Help me identify NEW head variations

I recently acquired these three gold-tone razors. Two are long-comb NEW with ball-end handles and the third is an undated Tech with a solid ball-end handle. The top cap on the Tech is engraved with the Gillette name inside a diamond. The underside of the Tech has no date code.

I have two questions: First, is there a way to date these other than generally to (I think) the 1930s? Might the gold Tech be from the 1940s and is there any way to know?

Second, what might explain the differences in the NEW heads? The top caps on each of the two NEWs differ on the inside. The tongues on the inside rest properly in the grooves of the base plates, but one almost spans the width of the cap while the other is shorter.

Also, on the underside of both comb heads is the Gillette inside a diamond and Made in U.S.A. on one side. But on the other side, one has a patent number and a reissue number and "other pats. pend." The other one is blank.

FYI, all were quite cruddy when I got them. One NEW had a "Pippin" blade in it, and the other "Cattaraugus Cutlery Company Little Valley N.Y." I can't find anything on Pippin but I learned that the Cattaraugus Cutlery Company closed its doors in 1963. From the condition in which I received these razors, it is possible that they have not been used in fifty years.

So, help me out here. Why the difference on the underside of the top cap? And does the absence of a patent number mean anything? Hope these pictures are good enough.

Thanks for your help.

Doug

I could be wrong, but I don't know that there is any data on when Gillette began stamping their logo on Tech heads. I think you will have to be happy with Gold Tech 1939-1950.

The second razor appears to be a regular Long Comb NEW. Without date codes, 1930 - 1940 is the best you will get there.

The first razor. Now that's a horse of a different color. I have not heard of the short slot on the head, smaller nibs on the cap and shorter smooth bands on the handle. Particularly intruiging is the base plate with no patent numbers. I can't help you with that one. You might check Achim's site to see if he might have one similar.

With the Parallel slots in the Tech head, I will say post WWII. The earlier and wartime production Techs had triangular slots.

with the one furthest to the left... what is the engraving on the handle just above the ball end?

i can't really tell, but I think it may be a Windsor? My basis for this guess is that this is the only ball tipped NEW that I could find that was made in the USA and also had some sort of engraving right above the base on the handle.

obviously can't see the insides from that picture to match the pegs or notches or whatever.

gillette did make a new with a short positioning bar in model #148 and and a 2 bar configuration the #154. these were made in 1931. (page 199.) there is a photo of the #154 on page 212, but no photo of the #148. the photo shown does not match your photo, so perhaps yours is the #148. (above info and page references from krumholz's the complete gillette collector's handbook.)

hbc07, the end of the handle nearest the ball end has:
Pat. Jan. 13, 1920 U.S.A.
Other Patents Pending

There is s crack at the top of this handle and the mid-part twists off the top of the handle with some effort. I suppose that it can be glued back on.

The top of the base has an alignment slot the entire width, but the positioning bar is short. I'd never seen this before. Also, thanks for pointing out that the corner tabs are smaller than what one usually sees.

I don't have the book that one of you referenced. Are there any other identifiers for the #148? I'm assuming that this was one of the earlier iterations of the NEW.

Thank you, gentlemen, for your kind and thoughtful responses. I really appreciate this site.

Doug

According to Krumholtz, the short-bar cap was only made in 1931, and as such is not commonly found! Nice Catch!!

That base plate also does not have the "reissue" patent numbers on it. Those were made later, once the dust had settled after the lawsuit and takeover of Gillette by AutoStrop.

BBrad said:

According to Krumholtz, the short-bar cap was only made in 1931, and as such is not commonly found! Nice Catch!!

That base plate also does not have the "reissue" patent numbers on it. Those were made later, once the dust had settled after the lawsuit and takeover of Gillette by AutoStrop.

Click to expand...

Well, this is interesting. I have been following this thread, not even realizing I have three heads with no patent numbers. Doug's has the short bar on the cap, while all three of mine have the longer bar. And yet, none of them have the patent numbers, which must indicate either 1930 or 1931 before the Auto-Strop storm. Here are two of mine (the third got replated by Bob and got a new custom handle because it was quite deplated and ugly). The one on the left came in a NOS palmolive boxed set with an A2 (1930) NEW blade. I am wondering if all of these are 1930 only razors?!

BBrad said:

According to Krumholtz, the short-bar cap was only made in 1931, and as such is not commonly found! Nice Catch!!

That base plate also does not have the "reissue" patent numbers on it. Those were made later, once the dust had settled after the lawsuit and takeover of Gillette by AutoStrop.

Click to expand...

BBrad, what page did you find this information on?

There is another distinction that I've noticed, as a result of recent postings on this thread and the photos that have been provided.

The head on the razor of mine that does have patent information has this on the left:
patented
no. 1,639,335

and this on the right:
reissue no. 17,567
other pats. pend.

I have a bar-handled NEW that reads as follows:
On the left:

pat. no. 1815745
pat. no. 1858316

On the right:
reissue pat.
no. 17567

I tried to format the text as it appears on the base plates, but this Reply to Thread text window will not permit that. And note that all letters are lower caps on the heads, and I have no easy way to type lower caps in this message. Also, on what seems to be the older head there are comma separators but not in the patent numbers on the later one.

So, I'd like to know more about that old lawsuit that might help explain these differences. Might the base plate with 1,639,335 more accurately locate that razor as 1930 or 1931?

Thanks guys. This is getting interesting.

Doug

IronHammer said:

BBrad, what page did you find this information on?

Click to expand...

Page 199, toward the top of the right-hand column.


1931 seems to have been quite the year in razor and blade manufacturing. The October 1930 takeover of Gillette by Henry Gaisman's AutoStrop Company (some refer to it as a "merger") was still being sorted through, and both companies (Gillette and Probak, an AS subsidiary) were making running product changes in order to keep the aftermarket blade makers confused.

It was also in 1931 that the Goodwill razors were produced from surplus Old Type blanks and designed only to accept the NEW style blades.

From what I have read, once the dust settled from the takeover, the new Gillette owners stamped the applicable patent numbers on their razors to preclude any thoughts of patent infringement by others, and preserve their rights in the event thereof.

Very interesting, indeed! I wonder if it would be safe to assume that long comb NEW heads with no patent numbers can be nailed down to either 1930 or 1931?

A couple of months ago there was an excellent condition long comb NEW with no box or anything that sold for something like $78. I was astounded at this. I think I know why now. It is much rarer than the usual long comb NEW since it was only made for a year or two, at most.

Following BBrad information, I just found the following:

http://www.bettershaving.com/2010/01/evolution-of-the-double-edge-blade/

On page two of this web entry is a drawing of a Probak razor and blades. On a Probak blade is the following:

Pat nos.
1633739 - 1639335

reissue pat. no 17567
other pat's pending

AutoStrop Company owned the Probak brand, a brand invented in 1928. The patent numbers on the NEW head of mine that has only one patent number on the left is actually an AutoStrop patent found on Probak blades. The reissue patent number on the right is also a Probak patent. That means that this Gillette guard was made after November 1930, likely in 1931. I wonder if those without patent numbers can thereby be dated to 1930? The AutoStrop/Probak patent numbers would only appear on Gillette guards *after* the merger. Guards without patent numbers might logically be made before Gillette had a right to engrave those AutoStrop patents on its own products.

Probak became a division of Gillette in November 1930 when Gillette bought AutoStrop (worth US $9m) for US $20 million. In one place this is referred to as a merger, as BBrad has already noted.

Five cap and guard designs are pictured in the article. The cap with the short bar is not among them.

So, as a result of what I've now learned, I believe the following are reasonable conclusions:

The NEW OC blade guard without patent numbers has to have been manufactured before the merger/acquisition Nov. 1930. So, guards without patent information likely date to 1929 - 1930.

Right after Nov. 1930 it is reasonable to assume that OC guards appeared with the AutoStrop patents (because the acquisition/merger was precisely to obtain patents, not necessarily technology, by Gillette). That would likely date the guard that I have with AutoStrop patents as very late 1930 or 1931.

Newer NEW variants have patent numbers numerically higher than the AutoStrop patent 1639335, so that would mean that these products are mature expressions of Gillette patent efforts throughout the rest of the 1930s through 1940, when I believe the NEW came to its end.

If anyone has anything else to add, please chime in. I'm all ears.

Is this the kind of material that ought to be in the B&B Wiki entry for the NEW? I don't know who has responsibility for making that kind of decision on B&B.

Doug

Doug, that is awesome research. Krumholz says in his book that the NEW design was produced and test marketed beginning in 1929 using the long slot bar design. Yours is, apparently, one of the rare 1931 variants. Mine, I think, can safely be identified as 1929 - 1931 because of the missing patent numbers from the base plate.

Doug_in_NNY said:

Following BBrad information, I just found the following:

http://www.bettershaving.com/2010/01/evolution-of-the-double-edge-blade/

Probak became a division of Gillette in November 1930 when Gillette bought AutoStrop (worth US $9m) for US $20 million. In one place this is referred to as a merger, as BBrad has already noted.


Doug

Click to expand...

For the sake of brevity, I didn't quote your entire post, but yes, I believe your theory is correct. I also believe this should be reviewed, verified, and included in the Wiki. Nice work, sir!

I retained your quote of the interesting wording concerning the "purchase" or "merger." In reality, it was about the same as if a man takes your wallet and car keys at gunpoint and you call it a gift instead of a robbery.

The "purchase" was the only way to settle a patent infringement lawsuit initiated by Henry Gaisman, the owner of AutoStrop and Probak. At the end of the day, Gaisman owned it all and cleaned house. The Gillette name was stronger, with Gillette having the lion's share of the blade market, so it remained as the successor company with AS and Probak as subsidiaries.

Interesting too is that it was not only about razor design or the shape of the blade holes, but also involved the processes used to manufacture and sharpen the blades themselves. Gaisman tried to persuade Gillette to buy him out several times, and there was speculation that both companies had "inside men" working for the other.

One of the greatest ironies is that even to this day, decades after the takeover and King C. Gillette's death in 1932, Gillette's picture still appears on razor blade packages!

here is a photo of a regent shared by a member here I bought the same model here in BST about a month ago it as stated earlier in this thread has no patent nos

Henry Gaisman "sold" AutoStrop in 1930 for over twice what it was worth. One inflation calculator informed me that $20m in 1930 dollars is equivalent to just over a quarter of a billion dollars today.

I certainly recognize that "merger" is perhaps a euphemism for what happened between Gillette and AutoStrop. Perhaps the hubris often connected with making tons of money with a consumable (like razor blades) might have blinded the Gillette patent people to the need to stay current. Timing is everything, and Mr. Gaisman knew it.

When I get home this evening I'm going to peruse my copy of Russell Adam's 1978 book, "King C. Gillette, the man and his wonderful shaving device." When I first read it a year ago I remember nothing of the historical intrigue. I think the author might have glossed over this stuff. I remember this book as more of a fawning history of the Gillette enterprise, though there's certainly some good historical material in his telling of the story.

Anyway, if anyone following this thread owns NEW guards either without patent information or with only early AutoStrop patent numbers, you just might want to hang on to them. Just sayin'.

Doug

I am definitely going to have to get that book!

I am curious, though. Does anybody have any pics of a LC NEW that actually has the patent numbers on the head? If so, what is stamped onto the handle portion?

Doug_in_NNY said:

Anyway, if anyone following this thread owns NEW guards either without patent information or with only early AutoStrop patent numbers, you just might want to hang on to them. Just sayin'.

Doug

Click to expand...

My daily shaver is a NEW with no patent on the guard. From what I gather from this thread this particular model is the LAST razor made by Gillette under King C.'s leadership and the final razor before the merger. They may have more collector value as time goes on.