Which Gillette designs are still controlled by patents?

This is for the Gillette company specialists.

I see that everyone has variants of the standard three piece. But many Chinese and Indian firms also knockoff the Super Speed TTO. Are the Fatboy and Slim Adjustable protected by patent? Is it possible to produce a modern razor with the same basic adjustment mechanism (albeit a slightly different overall design) or is this patent controlled? Or are they simply too expensive to produce economically in small numbers?

What do we know about this for sure?

The patents expired ages ago.

It's simply not profitable to produce quality razors as Gillette did 100 years ago. The market is a fraction of what it was back then.

So you're saying that the modern adjustables are using much cheaper mechanisms than the Slim/FB? I'm just curious because the Feather ASD2 is obviously a deluxe item using pure stainless steel, which seems better than what even Gillette used (nickel over brass) in its heyday. And ATT's system seems quite pricey. Would a new Slim Adjustable in nickel over brass cost way more than ATT's system? Moreover, given the interest in DE shaving is heavily limited, it would seem that the way for manufacturers to go would be to develop every more luxurious and specialist products in much the same way that high end turntable designers are selling more and more TTs that cost thousands of dollars than any product available 40-50 years ago.

coase said:

So you're saying that the modern adjustables are using much cheaper mechanisms than the Slim/FB?

Click to expand...

The built quality is certainly inferior these days. Unless you expect Zamak to last more than brass.

coase said:

I'm just curious because the Feather ASD2 is obviously a deluxe item using pure stainless steel, which seems better than what even Gillette used (nickel over brass) in its heyday. And ATT's system seems quite pricey.

Click to expand...

Gillette made razors 80 years ago costing $75. How much would that be today?
Luxury razors always existed, but that is a very small fraction of the market, even more so now in our time.

coase said:

Would a new Slim Adjustable in nickel over brass cost way more than ATT's system? Moreover, given the interest in DE shaving is heavily limited, it would seem that the way for manufacturers to go would be to develop every more luxurious and specialist products in much the same way that high end turntable designers are selling more and more TTs that cost thousands of dollars than any product available 40-50 years ago.

Click to expand...

Most people aren't willing to spend more than $40 or $50 on a razor, and you're saying the way to go is to produce highly expensive razors? I highly doubt that, and the manufacturers seem to agree.

Hi,

A utility patent (meaning one for how it works) is good for 17 years prior to 1995, 20 years after 1995. A design patent (meaning one for what it looks like) is 14 years prior to Dec 2013 and 15 years after. It is possible to extend the patent term up to a full second period, but that has to presented to a judge to decide if, and for how long, to extend.

So, this is why the designs of razors keep changing - to keep hold onto the market by having a new patent period.

Stan

nuclearblast said:

Gillette made razors 80 years ago costing $75. How much would that be today?

Click to expand...

I'll answer my own question.



The Aristocrat Seventy-five Dollars aka NEW Deluxe Aristocrat. Now this is a luxury razor!

nuclearblast said:

The built quality is certainly inferior these days. Unless you expect Zamak to last more than brass.



Gillette made razors 80 years ago costing $75. How much would that be today?
Luxury razors always existed, but that is a very small fraction of the market, even more so now in our time.




Most people aren't willing to spend more than $40 or $50 on a razor, and you're saying the way to go is to produce highly expensive razors? I highly doubt that, and the manufacturers seem to agree.

Click to expand...

Well, I would have thought so too. But the fact that Feather, Merkur, ATT, Muhle and others keep introducing and selling razors above the $50 price point suggests that a market exists at the higher end. I believe that the ASD1 and ASD2 have sold quite well as luxury products and the rapid spread of the Art of Shaving stores in malls tells me that there are more and more people willing to spend more if it's properly marketed. Rockwell Razors plans to make an all steel interchangeable system similar to ATT for about a third the price, but we're still talking about $80 or more retail. Yet this Kickstarter was crowdfunded in a matter of days. In fact their initial target of 12,000 Canadian dollars has been oversubscribed many fold (I believe they're over 50k now and have several weeks to go). So while even the luxury products like Feather and ATT are in the 200-300 range, don't be surprised if you see one thousand dollar razors getting snapped up in 5 years time. Especially if the Western economies recover just some of their mojo.

A machined SS razor for $80? Can't wait to see that razor. You are comparing to ATT, so I have to assume their razor is machined (as the ATT are) not sintered or whatever?

Because that makes a HUGE difference.

ATT and Feather operations are tiny when compared to Merkur and Muhle, and even those are too small if you look at the big picture. The big picture is the hundreds of millions of men in Asia buying $2 DE razors.

But you picked an unusually luxurious, high-end product. The Super Speed only sold for $1 for most of the 50s. And I believe that the Slim and Fat boys were no more than $5 in the early 60s.

And I do concede that the Feather sells to a small market. But that's exactly my point. I don't expect to see DE shaving go mass market, but there is enough of an obviously growing interest (hence P&G's purchase of The Art of Shaving) that I am guessing (operative word here is *guess*) that there will be a demand for luxury products if well marketed. Moreover, I can see how it might pay for a large company to subsidize a few break-even high end products that create a feeling of luxury in the US. Moreover, if this carried over to the popular press, it would possibly draw the attention of the small but growing number of Asian elites who mostly think that moving up means going to cartridges. If rich Chinese suddenly felt a gold-plated razor advertised in the leading high fashion mags were comparable to Rolex watches, then the sky's the limit on pricing for the elite.

Marketing is a big part of this. A lot depends on *who* the buyers of razors are associated with in the popular mind. If elites see it as a cool, retro item for the bicoastal rich, expensive items will do well. If razors are portrayed as the playthings of thrift-shop scavenger hunters from the backwoods, less so. None of this need correspond to reality. The image will be very important.

Remember that at one point, the Swiss watch industry thought they were doomed by the quartz watch. But they remarketed themselves as a classic, luxury item at the top end and as fashion models (Swatch) at the low end. Now you see many people who only use their cellphones as watches while others scramble to buy every pricier and rarefied timepieces.

Not sure if the luxury razor versus Rolex analogy holds ... how many of you carry a safety razor around your wrist?

nuclearblast said:

A machined SS razor for $80? Can't wait to see that razor. You are comparing to ATT, so I have to assume their razor is machined (as the ATT are) not sintered or whatever?

Because that makes a HUGE difference.

Click to expand...

Was just reading over on Sharpologist an interview with the designer of Rockwell Razors and he stated the razor would be forged stainless. What difference this would make vs machined vs sintered I don't know.

alaskazimm said:

Was just reading over on Sharpologist an interview with the designer of Rockwell Razors and he stated the razor would be forged stainless. What difference this would make vs machined vs sintered I don't know.

Click to expand...

The process is investment casting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_casting Basically the way they made ancient bronze statues. That said I think that "it's not machined so it's crap" is the prevailing attitude around here, and it's just not true. People say "sintered" like it's a dirty word, as if sintered steel is the same as zamak alloy. It's a little ridiculous. Steel is steel whether it's sintered or machined or "investment cast".

Patented or not, it was always my understanding that Gillette encouraged other companies to copy their razors, as this led to the sale of more blades.

Lomoru said:

The process is investment casting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_casting Basically the way they made ancient bronze statues. That said I think that "it's not machined so it's crap" is the prevailing attitude around here, and it's just not true. People say "sintered" like it's a dirty word, as if sintered steel is the same as zamak alloy. It's a little ridiculous. Steel is steel whether it's sintered or machined or "investment cast".

Click to expand...

If that is what you think, then you are wrong. I don't think people have anything against sintered razors and to prove this just look at all the praise Weber razors get.

The point in question is the difference in manufacturing costs. The cost of a CNC machined razor is largely bigger than a sintered one.

So you can't really say the ATT is $185 and the new razor will be a better deal because it will cost $80. Same reason why the Weber is $70 and not $200.

nuclearblast said:

The point in question is the difference in manufacturing costs. The cost of a CNC machined razor is largely bigger than a sintered one.

So you can't really say the ATT is $185 and the new razor will be a better deal because it will cost $80. Same reason why the Weber is $70 and not $200.

Click to expand...

I misread your intent on your original comment on it making a huge difference. I wasn't thinking cost though now it seems plain enough on second reading. For some reason I thought you meant it made a huge difference in quality.
Anyway, I do agree with you about it on the cost of the razor. You certainly aren't going to get a quality $80 machined razor.

alaskazimm said:

I misread your intent on your original comment on it making a huge difference. I wasn't thinking cost though now it seems plain enough on second reading. For some reason I thought you meant it made a huge difference in quality.
Anyway, I do agree with you about it on the cost of the razor. You certainly aren't going to get a quality $80 machined razor.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, Bret. I wasn't actually referring to your post. The OP somehow implied that the Rockwell razors were a better deal because they will cost 1/3 of what an ATT costs. I just said we can't really compare because ATT's manufacturing process is much more expensive.

But yeah ... we're saying basically the same thing.

**Take the following with a grain of salt because I've done absolutely zero research and going on other mass manufacturing things and shaky memory but I'm putting it on the internet so it must be true**

Gillette was (probably) able to put out a $1 Super Speed thanks to some economies of scale and an initial investment in the tooling necessary to crank them out over the long run. It would be easier for them to justify a cheap razor when they're invested in the technology for a longer term than just five or six years. They managed to put out basically the same design with minor modifications for a few decades. Adjustments and refinements to the tooling itself would take a bit of money, but there would be a break even point that they eventually would surpass on sheer numbers and sales. Also, with DE blades being far more the common selection, there's a distinct and sizeable market that would justify the costs and eventually yield profits. Now that they're 20+ years removed from making Super Speeds (and even further removed from a Fatboy or Slim), my guess would be that the equipment used to produce those razors en masse are probably long gone. For them to jump back into the market, they would have to reinvest in new manufacturing and tooling to start pumping out razors again, and potentially take a larger loss than they'd be willing to absorb for a substantially smaller market than their cartridge line.

One of the common factors in all of these higher end razors (with rare exception) is that they tend to be of the two or three piece design. If i were to hazard a guess, I would wager that the design and manufacture of a two or three piece razor would be cheaper and less complicated than an adjustable TTO setup of a Fatboy/Slim/Super Adjustable. There seem to be exceedingly few modern high end adjustable razors, and even fewer modern high end adjustable TTO razors, with only the Vision coming to mind at the moment, and even that seems to have been discontinued. I would absolutely love to see a reintroduction of a quality Super Speed / Fatboy / Slim / Super Adjustable that sits below $100, sold in reproduction plastic hinged cases that recall the past. Hell, even a modern Gillette Tech would be nice to see. I (personally) wouldn't even be all that disappointed if the point of distribution was limited to their Art of Shaving stores as a means to draw more interest. I just don't see them assuming that kind of financial risk with the still relatively small number of wet shaving enthusiasts out there.

Lomoru said:

The process is investment casting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_casting Basically the way they made ancient bronze statues. That said I think that "it's not machined so it's crap" is the prevailing attitude around here, and it's just not true. People say "sintered" like it's a dirty word, as if sintered steel is the same as zamak alloy. It's a little ridiculous. Steel is steel whether it's sintered or machined or "investment cast".

Click to expand...

I would be shocked if Rockewell can pull of a lost-wax casting razor for anything resembling a reasonable price. That process is many times more expensive than die-casting, and even more expensive still than maching. It's used for things like complex aerospace parts, underwater impellers, jet engine valves, etc. Each part typically takes days or weeks to make, and often still involves machining.

Perhaps that's how they made their prototypes. Maybe they've somehow refined the technique, or they're using something that isn't quite the lost-wax casting I've seen, but I just can't imagine you could make a razor like that for less than the cost of machining.

The inflation-adjusted pieces of the high end Gillette razors are truly amazing. We all oogle at $200-$250 razors which are top end these days. Who here would pay $1,300 or more for a razor. I wonder how many of those very high-end sets Gillette sold?

BSAGuy said:

The inflation-adjusted pieces of the high end Gillette razors are truly amazing. We all oogle at $200-$250 razors which are top end these days. Who here would pay $1,300 or more for a razor. I wonder how many of those very high-end sets Gillette sold?

Click to expand...

Not many I would say. I have only seen one all this time, ONE! AFAIK, not even Achim has one of these that I posted above.

Truly beautiful sets, I can only dream of owning one.