Your Most Unpopular/Controversial Shaving Opinion(s)
- Thread starter Lightspeed
- Start date
I’ve been initially torn between the BB and the Timeless 95OC, then the Overlander SS, the Timeless 95 being counter top eye candy as well as a fantastic razor, but I think you just cinched what I’m buying first/next- “the Overlander is so brainless, enjoyable and successful in producing perfect shaves. I use mine 99% of the time” sounds like EXACTLY what I’m looking for if it shaves closer than the 84GC?
Thank you Sir. Have a wonderful Holiday.
Thank you Sir. Have a wonderful Holiday.
A cedar shoe tree that slide into the shoe :
We need a reverse version of a cedar shoe tree that our brush can lie in coffin-like where the cedar will absorb the moisture. And yes, I saw the repurposed rubber stamp holder (which is not like what we call shoe trees).
And quite the mess for an unsatisfactory result.
Add post about owning $200-$700 razors followed with post about bade X being “too expensive” because it’s $4-$10 more per hundred than brand Y…I’m firmly in the “don’t want to hack up my face daily to save $5 a year club. This hobby is NOT saving me money, lol!
I don't worship emperors, presidents, or any so-called leader, clothed or not. I do have an Alter built to worship Feathers in my bathroom in a candle lit corner, however...
The false prophet Feather, I say burn 'em.
I’m very new to wet shaving, and here as well. Like all reviews, I play them all up the middle. When they start with “ I can shave with a shard of glass taped to a stick”, I’m not likely to assume their idea of aggressive and mine are the same, for example, but tend to put most stock in what the majority of people are saying, with more consideration towards the master class of experts here I have been following who obviously know much more about this hobby than the vast majority. There will always outliers or those that do things out of the traditional box, and YMMV reigns supreme. Great intel and advice to be had here, as well as ideas for experimentation that can be adopted or discarded as once again, YMMV. The most liberating thing I’ve heard was Kevy Shaves “there is no right or wrong, find what works for YOU and do that”. I can only share my own experiences so far as well, and will keep the more “noob” embarrassing ones to myself…a well worn styptic pencil is proof of my learning errors…
A 25,000 word “review” accompanied by three or four dozen pictures is of no more value than a concise, well written one.
It's not quite an opinion yet, as it's still in formation, but I have the idea that safety bar protrusion, and not blade gap or exposure, is the best indicator of mildness/harshness/aggressiveness in a safety razor. Bear with me. I read many of the reviews and reports here, and see examples wherein a razor having a gap well north of a Rockwell 6 on plate R6, and positive exposure, is comparable in aggressiveness to a Rockwell R3 or 4. Individual experience varies, of course, but I see these kinds of comparisons enough to draw the inference that gap and exposure don't fully explain aggressiveness.
My case: two razors, the Rockwell 6S and the Timeless Bronze .38. As I mentioned in another thread, I shed more blood in the first three shaves with the .38 than I had in a year with the Rockwell. I'm better with it now, but it still produces weepers and razor burn. Looking at the two tools side by side, there is a marked difference in the safety bars. The 6S has the R4 plate up:
There are other differences, such as the geometry of the bars, and I don't know the nominal exposure of blade in the Rockwell (neutral maybe), but the difference in bar protrusion is striking. By the numbers, the Rockwell R4 has a gap of .61mm and the Bronze .38mm, the Timeless having a very modest .05mm of exposure.
So my idea is that since it's the safety bar that makes it a safety razor, the more bar, the more safety. Thoughts?
My case: two razors, the Rockwell 6S and the Timeless Bronze .38. As I mentioned in another thread, I shed more blood in the first three shaves with the .38 than I had in a year with the Rockwell. I'm better with it now, but it still produces weepers and razor burn. Looking at the two tools side by side, there is a marked difference in the safety bars. The 6S has the R4 plate up:
There are other differences, such as the geometry of the bars, and I don't know the nominal exposure of blade in the Rockwell (neutral maybe), but the difference in bar protrusion is striking. By the numbers, the Rockwell R4 has a gap of .61mm and the Bronze .38mm, the Timeless having a very modest .05mm of exposure.
So my idea is that since it's the safety bar that makes it a safety razor, the more bar, the more safety. Thoughts?
Actually lots less mess and clean up time than using the DE over the sink, the prep, cleaning off soap containers, razors, countertops, etc vs rinse the electric razor under the shower, rinse off the Cremo and walk out of the shower. Clean up time is almost non existent. It’s the time it takes to get my face smooth that runs out pre work day time lock…. If it was not a “wet” shave rated razor that allows use of water and cream, yea, those are horrible.
Time to bring this wonderful thread back, surely.
Here’s one.
The ingredients label on shaving soaps just diminishes the experience for me a bit. And what is it for? It doesn’t tell me anything I need to know. Maybe it is of minor interest to a professional soap maker, but that’s the last person in the world who would be buying a jar of soap, isn’t it? Can’t they just bury this ‘information’ somewhere on the maker’s website?
For me, shaving soap is made of soap, presumably harvested from a soap plant or something - I don’t care. They should list the ingredients as: “soap, fragrance, jar”. Then there’d be room on the jar for a nice picture. If another soap ingredients list said “soap, fragrance, broken glass, anthrax spores, jar” then that would be useful information to aid my purchase decision. I think this would be a lot more helpful than writing ‘potassium stearate’ or ‘sodium tallowate’.
I don’t think, even in here, I’ve ever seen a “is potassium better than sodium” thread, and if there is one (there probably is) it isn’t active. Considering how obsessively detailed most of our discussions are, this alone tells me the specific ingredients of soap cannot possibly matter.
Here’s one.
The ingredients label on shaving soaps just diminishes the experience for me a bit. And what is it for? It doesn’t tell me anything I need to know. Maybe it is of minor interest to a professional soap maker, but that’s the last person in the world who would be buying a jar of soap, isn’t it? Can’t they just bury this ‘information’ somewhere on the maker’s website?
For me, shaving soap is made of soap, presumably harvested from a soap plant or something - I don’t care. They should list the ingredients as: “soap, fragrance, jar”. Then there’d be room on the jar for a nice picture. If another soap ingredients list said “soap, fragrance, broken glass, anthrax spores, jar” then that would be useful information to aid my purchase decision. I think this would be a lot more helpful than writing ‘potassium stearate’ or ‘sodium tallowate’.
I don’t think, even in here, I’ve ever seen a “is potassium better than sodium” thread, and if there is one (there probably is) it isn’t active. Considering how obsessively detailed most of our discussions are, this alone tells me the specific ingredients of soap cannot possibly matter.
Obviously you don't have any allergies or dermal sensitivities...
Exactly. The first thing I look for is Lanolin. Nope!
Just anthrax and broken glass. But yes, good point.
Arko smells okay.
Mike M
...but this one IS cracked.
But how else would we find out that our soap contains polar bear fat, ferret milk or toad venom and so is obviously superior to every other shaving soap ever produced.
I think the convention is to put “NOW WITH ADDED GIBBON SNOT” on the lid. Nobody would notice it in the middle of a list of potassium compounds.
Mike M
...but this one IS cracked.
But won't that ruin the pretentious artwork on the lid
