OP
- Joined
- Tuesday June 7, 2016
- Location
- Monterey Bay, California
- Thread Starter
- #49
@Fuzzyian - Ah, I understand now. I agree that a good test would be to take two razors that are closely matched in everything except the slant (and possible twist) of the blade—such as the Merkur 34C and the Merkur 37C. I have actually used that pair, and for me the difference is obvious: the 37C is noticeably more comfortable and noticeably more efficient. I attribute that to the obvious difference—the slant and twist of the blade—but I've encountered those who take as a premise that the slant of the blade cannot matter, so they assume the improved comfort and efficiency must come from something else (because, in their view, it cannot come from the slanted blade).
OTOH, there are obvious reasons why a slanted blade would improve cutting efficiency by introducing a small amount of shearing force to the cut, and even a small amount makes a difference. A purely compressive cut is not very efficient—a sharp samurai sword swung directly at a bamboo pole, trying to cut it using on compressive force, will bounce off and not cut at all; introduce even a little shearing force and the cut is easy and clean. The slant introduces a slight shearing action and thus a slight improvement in cutting ease.
Another way to find out would be to use the example of medical trials: people vary a lot in their response to medication because they are genetically different, have different diets and activity patterns, are different ages, etc. So when you are trying to decide whether a medication is effective, you give it to a whole bunch of people and count how many get better and how many don't seem to improve, without getting necessary into the minutiae of individual differences. That's what I've attempted with the poll. We now have a reasonable number who find that a slant shaves better (for them) than a conventional razor, and an equal number who find that it does not.
My explanation for the difference in perceptions (50% find a slant better, 50% find it about the same) is that the slant advantage is relatively small—it's a small slant—so that the benefit is not so easy to detect as the small differences between blades. Blades don't differ by much (in terms of measurements), but most (I would guess 80%-85%) find the differences obvious. Even there, though 15%-20% cannot detect any differences between different brands of blades. With slants, the difference clearly is harder to detect, since 50% cannot detect the difference. My guess is that, as the beard is tougher to cut, the slant's advantage becomes more obvious, and that seems especially true for those who have sensitive skin: a tough beard (which under pressure pushes against the skin) makes small decreases in cutting resistance more obvious. A beard that's quite easily cut makes it difficult to detect a small increase cutting efficiency.
OTOH, there are obvious reasons why a slanted blade would improve cutting efficiency by introducing a small amount of shearing force to the cut, and even a small amount makes a difference. A purely compressive cut is not very efficient—a sharp samurai sword swung directly at a bamboo pole, trying to cut it using on compressive force, will bounce off and not cut at all; introduce even a little shearing force and the cut is easy and clean. The slant introduces a slight shearing action and thus a slight improvement in cutting ease.
Another way to find out would be to use the example of medical trials: people vary a lot in their response to medication because they are genetically different, have different diets and activity patterns, are different ages, etc. So when you are trying to decide whether a medication is effective, you give it to a whole bunch of people and count how many get better and how many don't seem to improve, without getting necessary into the minutiae of individual differences. That's what I've attempted with the poll. We now have a reasonable number who find that a slant shaves better (for them) than a conventional razor, and an equal number who find that it does not.
My explanation for the difference in perceptions (50% find a slant better, 50% find it about the same) is that the slant advantage is relatively small—it's a small slant—so that the benefit is not so easy to detect as the small differences between blades. Blades don't differ by much (in terms of measurements), but most (I would guess 80%-85%) find the differences obvious. Even there, though 15%-20% cannot detect any differences between different brands of blades. With slants, the difference clearly is harder to detect, since 50% cannot detect the difference. My guess is that, as the beard is tougher to cut, the slant's advantage becomes more obvious, and that seems especially true for those who have sensitive skin: a tough beard (which under pressure pushes against the skin) makes small decreases in cutting resistance more obvious. A beard that's quite easily cut makes it difficult to detect a small increase cutting efficiency.
