Do you also have a gripe with Rooney's "Stubby"?
*New *Forest The Brand
- Thread starter jbaca
- Start date
- Status
Do you also have a gripe with Rooney's "Stubby"?
I dunno about Gary, but I've always thought the name "Stubby" was a bit out of line...I mean, if someone were to start a company called "Tyler of Old Bond Street" or "Geo. F. Trumpet's", wouldn't that be a pretty obvious ungentlemanly knockoff?
As for NF...well, I had a 2211, and the knot was pretty good, but the handle was awful. It looked cheap, it felt cheap, and the base had a sharp edge to it that dug into my palm when I held the brush. For the money, it was an OK brush, but it certainly doesn't deserve the praise it sometimes gets as a $100 brush for $50 or whatnot.
Perhaps, but now he's claiming to have Plisson-grade hair for his brushes, even calling it "High Mountain" as Plisson does.
Personally I don't have a cheap Chinese New Forest brush so I can't comment on them, but I do have two cheap Chinese brushes that I bought direct from Hong Kong for around £9 each on the bay a couple of years ago, I also have a Kent BK4, Shavemac can't remember the number, a B&B silver tip from a few years ago, A Semogue 1305 and a large sized C&E silvertip I bought in a sale from their outlet in the Clark's Village in Street, Somerset.
The three that get the most use are the Shavemac and the two cheap Chinese brushes, in that order, followed by any of the others for a bit of variety!
I prefer the Chinese jobbies to the B&B silvertip and the C&E. Don't look or feel as good to hold but they don't half lather tidy like!
As an aside, I have also been told off for telling a dry British joke too! I am not offended by a lot of the American jokes or words as I know there is a language and sensibility difference and just ignore it!
Gareth
The three that get the most use are the Shavemac and the two cheap Chinese brushes, in that order, followed by any of the others for a bit of variety!
I prefer the Chinese jobbies to the B&B silvertip and the C&E. Don't look or feel as good to hold but they don't half lather tidy like!
As an aside, I have also been told off for telling a dry British joke too! I am not offended by a lot of the American jokes or words as I know there is a language and sensibility difference and just ignore it!
Gareth
Have you tried a Plisson HMW and compared it to his? I haven't myself, so I won't state that his claim is or isn't valid.
You understand that all this badger hair mostly comes from China, right? Don't you think its possible that there is quite a bit of overlap between companies and sources of this hair?
His 2201 knot was virtually identical to the Simpson Two-band Super PJ2... Badger hair is a commodity and I suspect that its all the same depending on how much the brush makers want to pay the sorters, etc. for the product.
I have neither tried a Plisson nor his "High Mountain" brush, but I'm a bit skeptical that he can sell a brush using the same quality hair for a tenth of the price.
True, both hair may be coming from China, but I can certainly tell the difference between my Eagle and my Shea Moisture.
Why are people so upset that I'm calling this brush exactly what it is, a cheap Chinese brush?
Why are people so upset that I'm calling this brush exactly what it is, a cheap Chinese brush?
Maybe I'm missing something but isn't it a fallacy to dismiss a badger brush for being "Chinese," since basically all badger hair is sourced from China?
I've no stake in this having not tried the brush in question.
Why are people so upset that I'm calling this brush exactly what it is, a cheap Chinese brush?
You seem to be attempting to "call out" on this, but Peter is actually claiming his is a low-cost chinese produced option. For some reason, your posts make it sound like he is being misleading...
I think there are degrees of 'made in Chinaness'I have neither tried a Plisson nor his "High Mountain" brush, but I'm a bit skeptical that he can sell a brush using the same quality hair for a tenth of the price.
True, both hair may be coming from China, but I can certainly tell the difference between my Eagle and my Shea Moisture.
Why are people so upset that I'm calling this brush exactly what it is, a cheap Chinese brush?
Those $10 ebay brushes are what I would call a 'cheap Chinese brush'. The NF2201 was clearly a lot better. If we are being literal here then yes it is made in China and cheap(ish), but these brushes are very different.
Now, I don't think its at all implausible to describe a NF brush as a cheaper SImfix Grosvenor or Persian Jar....
The hair quality imo is very very similar.
On the other hand, it was an injudicious decision to market the new ones as 'High Mountain' - that just means Plisson.
This brush...
Is not really like this one...
But overall, I quite liked the NF brushes I had and was not disappointed at all (which can't be said about some high end brands!). They're better than ebay 'silvertips' but they're not Plissons. hate to be so diplomatic but thats the truth.
Last edited:
I have a New Forrest 2211. Which was my first badger brush. Now I also have a Semogue 2010 limited edition silvertip badger. So you can take my opinion with a grain of salt. But that opinion is actually a very positive one, this is my favorite brush. Great size to face lather with, feels soft to the face.
Compared to the Semogue it mixes soap and water effortlessly( the Semogue is very dense ). And the Semogue feels scratchy or itchy.
Compared to the Semogue it mixes soap and water effortlessly( the Semogue is very dense ). And the Semogue feels scratchy or itchy.
Sorry, sir. Tribute to a great design, at least.
The lookalike also looks a lot like my Shea Moisture handle (which is in black, not ivory), I wonder if the same source makes both handles.
I'm actually awaiting my Tubby 1 from Peter. I went into a buying spree of 2 band brushes for the simple task of taking pictures of them all together pre/post bloom and posting to the forums as a reference for people looking at 2 band brushes. I have simpson, rooney, morris and forndran, shavemac, TGN, Vie Long, and a semogue. I've been up front with everyone when I purchased the brushes and stated what I was using them for, a comparison test...Peter was up front and told me that while he didnt expect me to find his brush the best overall...he did expect it to be so at the price point he was selling at.
Sorry Gary, I sold the simpson 2 band chubby today. It was actually my own fault, I'm not fond of big brushes and the CH2 was the only one available at the time and I bought it.....just too big for me, I'd be much better off with a CH1. But one thing I have learned with my buying experience....the more expensive brushes are almost always better in the density department.
Back to the NF....the handles are now made locally to peter and the logo printing is done locally also. Once I get it in my hands I'll be posting my review of the various 2 bands I have and let the pictures do most of the talking. At his price point, I'm not expecting it to have the density of rooney, simpson, or shavemac.
Sorry Gary, I sold the simpson 2 band chubby today. It was actually my own fault, I'm not fond of big brushes and the CH2 was the only one available at the time and I bought it.....just too big for me, I'd be much better off with a CH1. But one thing I have learned with my buying experience....the more expensive brushes are almost always better in the density department.
Back to the NF....the handles are now made locally to peter and the logo printing is done locally also. Once I get it in my hands I'll be posting my review of the various 2 bands I have and let the pictures do most of the talking. At his price point, I'm not expecting it to have the density of rooney, simpson, or shavemac.
You'd have to see them in person...there's certainly no mistaking the NF for the Simpson's. Simply different qualities of handles. I used my 2211 for a few shaves, sold it, and got a Simpson's...there's a certain joy to using a well-made, high-quality product, and Fido certainly cuts a more than a few corners in getting to his price point.
I have a 2201 I picked up off of B/S/T. Yes the logo has worn off, yes the handle is just okay from a feel/solidity perspective, but the 50 mm 2-band knot performs more than adequately. Lathers great, releases lather great, feels comfortable and full on the face. If you can pick one up on BST for $30-35, its a solid price/performance buy. My other brushes are M&F, SR, and Simpsons. The 2201 is in the rotation with these other guys.
Last edited:
I have a NF 2216 tigris perla with a chunky style handle.
It is a good brush, perfectly priced as it cost almost the same price should have I built one from a TGN knot.
I like very much the handle that is tall, has a substantial weight and a ring place a the second third of the overall handle height. The new source of hand made handle made in England is really nice.
Regarding, the knot the badger hair is standard silver tip (not particularly soft) and not so dense. Yet, it is perfectly build with the loft at 48 mm length. It gives the brush nice face lathering performance.
Should I compare it with my Duke#2, the Duke feels slightly softer due to its greater denseness with slightly more backbone. Yet, this slight edge in performance is not in proportion of the price difference.
It is a great starter brush, well thought out and priced that gives enough with some limits that will allow one to appreciate the slight improvement provided by a higher end brand brush.
Regarding the stubby#2 : Given the price and the difficulty to find a vendor for a chubby#2 two band, the offer to acquire a clone at the fourth of the price is obviously tempting. The question being how different will be the knot from the original Simpson one ?
It is a good brush, perfectly priced as it cost almost the same price should have I built one from a TGN knot.
I like very much the handle that is tall, has a substantial weight and a ring place a the second third of the overall handle height. The new source of hand made handle made in England is really nice.
Regarding, the knot the badger hair is standard silver tip (not particularly soft) and not so dense. Yet, it is perfectly build with the loft at 48 mm length. It gives the brush nice face lathering performance.
Should I compare it with my Duke#2, the Duke feels slightly softer due to its greater denseness with slightly more backbone. Yet, this slight edge in performance is not in proportion of the price difference.
It is a great starter brush, well thought out and priced that gives enough with some limits that will allow one to appreciate the slight improvement provided by a higher end brand brush.
Regarding the stubby#2 : Given the price and the difficulty to find a vendor for a chubby#2 two band, the offer to acquire a clone at the fourth of the price is obviously tempting. The question being how different will be the knot from the original Simpson one ?
That is a good question indeed... I praise people who are honest about their business, and Peter is one of those.
Being the type of person who doesn´t criticize without trying I have a NF 2 band and it has surpassed my expections.
- Status
Similar threads
