What is a aggressive and efficient razor interpretation?

[Ron R]

Is it fair to say about the aggressiveness and efficiency of a razor is ?
Aggressiveness: its the parameters the manufacture has set in blade gap(Set height or varying as like in a adjustable razor) and blade exposure(positive,neutral,negative) with guard(hybrid or dimpled or just smooth straight) and Cap(OC,normal or Scalloped) all combined before a shave starts in it's static tightened blade loaded razor.

Efficiency: With the set parameters of the razor by manufacture and blade loaded how well did it perform with good hand technique & 1st & 2nd use with a sharp blade by operator of the razor! = end results DFS or BBS.
This my interpretation of aggression and efficiency of a razor, what is yours?

 

[romsitsa]

Bit different, by your description a Gillette RFB is a very aggressive tool, while it's not (ok, it can skin you in a second, but I'd call it user error).
I use "aggressive" for harsh razors. Ymmw.

Adam

 

[GlazedBoker]

Uh oh......

You just......

 

[Ron R]

Uh oh......

You just......

View attachment 903205

That could be a possible, I think I'm some where in the ball park of these interpretations. I'm hoping its more a enlightening than entangled like the worm can. The young fellow sure put some worms to use, that's a interesting smile.....

 

[Badgerstate36]

To me, an aggressive razor has a lot of blade gap, whereas an efficient razor has a lot of blade exposure. Theres a lot of razors out there that dont have a ton of blade gap but are open combs or slants; so they work very efficiently but they arent aggressive. Theres also razors that have a ton of blade exposure, so the blade has such easy access to your skin that you have a larger window of the angle where the blade will contact your skin.
The confusion comes in because we have different perceptions of those things and a different level of technique, so the same razor can give different people a vastly different feel and vastly different results.

 

[Twelvefret]

My limited experience and description with several examples of vintage razors is similar to @Dragonsbeard. What felt one way early differs as I became more tuned in to the particular razor.

I intentionally exchanged the term aggressiveness with efficiency soon after joining the forum. Using the Barbasol Floating head and Gleaner allowed me to feel the blade. Later the GEM Micromatic did the same, but in both cases I felt more blade because I was not tuned in to the skill to experience a smooth shave. I do think some razor punish hurried and careless shaver performance.

Having experienced a couple of the PAA Slants, the way I define efficiency is determined by the lack of stubble at 10-12 hours.

And, now that I am making my own later, I am getting a more efficient result compared to creams.

 

[AimlessWanderer]

Is it fair to say about the aggressiveness and efficiency of a razor is ?
Aggressiveness: its the parameters the manufacture has set in blade gap(Set height or varying as like in a adjustable razor) and blade exposure(positive,neutral,negative) with guard(hybrid or dimpled or just smooth straight) and Cap(OC,normal or Scalloped) all combined before a shave starts in it's static tightened blade loaded razor.

Efficiency: With the set parameters of the razor by manufacture and blade loaded how well did it perform with good hand technique & 1st & 2nd use with a sharp blade by operator of the razor! = end results DFS or BBS.
This my interpretation of aggression and efficiency of a razor, what is yours?

View attachment 903197

That's WAY more complicated than I would make it.

For me, a razor is mild or aggressive based on how badly it might bite you if it was mishandled. How far the blade just out, and the amount of gap between blade and comb, may well both be factors, but the nett effect is what I would judge it on.

I consider efficiency to be more operator based than equipment based. My DE razors are mostly on the mild side, but I also use a shavette and a straight. None of them have bitten me since I started shaving again in October 2017, and they're all giving me good shaves, though they would all do varying amounts of damage if mishandled.

 

[Esox]

This my interpretation of aggression and efficiency of a razor, what is yours?

I use "aggressive" for harsh razors.

I'm with Adam. ↑

The Fatip OC head is efficient. The Muhle R41 is said to be efficient.

Both offer similar blade exposures.

Using my Fatip Grande I can, quite easily, shave directly ATG first pass at 48 hours growth for a 10 hour BBS.

Using my R41 its a full 3 pass shave and one clean up on my neck, done much slower and with much more care, for the same 10 hour BBS finish.

I wont even try shaving directly ATG first pass with my R41 because I know I'd be bleeding profusely. Even the third pass ATG can be a challenge.

Which is the more efficient razor and which is the more aggressive razor of those two?

In my opinion, the Fatip is never 'aggressive' and always efficient. No matter the angle I use it with it never feels like its going to bite me at random.

The R41 is 'aggressive' and gives me the sense that it very well might bite at any time. Because of that its efficiency lacks. If it felt as safe to use as a Fatip, its efficiency would rise quickly.

This is why I've said many times, the Fatip OC head is The King of Efficiency in the DE world. I have other razors I can and have used directly ATG first pass, but none will give me the same BBS finish in one pass and one very small clean up.

My Gillette NEW SC and 1917 Gillette Single Ring easily shave me ATG first pass, but they're both less efficient than my Grande because they have less blade exposure. Both razors are 2 1/2 passes, all done directly ATG, for the same BBS finish, and the NEW SC, because it has a modest blade gap, isnt quite as comfortable for me.

Gap in a razor is a different component. I dont think of blade gap as making a razor 'aggressive'. The more gap a razor has, if used at a neutral angle, the steeper the angle of skin as it meets the blades edge resulting in a more effective cut while increasing its efficiency.

This is why I prefer to use my Slim on 9, but I personally can have issues with that much blade gap. On #9 its efficient and effective enough, but it can cause me irritation. Because its a more rigid design, its a very smooth, very easy shave and the thought of it biting me hasnt even entered my imagination. If I feel warmth coming to my skin, I just shallow the angle out a bit by riding the cap a little more. That effectively increases the gap, but at the same time changes the angle of edge against skin so I dont get the irritation that I otherwise might.

Too the above, if I use my R41 slightly shallower than the neutral design angle, it takes a lot of the fear of it biting away because the angle of blade to skin has changed. Because the R41 lacks base plate support however, if you get careless it will bite, and far easier than my Grande.

 

[tonich]

There is no such thing as "aggressive razor".
The greatest non-sense that I have been reading here lately.
This community has gone nuts about it!

 

[Twelvefret]

There is no such thing as "aggressive razor".
The greatest non-sense that I have been reading here lately.
This community has gone nuts about it!

 

[Esox]

There is no such thing as "aggressive razor".

Theres as much an 'aggressive' razor as there is an 'aggressive' screwdriver, I agree lol.

I'm not sure what term would fit for the difference between my Fatip Grande and my R41 though. Aggressive kind of fits, even if its not the correct word.

 

[santamariasteve]

Rating a safety razor is a very subjective judgment, be it a vintage razor or a modern razor.

I rate about 20% of razors as aggressive.

I rate about 50% of razors as moderate.

And I rate about 30% of razors as mild

 

[Toothpick]

Keep it simple all the way. I don’t care what the blade gap is. Or how “aggressive” people say a razor is.

I use it. If I like it, I keep using it. If i don’t like it, I stop using it. Simple.

 

[Chan Eil Whiskers]

Aggressive razors are prone to bite.

Efficient razors cut whiskers with fewer passes than inefficient razors.

Why? I'm not particularly sure, but interested.

Happy shaves,

Jim

 

[GlazedBoker]

Keep it simple all the way. I don’t what the blade gap is. Or how “aggressive” people say a razor is.

I use it. If I like it, I keep using it. If i don’t like it, I stop using it. Simple.

K.I.S.S. At its fullest effect and finest...

 

[Twelvefret]

What's aggressive is a bit like razor shaveoffs.

 

[Steve_in_CT]

This is my take on it from another thread:

Aggressiveness - how likely I am to wind up with nicks, cuts or irritation using my normal prep and my regular two pass shave.

Efficiency - how close the resulting shave is, using my normal prep and regular two pass shave.

Agility - how easily I can maneuver the razor around my face, under my nose and chin and along my neck.

While I'm sure that the various measurements are relevant to my subjective ratings, I don't believe that you can easily predict the precise combination of specifications that translate into my subjective assessments. There are many variables that relate to how I use the razor, which will be different from how others use it.

 

[MM879]

Efficiency = energy out/energy in.
When the blade gap in is increased the aggression is increased. The result will be a wider angle of acceptable performance, less energy to to preform the function. The efficiency will be increased. Think energy!
MM879

 

[Roccomon]

Aggressive razors are prone to bite.

Efficient razors cut whiskers with fewer passes than inefficient razors.

Why? I'm not particularly sure, but interested.

Happy shaves,

Jim

Exactly! And with care, that aggressive razor will also be the most efficient.

 

[BigJ]

Uh oh......

You just......

View attachment 903205

+1! Too many variables for me to deal with!