What makes a razor aggressive?

I'm not quite sure I understand how it works or why it helps.

I can see that having less blade exposure will give a certain level of protection. With less blade exposed, there's only so much you can actually cut yourself. What I don't get is why having more blade exposure is beneficial. I mean... the blade is either touching your face or it isn't, right? Wouldn't the ideal be a blade that just barely touches your face, and no more? Why does more exposure cut the hair better? Are there other properties that make a razor more or less aggressive?

I'm mostly referring to open and closed comb. I understand slants are a very different animal.

Some of them are temperamental [emoji12] ... but our perceptions of aggressiveness most likely are different . Some will tell you that Old Types are mild. Some associate aggressiveness with harshness ...

IMHO aggressiveness is mostly determined by the blade exposure, and more aggressive doesn't necessarily mean more efficient, also doesn't mean it's a harsh shaver.

I do prefer "aggressive" razors such as the R41, Fatip Piccolo, Old Type etc, because in my experience they require less passes to get the job done.

This doesn't answer your question, I guess what I'm trying to say is ... I don't know, use what works for you, and YMMV.

Okay speculation here, but...the skin is not a completely rigid surface. It flexes, has hills and valleys. Some areas are firm, some areas soft. This (to me) is why increasing the exposure of the blade edge not only feels different to different people, but can feel substantially different on your own face depending on what area you are shaving.

Then to add yet more variables, a highly lubricating and thick lather, and even the sharpness of the blade (more shaves dull down the edge, reducing the feel of the exposure) change the level of aggression as well.

With my 34C it is so mild if I use too thick of a lather it actually cuts less effectively because the cushioning effect impedes the blade's contact, whereas I can take my Progress, dial it up (or a Gillette adjustable) and notice much greater blade contact because that additional blade exposure gets through that layer of lather protection to the stubble below.

Then to add even another variable, angle. Angle can affect the feel of a blade and even a highly exposed blade can feel tame if the angle is good for that razor and the area of the face you're shaving, or it can be a beast that draws blood instantly and causes shavers to complain about it later.

Then there is the blade itself. It is common to see shavers state that they get great results with X blade in their razor at a particular level of blade exposure but Y blade is a blood letter, because blade edges (and coatings) are not uniformly the same across manufacturers.

Completely unscientific, speculative, but that's my take.

Definitely something to "aggressiveness". You can experience it easily on an adjustable razor.
Also, some razors like my Matador Toro were designed to be aggressive.

An aggressive razor cuts closer and faster maybe deeper too because I couldn't use one every day.
But, sometimes they are just great.

I believe it is a combination of blade exposure and angle from the razor cap.

A member here did a whole discourse on the physics of it but now but I searched for it and I can't find it.

For me, rigidity is key for an effortless efficient shave. When you have a rigid blade edge then you don't need alot of blade exposure.

The postwar Tech is a great example of this. It has a rigid blade edge with little blade exposure and will cut through coarse hair better than razors with more blade exposure.

The two razors in the picture are the NEW SC(top) and NEW Deluxe(bottom).

Both of these razors feel the same, same blade exposure, the NEW SC(top) is more efficient because of its baseplate design.

My Postwar Tech has a baseplate design like the NEW SC(top) and cuts my coarse hair better than the NEW Deluxe(bottom). The Deluxe is a great razor, but when it comes to the two coarse areas in my beard, the post war Tech accually out performs it.

The Old Type is more efficient than the NEW Deluxe because it has a more rigid blade edge. I find the SC to be slightly more efficient than the Old Type because it has the same blade exposure and rigidity, but has more blade gap.

The prewar Tech compares to the Postwar Tech like the SC and Deluxe. Less rigidity.

When you have a rigid blade edge, alot of blade exposure is not needed.

Less rigid requires more touch up for me.

For most of my beard, any razor will work great. For my coarse areas, a rigid blade edge works best.

What makes it aggressive? The manufacturer!
Seriously though, I find my more 'aggressive' razors are the ones with more blade gap. Wider area between blade and bottom plate.

I think most would agree that the most aggressive DE would be a DE without any safety bar or comb, a devette, as it's been named here. So a DE without a bar or comb is just the blade and your skin. That's aggressive. Not positive where I'm going with this, but when we add a safety bar or comb, we start taking away the aggressiveness by determining how much we let the blade and the skin contact each other and how much pressure we let the bar or comb absorb.

Strange, I've never heard anyone describe a straight as being "aggressive".

TobyC said:

Strange, I've never heard anyone describe a straight as being "aggressive".

Click to expand...

I describe razors as:

Efficient - rigid blade edge
Less efficient - not so rigid blade edge


Safe - postwar Tech
Not so safe - NEW SC
Unsafe - Muhle R41
Lethal - Straight razor

All of the comments thus far are good.

Let's not forget that the weight of the razor and to a lesser degree the thickness of the handle also contribute to aggressiveness.

My most aggresive razor is the R41. That's for me, subjectively. When I look at the head, I dont see an aggresive razor, soley basing this on blade exposure and blade gap. To compare, my Cadet OC has nearly double the exposure, and I find it less aggresive. I do find that blade gap being increased by either shims or using my Progress, does make my razors more aggresive to a point. The R41 has a minimal gap, minimal exposure, and will bite if not given proper affection. In this case, I think that blade angle comes into play for aggresiveness beyond blade exposure, and blade gap. I might be wrong though.

gitira6 said:

My most aggresive razor is the R41. That's for me, subjectively. When I look at the head, I dont see an aggresive razor, soley basing this on blade exposure and blade gap. To compare, my Cadet OC has nearly double the exposure, and I find it less aggresive. I do find that blade gap being increased by either shims or using my Progress, does make my razors more aggresive to a point. The R41 has a minimal gap, minimal exposure, and will bite if not given proper affection. In this case, I think that blade angle comes into play for aggresiveness beyond blade exposure, and blade gap. I might be wrong though.

Click to expand...

I agree. To me, "aggressiveness" seems to be a combination of blade gap, exposure and angle. My R41s (both 2013 and 2011) excel at angle. My Ikon Tech excels at gap and exposure. Both varieties are amazingly close and long-lasting.

+1. IMHO aggressiveness is mainly determined by blade exposure and the risk of a cut. Head geometry is also important.

I get my best shaves with mild/moderate razors combined with a sharp/very sharp blade. Clearly YMMV.

The main factor is blade exposure. That effects aggressiveness more than anything else by far.

From what I understand, what makes a razor aggressive is blade angle and blade gap. I use an open comb Merkur and a lot of people seem to think its pretty aggressive but honestly, I dont find it to be any more aggressive than my Merkur long handle or my Feather Popular.

Badgerstate36 said:

From what I understand, what makes a razor aggressive is blade angle and blade gap. I use an open comb Merkur and a lot of people seem to think its pretty aggressive but honestly, I dont find it to be any more aggressive than my Merkur long handle or my Feather Popular.

Click to expand...

Quite the opposite actually. Most people will agree that Merkur OC razors are ridiculously mild. Perhaps even too mild.

I think the user has as much to do with how aggressive a razor is as anything else. There are razors that have more exposure that seem aggressive if not handled properly and the are razors with less exposure that seem just as aggressive if not handled well. If your technique is good the only thing left is for you to discover the optimum angle at which to use the razor. Once that is found then an aggressive or a mild razor seem to give identical results for me.

And nd then factor in how wide or narrow the window is for optimum performance and you have the last piece of the puzzle. Some razors whether mild or wild have narrow windows of angle at which they do well and some have wide Windows. That is partly due to head geometry and partly due to the head design. Is the blade high above the guard or teeth or is it low or even touching the guard or teeth. For me the ones with low blades tend to be the smoothest and most efficient with a narrow window of angle at which they work. But I can also use high blade razors with large window of angle and get exactly the same results.

So it likely also has quite a bit of the old YMMV factor as well.

Simple answer, and YMMV, as perception does with all of this hobby, how close they are to shaving with a straight.

A run up to each stroke makes razors pretty agrssive, bearing down HARD on each stroke dose the trick too

There are no aggressive razors, just girly men!