Gillette Tech

I have and use Canadian, English, and US Techs from Pre-War to 1960s. I agree with @Bogeyman that there isn't much difference among them. Having said that, my favourite is the Canadian Post-War No Date Code Fat Handle Tech. That "frog's hair" difference in blade rigidity compared to the Pre-War Tech makes a difference. Maybe. Just a little.
I think the lowly Travel Tech is a great way to acquire an as-new tech head for very little £. Most Travel Techs were never used since the little 2" handle was seen as difficult to use. Screw on your own handle, and you have what is essentially an unused Tech.
Just my .02
I agree as I have bought several different tech travel sets and the heads are indeed unused. Several as I wanted the heads with the Gillette Diamond, plain and aluminum to try. All seem mostly the same to me? I like the Gillette Tech head with the diamond etched onto it best.
 
Is the Star razor allegedly better built than British Techs? I heard that the build, fit and finish of the British made Techs was vastly superior to the rest!
I only have a few English Techs. One has a head like a travel tech and an aluminium handle. The other one is all-aluminium. They shave like my other Techs with minimal differences due to weight and balance. It's a small sample, but the build quality of my English Techs is outstanding.
I think what people mean when they say a Star is built better is that the design of the razor is better (thicker base plate, "wings" on the posts to better align and stabilize the blade, and a solid brass handle) rather than build quality.
 
I have only one Tech. A 1950's ball ended, I think; British version. Currently my favorite razor. Not had a poor shave with it as yet. Curious to learn about the Star, Pal and I guess, the Personna razors too. I understand that they are all similar. Will check the 'bay.

Does anyone else struggle with handles, and pair the head with the handle of Murker 45? Asking for a friend ;)
 
Last edited:
I have only one Tech. A 1950's ball ended, I think; British version. Currently my favorite razor. Not had a poor shave with it as yet. Curious to learn about the Star, Pal and I guess, the Personna razors too. I understand that they are all similar. Will check the 'bay.

Does anyone else struggle with handles, and pair the head with the handle of Murker 45? Asking for a friend ;)
I don't struggle with the handle on my English Flat Bottom, but can see why people would with the aluminium versions... Bloody small and skinny! Head shaves great though (even if it is zamak or whatever)

Sent from my EML-L09 using Tapatalk
 
Believe it or not, I actually like the sleek thin head design of the current Chinese Tech made of pot metal very much. The only issue is lack of weight and if you screw on a heavy handle it gives it a weird off center balance:

https://www.ebay.com/p/1-Super-Gill...r-Men-Sets/1320023423?iid=122227004515&chn=ps

That said, I will reiterate that the post-war Tech does have better blade rigidity for a slightly smoother shave, but all Tech models shave the same as far as aggression goes IMO.
 
Looks in great condition :cool:
Thanks :)!There is some VERY light scratching on the top cap and minute dings on one the top cap's edges (shown in photo). None of those things affect the shave, so won't be sending it away for replating :D. I will certainly be keeping my eyes open for a NOS/mint condition model... I would really like a backup (particularly to be able to give one to my son when he starts shaving)!
 
Thanks :)!There is some VERY light scratching on the top cap and minute dings on one the top cap's edges (shown in photo). None of those things affect the shave, so won't be sending it away for replating :D. I will certainly be keeping my eyes open for a NOS/mint condition model... I would really like a backup (particularly to be able to give one to my son when he starts shaving)!

I had one of these really nice shaver, gave it to my son, he loves it.
 
For comparison purposes I have taken photos of three different era Tech heads to make a point. First, a pre-war Canadian. Notice the thickness:



Next is an early 70's Tech head (on the pre-war handle):



Finally, a Chinese branded Tech:

lsoVNrf.jpg


These changes do indeed affect the shave angle and perhaps more. The latter is up to the user. The last one is pure pot metal and although I love the shave and maneuverability the light weigh is a disadvantage. This makes the middle one, which has a brass base and a pot metal head, as the better shaver IMO as it is more nimble and able to reach tighter areas with more ease. As well, the blade rigidity is a frog hair better. YMMV.
 
For comparison purposes I have taken photos of three different era Tech heads to make a point. First, a pre-war Canadian. Notice the thickness:



Next is an early 70's Tech head (on the pre-war handle):



Finally, a Chinese branded Tech:

lsoVNrf.jpg


These changes do indeed affect the shave angle and perhaps more. The latter is up to the user. The last one is pure pot metal and although I love the shave and maneuverability the light weigh is a disadvantage. This makes the middle one, which has a brass base and a pot metal head, as the better shaver IMO as it is more nimble and able to reach tighter areas with more ease. As well, the blade rigidity is a frog hair better. YMMV.
I have zero problems with my English Flat Bottom Tech. It holds the blade securely (and rigidly) and provides a wonderful shave.
 
For comparison purposes I have taken photos of three different era Tech heads to make a point. First, a pre-war Canadian. Notice the thickness:



Next is an early 70's Tech head (on the pre-war handle):



Finally, a Chinese branded Tech:

lsoVNrf.jpg


These changes do indeed affect the shave angle and perhaps more. The latter is up to the user. The last one is pure pot metal and although I love the shave and maneuverability the light weigh is a disadvantage. This makes the middle one, which has a brass base and a pot metal head, as the better shaver IMO as it is more nimble and able to reach tighter areas with more ease. As well, the blade rigidity is a frog hair better. YMMV.


Got a caliper? They are about the same.


Inked7oeY3d9_LI.jpgInkedfx66szd_LI.jpg



There is a general consensus that the pre -war is best, the all-brass post-war is a good shaver but slightly milder, and the zamak crapper with the bevel edged cap was Gillette's first disposable! There are aluminum and Bakelite versions that have their own followers, but the late Tech is a bit of a bastard child in the family.

.
 
Toby, the distance is smaller. As well, I have owned a "flat bottom" jtface and sold it. The post-war models shave smoother IMO. I discovered that there was a lot of myth merely being handed down about the Tech and repeated on forums. It was repeated so much as to become basically lore. No Tech model is more "aggressive". They all have the same blade gap, 0.025" approx. + or - 0.003", with few exceptions. Just my 2 cents.
 
Toby, the distance is smaller. As well, I have owned a "flat bottom" jtface and sold it. The post-war models shave smoother IMO. I discovered that there was a lot of myth merely being handed down about the Tech and repeated on forums. It was repeated so much as to become basically lore. No Tech model is more "aggressive". They all have the same blade gap, 0.025" approx. + or - 0.003", with few exceptions. Just my 2 cents.

The post-war is a very different design from the pre-war, with more blade support. Many say the post war is smoother because the blade is more rigid, and there is no blade chatter. I have no problem with chatter, and, IMO, the pre-war is more aggressive than the late Tech, and seems to have a wider usable angle range. But any razor will shave, so none of this really matters, and I think blade gap is meaningless, and I submit razors such as the OLD type and the Piccolo as evidence.

How does the flat bottom Tech shave compared to the New?
 
Back
Top Bottom