What's new

Photo Analysis of Razor Designs

Well done. I'd like to see if the vintage blades were different in how they behave in the razors, as far as bending, exposure, etc.

We always seem to talk about them in terms of edge (sharpness) only.
 
Well done. I'd like to see if the vintage blades were different in how they behave in the razors, as far as bending, exposure, etc.

We always seem to talk about them in terms of edge (sharpness) only.

Hi Topgumby -

I've taken a look at some vintage and modern blades - some of my eBay purchases came with a nice selection of oldies!

The original Gillette blades appear to be 0.0075 inch per my calipers, while modern blades are 0.005 inch. The difference in the position of the edge between the old and modern would be half the difference in thickness, or just a bit over one-thousandth of an inch. If you shim a razor blade in a single or double ring, as I've heard some advocate, you increase the gap by a full five thousandths of an inch - i.e. overshoot any purported correction by a factor of five. I mean, if it works for you, great - but I don't think these razors were made to tolerances of a thousandth of an inch in the first place. So I think they're fine with new blades - probably better than ever.

I've noticed some interesting things about the blade stiffness however. The old style has an arching of the cap lengthwise (seems to mostly disappear with the New Improved onward), and the oldest blades have a diamond-shaped indentation around the center hole. When I flex them by hand in both directions, the center diamond seems to "pop" downward. I've been wondering if that wasn't a mechanism to permit a two-way arching (sharp from edge to edge, very gradual lengthwise) with a relatively stiff blade having only three holes, no big center cutout part. But I don't have enough information to do more than make wild guesses. Or even know why they put that arching in there to begin with!

But it's surely interesting.

- Bill
 

Ah, OK. Thanks.
So it's not a matter of anything functional, just an artful design feature that allows us to distinguish dates of a certain model?

Yes, and also note that the Double Ring was the first Gillette, only made for a few years (from the wikki: 1903-1906) before they changed to the Single Ring design. So they are a rarity.

-jim
 
Last edited:
Outstanding work. Thank you.

I, too, am really interested in seeing how this would translate to a Slim adjustable on different settings.
 
Thanks so much for a great post. It is was most informative. I hope that the shaving fairy brings you a lot of nice toys.
 
very well written - a pleasure to read. too bad i ditched all my de razors in favor of straights or i would go try this out myself!
 
very well written - a pleasure to read. too bad i ditched all my de razors in favor of straights or i would go try this out myself!

Well you certainly simplified the cutting angle, exposure and gap questions for yourself.

  • cutting angle: how ever you hold it
  • exposure: scary much
  • gap: don't need no stinking gap

:001_smile

-jim
 
Bill, congratulations on a brilliant post. Truly a beautifully executed analysis. Many, many thanks! Moreover, I am delighted you focussed on the vintage 3 piece Gillettes. They are fabulous little machines!
 
I love stuff like this. Did you measure the angle on the physical razor, or just in the pictures?

I'd be willing to take pics of my EJ DE89 to add to this, although I don't have any Derby blades. Hmm...guess that won't work.
 
Bill, congratulations on a brilliant post. Truly a beautifully executed analysis. Many, many thanks! Moreover, I am delighted you focussed on the vintage 3 piece Gillettes. They are fabulous little machines!

Thank you! :blushing: I'm honored by the appreciation.

I agree about the 3-piece Gillettes. I use them more than any other. Perfect blend of simplicity and precision.

- Bill
 
I love stuff like this. Did you measure the angle on the physical razor, or just in the pictures?

I'd be willing to take pics of my EJ DE89 to add to this, although I don't have any Derby blades. Hmm...guess that won't work.

:biggrin1: Don't need to use Derby blades - had one from a sample pack in one razor so decided to stick with that out of scientific OCD!

Just used the pictures for measuring angles. Have to see things under considerable magnification and it's hard to combine that with a protractor! Photos are the best way I think, in addition to documenting what you find. I have measured gaps and such with a field microscope and reticle, however.

You and others could add to this. You don't have to use a terribly sophisticated camera but macro setting is a must, plus a table-top tripod. I had much better luck with indirect lighting than onboard flash. Getting focus and especially alignment is the tricky part. If I could focus manually as with an SLR instead of the blipping autofocus, I could get that right in every shot! Getting the blade near the edge almost exactly perpendicular required many re-tries and discarded shots. But go for it!

I'll do a couple more, including slim adjustable on different settings, perhaps over the weekend.

- Bill
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom