AI generated? Me thinks the LLM was on LSD
AI generated? Me thinks the LLM was on LSD
It's why I bought 100 Bruce Lee blades. The fact that they are good was almost immaterial.I would buy a 1000 of those just on the cool art alone. I did pony up for 200 of the Zaza Super Stainless for that exact reason. <Groan> They are horrible.
Because when I think of a sharp blade slicing whiskers off of my face, I immediately think of Mammoths...
Because when I think of a sharp blade slicing whiskers off of my face, I immediately think of Mammoths...
If they're trying to be deceptive, they're not trying very hard. I don't know how many people would be fooled by the generic-looking "American" branding when the country-of-origin (and even the company behind it) labeling is large and prominent.This is the American Razor Blades premium super sharp high quality Japanese steel blade. It is made in India for a Netherlands company called 1 Supply B.V. It is a 95 micron blade with a platinum driven metallic coating. It is mild-moderate in sharpness with fair balance, and good durability and consistency. It is probably made by Vidyut Metallics.
The graphic design and branding are highly misleading. I filed a report with the FTC. The printed single layer wax paper wrappers are similar to Topaz, but I haven't seen another Indian blade bulk-packed like these.
View attachment 1988802 View attachment 1988803
View attachment 1988804 View attachment 1988805
Polymer and metallic coatings are visible. The three stage grind is quite similar to Vidyut blades such as Starmaxx. The grind is done with cheaper and more uneven abrasives, so there are errant stria and uneven scratches. It doesn't seem to be detrimental to performance with this milder grind. The steel is tough and durable. In the second photo, taken after the test, we see the failure mode of some very small chipping at the apex, which is typical of high-quality razor blade steels.
View attachment 1988806 View attachment 1988807
Performance is closely aligned with other moderate Indian blades with platinum coatings, especially Starmaxx and Supermax blades.
I have mixed feelings about this blade. I am not happy that a European company would import Indian blades to the US with such intentionally misleading branding and design, but blades of this quality at the current street price of $5.40/200 with a coupon on Amazon, represent one of the best values on the American market, and perhaps the very best value among blades that ship from a US retailer. If you like Indian blades, or mild blades, and you aren't turned away by the importer's dishonesty, then these are probably worth trying. The mild sharpness, fair balance, and crude grind do not represent a top-tier blade by any means, but these are impressive for a blade that costs less than three cents.
I wish they had the good judgement to present them as "Snow Leopard" or "Indian Elephant" blades with a picture of an iconic Indian wildlife species in classic posterized graphic design and transparent manufacturer, production location, and production date information printed on the package. Even better would be to specify that there is a platinum driven metallic coating and call out the specific alloy used. It surprises me that these companies make such stupid mistakes being opaque and dishonest. This blade would sell well with an honest presentation as the thing it actually is. Perhaps I should start my own marketing company and import blades myself.
View attachment 1988812
Date 3-Feb-2025
Blade Thickness, mm 0.095 Blade 1 Supply BV American SS Japanese India 1-Jan-2024 Wear on Edge 0 3 6 9 12 Edges Measured Bottom / Top Bottom / Top Bottom / Top Bottom / Top Bottom / Top Measurement Medium Stren 4 .21 Stren 4 .21 Stren 4 .21 Stren 4 .21 Stren 4 .21 Dulling Substrate New Paper Paper Paper Paper Measurements 20 20 20 20 20 Adj. Std. Dev. 12 9 8 5 11 Median F (g) 60 55 52 55.5 59 Mean F (g) Top 54 53 50 52 56 Mean F (g) Bottom 67 58 57 58 64 Mean F (g) 61 55 53 55 60 BESS Adj. Factor 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 Avg. Adj. F (g) Top 75 73 69 72 78 Avg. Adj. F (g) Bottom 93 81 80 80 89 Median Adj. F (g) 83 77 72 77 82 Mean Adj. F (g) 84 77 74 76 84
View attachment 1988813 View attachment 1988814
Blade Sharpness Test Index
Yeah, Accutec really missed the mark with the pricing of their OEM branded blades. They can't just sell blades to Edgewell's Fromm to market under their established Personna brand at $.17 and then turn around and get $.36 for OEM branded blades in a brown cardboard 250 blade bulk pack.If they're trying to be deceptive, they're not trying very hard. I don't know how many people would be fooled by the generic-looking "American" branding when the country-of-origin (and even the company behind it) labeling is large and prominent.
I'm more surprised that a blade maker would want to be seen as from the U.S. It's not a country known for producing razor blades. As far as I know, there's only one blade maker in the U.S. and they are in the witness protection program to ensure no one learns their name or the name of their products.
I believe that Personna is the true heir to the Bergman movie "Persona" and it exists to subvert the very idea of identity.Yeah, Accutec really missed the mark with the pricing of their OEM branded blades. They can't just sell blades to Edgewell's Fromm to market under their established Personna brand at $.17 and then turn around and get $.36 for OEM branded blades in a brown cardboard 250 blade bulk pack.
If they put them in a 100 blade box and get the wholesale price so retailers sell it around $15, then they can actually sell some blades through normal retail channels.
And if they want so much to focus on industrial, scientific, and medical, then why sell blades to Fromm cheap and why even have the 250 blade bulk packs?
So, was the greif… good? I’ll see myself out…I am definitely going to shave with one this week to see how it feels. I am guessing it is not as bad as the chart makes it look.
It was smooth and comfortable, but it broke in my razor like the first test sample.So, was the greif… good? I’ll see myself out…![]()
I guess you win the toughest whiskers contest.It was smooth and comfortable, but it broke in my razor like the first test sample.
View attachment 1989450
Well there goes my understanding of the name change.You seen these @helicopter?
View attachment 1991921
Sold by Connaught (UK) ... not sure if it's okay to link direct, but folks can find them
... as if Personna was not complex enough, now Edgewell are making AccuForge! I questioned the proprietor on this and he is absolutely firm that these are made in Germany by Edgewell. I guess it's this SKU https://accuteccompany.com/s/product/accuforge-double-edge-blade-with-microcoat/01t3i0000089qvIAAQ ... but made under license.
Date | 8-Feb-2025 | Mass, mg | 553 | Thickness, microns | 100 |
Blade | White Label | KRWN | Super Stainless | China | 1-Jan-2024 |
Wear on Edge | 0 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 12 |
Edges Measured | Bottom / Top | Bottom / Top | Bottom / Top | Bottom / Top | Bottom / Top |
Measurement Medium | Stren 4 .21 | Stren 4 .21 | Stren 4 .21 | Stren 4 .21 | Stren 4 .21 |
Dulling Substrate | New | Paper | Paper | Paper | Paper |
Measurements | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 |
Adj. Std. Dev. | 15 | 15 | 19 | 22 | 20 |
Median F (g) | 71.5 | 70 | 71 | 75 | 81 |
Mean F (g) Top | 64 | 64 | 74 | 77 | 82 |
Mean F (g) Bottom | 80 | 77 | 77 | 80 | 88 |
Mean F (g) | 72 | 71 | 76 | 78 | 85 |
BESS Adj. Factor | 1.39 | 1.39 | 1.39 | 1.39 | 1.39 |
Avg. Adj. F (g) Top | 90 | 89 | 103 | 107 | 113 |
Avg. Adj. F (g) Bottom | 111 | 108 | 108 | 111 | 122 |
Median Adj. F (g) | 99 | 97 | 99 | 104 | 113 |
Mean Adj. F (g) | 100 | 98 | 105 | 109 | 118 |
Date | 8-Feb-2025 | Mass, mg | 547 | Thickness, microns | 99 |
Blade | White Label | Gocelle | New Super Blue Pt | China | 1-Jan-2024 |
Wear on Edge | 0 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 12 |
Edges Measured | Bottom / Top | Bottom / Top | Bottom / Top | Bottom / Top | Bottom / Top |
Measurement Medium | Stren 4 .21 | Stren 4 .21 | Stren 4 .21 | Stren 4 .21 | Stren 4 .21 |
Dulling Substrate | New | Paper | Paper | Paper | Paper |
Measurements | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 |
Adj. Std. Dev. | 10 | 12 | 17 | 14 | 18 |
Median F (g) | 77 | 67 | 68 | 67 | 69.5 |
Mean F (g) Top | 73 | 59 | 60 | 64 | 66 |
Mean F (g) Bottom | 81 | 72 | 77 | 74 | 81 |
Mean F (g) | 77 | 65 | 68 | 69 | 73 |
BESS Adj. Factor | 1.39 | 1.39 | 1.39 | 1.39 | 1.39 |
Avg. Adj. F (g) Top | 101 | 82 | 84 | 88 | 92 |
Avg. Adj. F (g) Bottom | 112 | 100 | 107 | 103 | 113 |
Median Adj. F (g) | 107 | 93 | 95 | 93 | 97 |
Mean Adj. F (g) | 107 | 91 | 95 | 96 | 102 |
I wouldn't say it's necessarily counterfeit!This is the Gocelle New Super Blue Stainless Platinum blade. It is made in China for the Chinese market. The graphic design and branding are designed to confuse Chinese consumers and make them mistake it for a Gillette Super Blue blade, which is a premium blade in the Chinese market.
I am not sure who manufactures it. It is made from 100 micron steel with a dull traditional grind and a platinum driven metallic coating. Balance, durability, and consistency are fair.
View attachment 1992071 View attachment 1992072 View attachment 1992073
It is essentially a counterfeit blade, and it certainly violates Procter and Gamble trademarks. Performance is poor, and I guess that's what you get for buying this if you are familiar with the Latin alphabet. If you want a Chinese blade of questionable intellectual property usage, go for Cloud Bruce Lee.
I agree it isn't a straight counterfeit. That is why I characterized it as 'essentially' counterfeit.I wouldn't say it's necessarily counterfeit!
Counterfeit is usually an exact copy with the same name and everything.
Here they just made a product that strongly resembles another one.
I just compared your picture to a pack of real Gillette Blue Blades and they're different enough I guess.
Nevertheless, I'd never buy them!![]()
Absolutely!I agree it isn't a straight counterfeit. That is why I characterized it as 'essentially' counterfeit.
Imagine if you were trying to buy an expensive blade that had Chinese writing on it, and someone swapped out the characters for different, but similar looking ones. There is no question it is intentionally deceptive, and no question about whether it violates trademarks from a US standpoint.
View attachment 1992106