- Thread starter
- #41
tankerjohn
A little poofier than I prefer
PM sent. Thank you sir.
Tech vs. Tech
- Thread starter tankerjohn
- Start date
PM sent. Thank you sir.
I love Techs. Have lots. Great shootout! Thanks for doing it. I have recently been hunting down English Techs. They're a different feel all together. But I still lean towards the Pre-war and Late 40's USA Techs. Great write up.
This is the correct answer. Also the England brass post war Techs are smoother than the USA cousins. Actually I've found nearly all England Gillettes shaved smoother than the USA models. Exception was the thick cap OLD. USA was smoother.
SOTD: May 04: Grudge Match: Pre-War vs Oval Slot Tech
Prep: splash of hot water on face
Lather: RazoRock Son of Zeus
Brush: Simpson Berkeley 46 in Best
Razor #1: Gillette Tech "pre-War"
Razor #2: Gillette Tech "oval-slot" (1946-50)
Blade: Bolzano Superinox [95]
Finish: Fine l'Orange Noir
When [MENTION=81103]rabidus[/MENTION] stated the oval-slot Tech is a better shaver than the pre-War triangle-slot Tech, I was sceptical. Reference: Post #16 in this thread
Basically, it comes down to blade support. Same reason why a NEW SC is a smoother shaver than a NEW LC. The pre-War Tech (and NEW LC) only supports the blade near the center plateau of the base-plate, resulting in lots of blade overhang, while the oval-slot Tech (and NEW SC) have blade supports almost right at the blade's cutting edge. The result is a much stiffer blade, almost like a torqued slant.
So today, I decided to test the theory. I've used both razors many times, but never side-by-side to make a real comparison. Dang! The oval-slot Tech is noticeably smoother than the already smooth pre-War Tech, while only being slightly less efficient.
I shaved my right side with the pre-War Tech (I'm right handed) and the left side with the oval-slot Tech. After the first WTG pass, both sides felt exactly the same, but the second XTG pass revealed the pre-War shaved just a little closer. Both sides still felt the same after the second pass, and the third ATG pass confirmed the equality - there was not much left to shave. Dead even after 3 passes, and still dead even 5 hours later. My shave today almost exactly corresponded to Post #14 by [MENTION=90101]tankerjohn[/MENTION]
Caveat: this was one shave with a one-day stubble and a less-than-new "Excalibur" blade. Had I skipped a shaving day, my guess is that the pre-War Tech would tackle the longer stubble better using seasoned blades like I always do. With a sharp new blade, who knows - I only see new blades a handful of times a year ;-)
The fact that Gillette used the pre-War head for only about 6 years or less and used the oval-slot design for almost 40 years thereafter tells you they knew they got it right.
Prep: splash of hot water on face
Lather: RazoRock Son of Zeus
Brush: Simpson Berkeley 46 in Best
Razor #1: Gillette Tech "pre-War"
Razor #2: Gillette Tech "oval-slot" (1946-50)
Blade: Bolzano Superinox [95]
Finish: Fine l'Orange Noir
When [MENTION=81103]rabidus[/MENTION] stated the oval-slot Tech is a better shaver than the pre-War triangle-slot Tech, I was sceptical. Reference: Post #16 in this thread
Basically, it comes down to blade support. Same reason why a NEW SC is a smoother shaver than a NEW LC. The pre-War Tech (and NEW LC) only supports the blade near the center plateau of the base-plate, resulting in lots of blade overhang, while the oval-slot Tech (and NEW SC) have blade supports almost right at the blade's cutting edge. The result is a much stiffer blade, almost like a torqued slant.
So today, I decided to test the theory. I've used both razors many times, but never side-by-side to make a real comparison. Dang! The oval-slot Tech is noticeably smoother than the already smooth pre-War Tech, while only being slightly less efficient.
I shaved my right side with the pre-War Tech (I'm right handed) and the left side with the oval-slot Tech. After the first WTG pass, both sides felt exactly the same, but the second XTG pass revealed the pre-War shaved just a little closer. Both sides still felt the same after the second pass, and the third ATG pass confirmed the equality - there was not much left to shave. Dead even after 3 passes, and still dead even 5 hours later. My shave today almost exactly corresponded to Post #14 by [MENTION=90101]tankerjohn[/MENTION]
Caveat: this was one shave with a one-day stubble and a less-than-new "Excalibur" blade. Had I skipped a shaving day, my guess is that the pre-War Tech would tackle the longer stubble better using seasoned blades like I always do. With a sharp new blade, who knows - I only see new blades a handful of times a year ;-)
The fact that Gillette used the pre-War head for only about 6 years or less and used the oval-slot design for almost 40 years thereafter tells you they knew they got it right.
^^
Excellent post, thanks!
Excellent post, thanks!
While I haven't done any in-depth comparison like you, [MENTION=81103]rabidus[/MENTION], and [MENTION=90101]tankerjohn[/MENTION] have (Thank you all for doing this, BTW. This thread is a great read.), owning and having used both Prewar ball-end Techs and Postwar ('46-50) NDC ball-end Tech I have to agree with your assessments. Keeping prep, lather, blade, etc. the same, they are very close in performance, but the '46-50 Tech does give a smoother, less irritating shave. It is a matter of degrees, but it is noticeable.
The Postwar Tech is my favorite vintage Gillette. I even just PIFed one to my brother.
My pre-war Tech gets most of my shave business these days. I have to remind myself that RustBoy is there most mornings. My post-war Tech doesn't see as much love but I find it to be just as smooth as the Pre-war. I do add extra balance to my Techs by using either a Durham handle or an Apollo handle (my current favorite) and I've found that GSB's were tailor-made for this razor.
Very interesting reading here.
My own approach to the Tech enigma is to incorporate both US Techs (C-2 and pre war) and the British made Flat Bottom and the one in aluminium into the rotation. The handles make a lot of difference - I switch between my solid brass via the stainless to both British and US made ball ends.
"Love all, serve all" as the say at he Hard Rock Café...
My own approach to the Tech enigma is to incorporate both US Techs (C-2 and pre war) and the British made Flat Bottom and the one in aluminium into the rotation. The handles make a lot of difference - I switch between my solid brass via the stainless to both British and US made ball ends.
"Love all, serve all" as the say at he Hard Rock Café...
I have three Techs in the stable right now: a U.S. post-War Tech that I just found in the wild last week, a Canadian pre-war that I've had for a long time, and an English Hybrid Tech that is my most frequently used razor.
I like all three of these razors. I have never thought of doing a head-to-head comparison, but maybe I should. Canadian pre-war versus American post-war, and the winner gets the Hybrid, perhaps?
I like all three of these razors. I have never thought of doing a head-to-head comparison, but maybe I should. Canadian pre-war versus American post-war, and the winner gets the Hybrid, perhaps?
Oh, and I forgot to mention that it seems that pretty soon somebody's going to have to add yet another Tech (the about to be released "new" Tech from AoS) to the line-up and see how it compares.
I am just going to call that one the "AoS Tech".
I will probably be picking one up, but $70 (if that is the actual price point) seems a bit high for my liking (unless it is stainless).
![$DSCN0097[1].jpg](https://xfdata.badgerandblade.com/attachments/401/401076-be13a60676d91a52a21e489099383bdc.jpg "$DSCN0097[1].jpg")
Thanks for the mention [MENTION=84529]rudyt[/MENTION]
If you put the prewar Tech cap on the postwar baseplate, you would have the best of both worlds. That combination has the same specs as the Canadian postwar Tech that I have.
The US postwar Tech cap is slightly thicker than the US prewar Tech cap. Which is why the prewar Tech may have slightly more blade exposure.
The made in England version of the postwar Tech has a thicker cap than the US postwar Tech, all the baseplates from the US, Canada, and England seems to be the same.
Thanks for the review!
If you put the prewar Tech cap on the postwar baseplate, you would have the best of both worlds. That combination has the same specs as the Canadian postwar Tech that I have.
The US postwar Tech cap is slightly thicker than the US prewar Tech cap. Which is why the prewar Tech may have slightly more blade exposure.
The made in England version of the postwar Tech has a thicker cap than the US postwar Tech, all the baseplates from the US, Canada, and England seems to be the same.
Thanks for the review!
Just measured my US and England made Tech baseplate and they were the same at
.989"
Another US Tech measured .985"...
My Canadian Tech measured .987"...
Excellent read! I just used my first tech last weekend, great razor!
