Greencult 2.0 review

[RJB42]

So, I took a chance on the Greencult 2.0, and ordered it with the II, III, and IV plates based on experiences detailed on B&B and other forums. I've only been at it for a few shaves, but here's an initial review.

For reference, I had been shaving with a 34C for ~10 years. Could only really shave once or twice a week to keep irritation down and then last year decided it was time for an upgrade and got the Timeless in stainless with the .68 and .95 SB plates. The Timeless was definitely an improvement over the 34C, but the main impetus for buying the Timeless vs. anything else was the blade clamping. After reading a lot about issues around 'chatter', and suspecting that could be a source of the irritation I was experiencing with the 34C, I looked at the Henson and and the Timeless, eventually settling on the Timeless because I didn't really want an Al or Ti razor.

The Timeless was great, but to my surprise I still couldn't shave every day with it without irritation... kinda threw out my ideas around the 'chatter' issue as a result, but oh well. It was still a nicer razor than the 34C and did provide noticeably better results. My growth after 24 hours is sandpapery stubble. I'm not sure how thick or wiry my beard is, but I do notice that blades that are considered very sharp perform much much better than ones that are not. I had used the Timeless with mostly Feathers and Nacets. I started out using the .68 plate primarily and figured I'd use the .95 plate for longer growth. Turns out, the .95 plate shaved with much less irritation than the .68. With both plates, I use the following technique (for short growth): XTG, XTG (other way), and then ATG but each ATG stroke is a short 'buffing' stroke with 3-4 strokes needed to stop hearing the hairs 'tink' past the blade. I noticed that I needed much fewer 'buffing' strokes with the .95 and the shave ended up being kinder to my skin. However, with ~ a week worth of growth, either plate shaved perfectly with almost no irritation. I started thinking that perhaps the reason I got less irritation with the .95 was nothing really to do with the gap, but because the .95 plate has 0.05 mm exposure, and the .68 plate has no exposure (or close to no exposure). I couldn't really see the gap mattering at all if I was just shaving short stubble, but the increased exposure was providing a big boost in efficiency. A lot of my growth, especially on my neck is very flat to my skin, and I think the increased exposure allows these to be more efficiently 'picked up' by the blade. So I started looking for razors with more positive exposure than 0.05 mm.

One that kept coming up was the Blackbird - Blackland doesn't publish the head geometry, but user measurements on here seem to put it ~.6 mm gap (fine for my typical length of stubble) and ~0.1 mm exposure (double the Timeless .95). It's a very popular razor, and I'm confident I would have seen an improvement over the Timeless if my thinking on gap/exposure were correct. However, the other (more recently released) razor that came up in a couple reviews was the Greencult 2.0. It has 4 plates with gap/exposure measurements of: #1 (0.45/0.05 mm), #2 (0.65/0.10 mm), #3 (0.85/0.15 mm), and #4 (1.05/0.20 mm). It comes default with the #2 plate, which I figured was pretty close to the Blackbird, and I liked that #3 and #4 provided some additional data points with increased exposure, so I got those as well.

Like I said, I'm only 3 shaves into using the Greencult and I've only used the default #2 plate so far, but I'm very impressed! I didn't like the default handle it came with, so I ordered it with the 'vintage thick bar' knurled handle that's 76 mm long (both ordered on Italian Barber). At first I thought it might be a swing and a miss because it didn't feel as 'glidey' or smooth as the Timeless. The head is bead blasted and I think that contributes a small amount compared to the high polish of the Timeless, but what I think was the bigger effect was actually very positive - I think the resistance I felt relative to the Timeless was just the blade actually cutting rather than skipping over a lot of the stubble! The stubble in the lather after each XTG pass was longer looking and more numerous than with the Timeless, and I only needed ~1-2 buffing strokes to stop hearing hair hit the blade ATG. My skin is very noticeably less irritated than with the Timeless and I'm definitely smoother. You definitely feel the blade a bit more than the Timeless, but I think I like that. I'm going to give the #2 plate a week of shaves then switch to the #3 plate. I kind of doubt I'll use the #4 plate unless I go a week without shaving, which I don't often do, but I mostly got it in case I wanted to sell the Timeless if I liked the Greencult better. Which I do.

In any case, another thank you to the community here for taking a chance on things before I did! I got the Timeless based on its reviews here, and while I think it's a great razor - especially for longer growth than my typical 24 hour stubble - I think the Greencult is a better fit for my routine. I do kind of wish I had done the 30 day trial of the Blackbird just to compare it to the Greencult and Timeless, but I'm happy enough with the Greencult that I don't think I will do that. I hope this review helps anyone thinking about the Greencult as well.

 

[kingfisher]

Nice review. Some folks like a lot of exposure and smaller gaps, others like big gaps with little to no exposure.

Nice to live in a time when one can pretty much find whatever one needs/desires.

 

[Contact_vs_Feedback]

The #2 plate is (seems to be) the same base plate in Green Cult V1.1 and it is my daily shaver as well.

I have the V1.0 with the now discontinued 0.95 mm gap, +0.25 mm exposure plate and that plate is like a dream come true for a sweet combination of efficiency and smoothness without going into the harshness on skin factor.

Green Cult definitely seems to have found good balance and irritation free close shaves have been common compliments from my friends as well.

I have both the Open Comb and Close Comb plates of Blackbird as well.

I must say in terms of efficiency, close shave and chatter free shaves, I'd rate the Green Cult V1.1 (same as plate #2) above the Blackbird. The Open Comb of Blackbird edges ahead in terms of efficiency but still I feel the Green Cult is more refined in terms of usability.

I've had both Green Cult for about a year and Blackbird for more than a year, my favourite would be in order of:

Green Cult V1.0

Green Cult V1.1 (#2 plate)

Blackbird Open Comb

Blackbird Close Comb


Ymmv.

 

[RJB42]

Interesting about the v1.0. It wasn't on my radar when it was available, but I think the #4 plate of the 2.0 is *kinda* close to it with 1.05 gap 0.20 mm exposure. I'll get to it in a couple weeks for a comparison. Just curious - was the v1.0 something you would use daily? Or was it more for a few days of growth?

 

[RJB42]

After a week of daily shaving with the #2 plate and getting great shaves from it (pretty much no irritation and very good efficiency), I switched to the #3 plate for the past week. I had read on here that there seemed to be debate as to if it was more efficient than the #2 plate with some users reporting that it was just harsher. I would say you definitely feel the blade a bit more, but it does not feel at all 'harsher' to me. It's definitely a bit more efficient as well and I'd say as of now, I prefer it for daily shaving to the #2 plate. I would say that the increased blade feel 'reminds' me more to use no pressure, and perhaps that's the reason I don't feel it is more harsh. I would say my skin has felt a bit better after the #3 plate shaves than the #2 plate shaves, but that could just be due to my increasing familiarity with the razor. I'll give it a few more days then go back to the #2 plate and see if I feel the same. I did also purchase the #4 plate, but have not ventured there yet... I kinda only bought that for the very rare occasion where I go a week or more without shaving.

For reference, I've been using only Nacet blades in it with a shave/flip/shave/discard routine (I really only flip it to keep track of how many times I've used it and the Nacet blades are numbered per side and per edge). I would only use them twice with the Timeless I had before this with the third shave being the threshold where I'd feel reduced performance where I'd require more buffing. I suppose with the increased exposure of this setup, I might get away with more uses, but haven't wanted to add that variable in yet.

Still really loving this razor, and the only thing I miss about the Timeless is the polished finish. I'm considering giving this thing a buffing compound/Dremel treatment to polish it up. I do feel that the Timeless felt a bit more 'glidey' on my face, and I'm guessing that's the difference between the polished and bead blasted finish. The 'glide' of this razor is nothing to complain about, but I did like the way the timeless felt a bit better in that aspect.

 

[Iridian]

I ordered mine with plate IV and to be blunt, bead blasted finish just isn't my thing. Strangely enough I didn't like the handle, I have large hands and usually like beefy handles, like the 100mm SS Barberpole from Timeless, but I couldn't quite get a good and precise grip with the GC 2.0 handle.

Can't help, liked the machined finish (and coated handle) and characteristics of the GC 1.0 better.
The shave was fine, I guess the other factors I mentioned detracted from my enjoyment.

 

[Galibier_Numero_Un]

After a week of daily shaving with the #2 plate and getting great shaves from it (pretty much no irritation and very good efficiency), I switched to the #3 plate for the past week. I had read on here that there seemed to be debate as to if it was more efficient than the #2 plate with some users reporting that it was just harsher. I would say you definitely feel the blade a bit more, but it does not feel at all 'harsher' to me. It's definitely a bit more efficient as well and I'd say as of now, I prefer it for daily shaving to the #2 plate. I would say that the increased blade feel 'reminds' me more to use no pressure, and perhaps that's the reason I don't feel it is more harsh. I would say my skin has felt a bit better after the #3 plate shaves than the #2 plate shaves, but that could just be due to my increasing familiarity with the razor. I'll give it a few more days then go back to the #2 plate and see if I feel the same. I did also purchase the #4 plate, but have not ventured there yet... I kinda only bought that for the very rare occasion where I go a week or more without shaving.

For reference, I've been using only Nacet blades in it with a shave/flip/shave/discard routine (I really only flip it to keep track of how many times I've used it and the Nacet blades are numbered per side and per edge). I would only use them twice with the Timeless I had before this with the third shave being the threshold where I'd feel reduced performance where I'd require more buffing. I suppose with the increased exposure of this setup, I might get away with more uses, but haven't wanted to add that variable in yet.

Still really loving this razor, and the only thing I miss about the Timeless is the polished finish. I'm considering giving this thing a buffing compound/Dremel treatment to polish it up. I do feel that the Timeless felt a bit more 'glidey' on my face, and I'm guessing that's the difference between the polished and bead blasted finish. The 'glide' of this razor is nothing to complain about, but I did like the way the timeless felt a bit better in that aspect.

I don't think I'd worry about polishing the top cap. My admittedly uniformed guess is that the slight texture of the bead blast breaks up surface tension, in the same way that adding structure to a (snow) ski base improves glide. Structure is "scratches" or micro groves.

... Thom

 

[RJB42]

I might agree with that especially since after using the #2 plate today for the first time in a bit over a week after the #3 plate. I think the increased drag might just be from the increased blade exposure, as the #2 plate seemed to glide a bit better than the #3 plate. It being polished might have nothing to do with the glide relative to the Timeless I had.

I got a bit less irritation from the shave with #2 than with #3... though with both of them it's hard to tell because I haven't got much irritation from either of them, and I might just be getting more used to the razor in general. I noticed I don't have to be as careful with the #2 plate and I think it's just because the increased exposure on the #3 plate "grabs" hairs much more strongly, and when they catch, it can change the angle of the razor, and this isn't something I noticed with the #2 plate this morning.

Tentatively, I think I like the #2 plate a bit better, and I can see why people like the Blackbird so much as from what I can tell, this razor with the #2 plate has very similar gap/exposure. I also have the #4 plate, but I'd likely only use that for a lot of growth. I probably didn't need the #3 plate as it is pretty similar to the #2 plate but I'm glad I got it because well... how would you know otherwise?

This razor is a great deal at ~$110. I likely could have been happy with just the default #2 plate, but like I said, it's been good to experiment with the others.

 

[Guido75]

Great recording of your experiences! I have the GC2 level II and GC1 razors and they both shave like a dream - both face and head (I would even say that the head shave is near the top of my list when it comes to results in less passes).

I hadn’t thought of comparing the Blackbird to the GC so thank you for that as well - puts it down on my list. I think I have similar feelings about the Karve CB as its plates are in the same ball park as the GC has so feels redundant to do so.

My Ti95 is in a different league altogether. I think I am with you regarding efficiency comparisons, but the effortlessness in shaving is a bonus. At least I have the (false) sense that I can get away with more user error using the Timeless.

Fairschenkt (GC producer) has announced OEM chin plates but so far nothing is available.

I hated the beats blasted finish so I took some hand polish to effectively get rid of it. The GC1 is smooth right out of the box.



Again thank you for your review.

Enjoy!

Guido

 

[RJB42]

That looks much nicer! Any noticeable difference in feel with it polished?

 

[Guido75]

That looks much nicer! Any noticeable difference in feel with it polished?

I believe so yes. Much smoother than when I got it. And I like shiny objects. If something comes in satin finish or beads blasted I usually skip and move on.

 

[RJB42]

I happened to have some white and green compound that I use for kitchen knife sharpening as well as a dremel-like tool with felt pads and spent about a half hour giving the GreenCult a polish. I never really liked the bead blasted finish, especially since when I ordered it from italianbarber I bought a short knurled handle from them as well to use with it. I just like plain, knurled, short handles and thought the one it came with wouldn't be to my liking. The non knurled parts of the handle are polished and I thought it looked a little funny with the bead blasted head. I think it came out pretty well! You can tell the cap and the topside of the plate were more finely machined than the back and sides of the plate because after polishing the machining marks are quite a bit more evident in those spots. They probably could be eliminated, but I would have to sand them first. I definitely don't want to sand the cap or the comb of the plate because I don't want to change any tolerances which would affect the shaving geometry. It is noticeably smoother during the shave as well. Not quite as smooth as the Timeless I had before this, but better than as-received.

One thing about the plates that I would change is make the cross-section of the safety bar "rounder" rather than coming to more of a point like it does... again, another comparison with the Timeless. I prefer to shave quite steep, and the feeling of the safety bar on the timeless was nicer.

I'd also like to update that after using this razor exclusively every day for the past two months with the II, III, and IV plates that I still really like it. All those plates give me very irritation-free shaves, and I'd say that it's a pretty linear progression in efficiency as you move up in plate number. The IV plate has ended up winning out in my opinion. The other two are great, but the shave from IV lasts quite a bit longer and I don't find it any harsher really. It likely also benefits from a wider range of acceptable angles due to it having the biggest gap.

I'm curious if the manufacturer will come out with anything new, but this razor doesn't really leave me wanting much... At least in the way of performance - there's definitely much prettier ones out there. It is quite the bargain from the performance perspective though, and it's somewhat unique in the amount of blade exposure you get at the gaps offered (at least as far as I can tell from my research).

 

[Iridian]

I just like plain, knurled, short handles and thought the one it came with wouldn't be to my liking. The non knurled parts of the handle are polished and I thought it looked a little funny with the bead blasted head. I think it came out pretty well!

Well done! I also like the GC 1.0 and 2.0, but the handle of the 2.0 and the bead blast finish just don't do it for me.

 

[Guido75]

Nice polishing action there. I like that handle as well @RJB42! Razorock?

Enjoy!

Guido

 

[RJB42]

Thanks! Yeah it was a Razorock handle. Their shortest knurled one.

 

[RJB42]

While I initially liked the II plate as it was the first plate I tried, and then stuck with it for the next couple weeks, I found the III and IV plates pretty much equally comfortable, but much more efficient. In searching for something to replace my Timeless .95, which I found too inefficient, I had been stuck on the thinking that I needed something with JUST more exposure, and that gap didn't really matter since I'm pretty much always just shaving off a day of growth and not something like a week of growth. This is what lead me to the GreenCult in the first place as it seemed to keep the gaps at what I considered "reasonable" as the exposure increases as the plate number increases. Also, there aren't too many razors out there where the exposure is even published, and I liked that this was geometry that was disclosed for the GreenCult.

I have since come across some threads about the very high-gap Wolfman WR2 razors. At first, I thought the WR2 razors were of minimal to small exposures because I guess I had only seen the data from gaps ~1.05 mm and below, which seem to be popular. It wasn't until I came across this thread:

Blade gap and exposure - https://www.badgerandblade.com/forum/threads/blade-gap-and-exposure.636078/page-2

which really really nicely compiles data from current razors that I realized that the larger gapped Wolfmans have pretty gigantic blade exposure. After digging a bit more, it seems that reports from users with WR2 gaps greater than 1.35 mm report that the razors are extremely smooth if you use a really steep shaving angle - which is something that my skin definitely prefers for whatever reason.

Anyway, as I said, I've been really liking the IV plate on the GreenCult, but I do still have to do more buffing than I would like in areas such as under my chin. I had experimented with using shallower angles to tip the blade further toward my skin for areas like that, but my skin really doesn't like that. I got to thinking that maybe shimming this plate with a couple blades might simultaneously give me more blade exposure AND the increased gap will let me shave steeper. The GreenCult IV plate already has an exposure of 0.2 mm and a gap of 1.05 mm, so two blade shims should up the gap to 1.25 mm, and the exposure should increase roughly (need to verify with some trig or a picture) by the same amount. Since there's so many reports of the Wolfman 1.55 being super smooth with a steep angle, I thought 2 shims would be a good place to start as I'm guessing I now have a blade exposure of ~0.4 mm like the Wolfman 1.55.

I shaved with that configuration this morning, and I have to say... Amazing! I was able to shave with the handle almost parallel to my face and it was extremely efficient compared to just the IV plate alone. I'd say it knocked down the required buffing by more than 70% and my skin feels great as a result. I'll probably try another shim or two in there after a bit, but this result was very eye-opening. I had discounted bigger gaps because I'm not shaving long hairs, but I hadn't really considered the steep shaving angle advantage. The results of this experiment have me wondering what an actual WR2 1.55 might shave like...

 

[Guido75]

Thanks! Yeah it was a Razorock handle. Their shortest knurled one.

Ah. That's the Vintage Thick Bar or Vintage Thin Bar. Nice - looks really good.

so two blade shims should up the gap to 1.25 mm

Shimming a GreenCult 2.0 IV - whoa! Have you ever looked at Stando Razors? Their gap and exposure are in competition with GreenCult's. And while we still have to exercise patience, GreenCult is said to launch open comb variants as well.

Very happy to read you were able to find (and adjust) a razor that gives you the shave you desire!

Cheers,

Guido.

 

[RJB42]

Ah. That's the Vintage Thick Bar or Vintage Thin Bar. Nice - looks really good.


Shimming a GreenCult 2.0 IV - whoa! Have you ever looked at Stando Razors? Their gap and exposure are in competition with GreenCult's. And while we still have to exercise patience, GreenCult is said to launch open comb variants as well.

Very happy to read you were able to find (and adjust) a razor that gives you the shave you desire!

Cheers,

Guido.

I found the receipt in my email - it's the vintage thick bar one. Also I had checked out the Stando razors, but I only see their gap info listed. As far as exposure, they seem to use terms like "neutral" or "slightly positive". I couldn't find any numbers. Is there some user-collected data out there?

As far as shimming the IV plate - yeah I was a bit worried it would make it much harsher. It might have been if I used it at the same angle as before, but at a steeper angle, it was honestly less harsh than without the shims the way I had been using it.

 

[Guido75]

I couldn't find any numbers. Is there some user-collected data out there?

Me neither, but I will check.

 

[RJB42]

Just a correction on my assumed geometry I created with the two shims: I took a picture of the head, end-on with blade and shims loaded. Then I measured the distance from the top of the cap to the bottom of the plate with calipers so I had a reference dimension that was also captured in the picture. Using Adobe illustrator (Microsoft paint would likely work too) I could then draw lines on the picture that register how many pixels long they were. Using the dimension measured with calipers you can then come up a mm per pixel conversion like this.

Anyway, while I definitely increased the gap to ~1.25 mm with two blade shims, the exposure only increased to ~0.23-0.26 mm (up from the reported 0.2 mm un-shimmed). I had made an incorrect assumption initially when I estimated the exposure would increase by as much as the shim thickness. But it makes sense now.