten past the learning curve and have come to appreciate the 2011 r41, even declaring it as the razor which delivers their best shaves ever. So, now what. How does the wetshaving community deal with all the confusion in their pursuit of acquiring the tools for an even better shave?

So please add the following questions to the list for Muhle:

Is the most aggressive r41 the community calls the "2011" still in production? If not will it be put back into production? Can it be given a new designation?

I still think that communicating with Jim would be ideal and more productive for you. We are not in control of the Muhle manufacturing process and can not account for any discrepancies or variations that occur to alter the shave items at Muele. Jim can be an interpreter since your questions are technical and Andreas may not understand.

 

[aimsport]

I still think that communicating with Jim would be ideal and more productive for you. We are not in control of the Muhle manufacturing process and can not account for any discrepancies or variations that occur to alter the shave items at Muele. Jim can be an interpreter since your questions are technical and Andreas may not understand.

I've made contact with Jim and hope something will come of it.

If not, let's just rename this thread "How the DE that delivers the world's best and longest lasting BBSs was discontinued."

 

[Codfish]

I've made contact with Jim and hope something will come of it.

If not, let's just rename this thread "How the DE that delivers the world's best and longest lasting BBSs was discontinued."

I was contacted by Aimsport to hopefully address the questions raised in this thread. I will do my best. First, let me say that I do not represent Muhle, Andreas or Christian. I was able to interview each of them after I posted a review of the R41 2011 in July of that year. Much of what I know about the R41 is a result of the questions I asked Andreas at the time.

The first question I read in Aimsport's thread was whether the 2011 model is still produced. It is no longer manufactured. However, it is still available from U.S. vendors due to complications experienced by the U.S. distributor. Any new R41 sold by U.S. vendors is the 2011 model.

Now the hard part. There were three models of the R41 produced in recent years: the R41 2010, 2011 and 2013.

The 2010 was an OC model that was relatively mild. Thus, the comments about stubble/beard reduction in this thread. It was so much like the R89 that Muhle decided to modify it--producing the 2011 model sometimes referred to as "The Beast".

During my interview with Andreas, I was at first surprised when he said that handle weight was not a crucial factor in the razor's aggressiveness. In my personal experience, handle weight does contribute to aggressiveness. In this particular case, I've come to understand that the key concept--the word "crucial"--may have been interpreted differently by the two of us. In the context of the 2011 model, handle weight is clearly secondary to "blade exposure"'. The Q & A process may have suffered a in the translation.

Likewise with the question concerning the tooth-comb design. Is it a critical element in the razor's aggressiveness? Again, not as much as blade exposure. The tooth-comb is a hybrid design that has qualities of both open-comb and safety-bar razors.

Are modifications of less than one millimeter and less than one gram tweaks? Most definitely. The changes are nearly undetectable other than by close examination. The razor's aggressiveness is hardly effected, but safety and ease of use are greatly enhanced. Blade exposure has been reduced by roughly 50%.

Why wasn't a new model designation made? Muhle feels that changes and improvements in products are a normal part of doing business--much like software updates in Silicon Valley. Muhle does follow shaving websites around the world, and is aware of the consumer (and vendor) confusion over R41 and V1/V2 issues. Their 2013/14 catalog does a much better job of making both razor and brush models clear to vendors and consumers alike.

Remember, this was a small niche company until recently. Sales of the R41 and V2 brushes have given them a brand new audience and brand new exposure. If there was a learning curve along the way, so be it. The future will tell if they have learned any lessons along the way.

 

[Icebear]

Great insight , Jim .

 

[aimsport]

Thank you for that informative post, Jim. It sheds light on many things.

 

[wagstaff]

Good stuff across the board, gents! That 2010 to 2011 transition in particular seems like a real reimagining, not so much a "tweak" though.... that's where an altogether new model number seems most obviously called for, still.On the v1 vs v2 brushes, woulda been nice for something more obvious. But I can see them not predicting it was more than a "tweak" to us enthusiasts.

 

[alex2363]

I was contacted by Aimsport to hopefully address the questions raised in this thread. I will do my best. First, let me say that I do not represent Muhle, Andreas or Christian. I was able to interview each of them after I posted a review of the R41 2011 in July of that year. Much of what I know about the R41 is a result of the questions I asked Andreas at the time.

The first question I read in Aimsport's thread was whether the 2011 model is still produced. It is no longer manufactured. However, it is still available from U.S. vendors due to complications experienced by the U.S. distributor. Any new R41 sold by U.S. vendors is the 2011 model.

Now the hard part. There were three models of the R41 produced in recent years: the R41 2010, 2011 and 2013.

The 2010 was an OC model that was relatively mild. Thus, the comments about stubble/beard reduction in this thread. It was so much like the R89 that Muhle decided to modify it--producing the 2011 model sometimes referred to as "The Beast".

During my interview with Andreas, I was at first surprised when he said that handle weight was not a crucial factor in the razor's aggressiveness. In my personal experience, handle weight does contribute to aggressiveness. In this particular case, I've come to understand that the key concept--the word "crucial"--may have been interpreted differently by the two of us. In the context of the 2011 model, handle weight is clearly secondary to "blade exposure"'. The Q & A process may have suffered a in the translation.

Likewise with the question concerning the tooth-comb design. Is it a critical element in the razor's aggressiveness? Again, not as much as blade exposure. The tooth-comb is a hybrid design that has qualities of both open-comb and safety-bar razors.

Are modifications of less than one millimeter and less than one gram tweaks? Most definitely. The changes are nearly undetectable other than by close examination. The razor's aggressiveness is hardly effected, but safety and ease of use are greatly enhanced. Blade exposure has been reduced by roughly 50%.

Why wasn't a new model designation made? Muhle feels that changes and improvements in products are a normal part of doing business--much like software updates in Silicon Valley. Muhle does follow shaving websites around the world, and is aware of the consumer (and vendor) confusion over R41 and V1/V2 issues. Their 2013/14 catalog does a much better job of making both razor and brush models clear to vendors and consumers alike.

Remember, this was a small niche company until recently. Sales of the R41 and V2 brushes have given them a brand new audience and brand new exposure. If there was a learning curve along the way, so be it. The future will tell if they have learned any lessons along the way.

Thank you Jim, as always very eloquently and well put post that answers the inquiry.

 

[aimsport]

Why wasn't a new model designation made? Muhle feels that changes and improvements in products are a normal part of doing business--much like software updates in Silicon Valley.

Like software? I disagree.

iOS 3.1.3, 4.2.1, 5.1.1 6.1.3 ? Window 95, 98, 2000, XP, Vista 2007. WinZip 9, 10, 11.2, 12.1. Linux Kernel 2.6, 3.3, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12. Even version numbers on routers Cisco Linksys E4200 v2. Of course there are exceptions, but the norm is to disclose and clearly indicate version.

If it's like software in Silicon Valley the clear designation of precise version in use is the standard... since before PC's with uname -a and the -version parameter.

Anyone buying, selling, reviewing, comparing/contrasting an R41 or Muhle synthetic brushes has an extra significant hurdle due to the lack of version stamping.

 

[aimsport]

Are modifications of less than one millimeter and less than one gram tweaks? Most definitely. The changes are nearly undetectable other than by close examination. The razor's aggressiveness is hardly effected, but safety and ease of use are greatly enhanced. Blade exposure has been reduced by roughly 50%.

Not so. At arms length one can clearly differentiate a 2011 from a 2013 R41. These are different razors that actually both deliver great results. In razor head terms a millimeter difference might as well be a mile performance wise. The 2011's BBS does last markedly longer. The 2013 is more flexible with regard to blade angle and more forgiving with errors.

I believe lack of clear version designations is hurting Muhle and the wetshaving community including vendors, reviewers, BST and users. I can not acquire many of their synthetic brushes with any assurance they are the latest fiber. Unless, of course, I go on hearsay that a particluar model was never made with anything other than latest fiber. I would easily have four of their synthetics if I could be sure that what I ordered is the latest. Not even the packaging contains any kind of indicator. And in the rapidly advancing world of synthetics this is even more aggravating. Ugh.

And to protest the Mulhle designation ambiguities... I will sometimes refer to the two brothers at Muhle as Daryl and Daryl... you see, their DNA varies less than 0.1%. Just a tweak and not worth a unique designation, right? Not! lol.

 

[DrAwkward]

<snip>
Are modifications of less than one millimeter and less than one gram tweaks? Most definitely. The changes are nearly undetectable other than by close examination. The razor's aggressiveness is hardly affected, but safety and ease of use are greatly enhanced. Blade exposure has been reduced by roughly 50%.

Why wasn't a new model designation made? Muhle feels that changes and improvements in products are a normal part of doing business--much like software updates in Silicon Valley. Muhle does follow shaving websites around the world, and is aware of the consumer (and vendor) confusion over R41 and V1/V2 issues. Their 2013/14 catalog does a much better job of making both razor and brush models clear to vendors and consumers alike.

<snip>

Awesome post!
I will never use the R41 as a daily shaver, so I'm not as interested in these questions as the many guys who use the R41 as their primary weapon. Nonetheless, I have enjoyed reading the info in this thread. I like the changes made to the R41 in 2013. It remains the most aggressive razor I have ever used and I can't imagine using something that is even more dangerous!

 

[alex2363]

Not so. At arms length one can clearly differentiate a 2011 from a 2013 R41. These are different razors that actually both deliver great results. In razor head terms a millimeter difference might as well be a mile performance wise. The 2011's BBS does last markedly longer. The 2013 is more flexible with regard to blade angle and more forgiving with errors.

I believe lack of clear version designations is hurting Muhle and the wetshaving community including vendors, reviewers, BST and users. I can not acquire many of their synthetic brushes with any assurance they are the latest fiber. Unless, of course, I go on hearsay that a particluar model was never made with anything other than latest fiber. I would easily have four of their synthetics if I could be sure that what I ordered is the latest. Not even the packaging contains any kind of indicator. And in the rapidly advancing world of synthetics this is even more aggravating. Ugh.

And to protest the Mulhle designation ambiguities... I will sometimes refer to the two brothers at Muhle as Daryl and Daryl... you see, their DNA varies less than 0.1%. Just a tweak and not worth a unique designation, right? Not! lol.

You do have your right to an opinion, as do all of our members. Jim has given an opinion and you have given yours. But in the end, it is a Muele product and they are responsible for their production designs and tweaks.

 

[alex2363]

Awesome post!
I will never use the R41 as a daily shaver, so I'm not as interested in these questions as the many guys who use the R41 as their primary weapon. Nonetheless, I have enjoyed reading the info in this thread. I like the changes made to the R41 in 2013. It remains the most aggressive razor I have ever used and I can't imagine using something that is even more dangerous!

I loved the razor, but for me it was not a keeper. I had to really be on my game for that beast

 

[aimsport]

You do have your right to an opinion, as do all of our members. Jim has given an opinion and you have given yours. But in the end, it is a Muele product and they are responsible for their production designs and tweaks.

True indeed. That is the point.