What is it with Vintage Razors?

Bechet

Bechet

Messages
10,159
Location
Southampton
I don't get it at all but you all seem very keen so I thought I'd join the club and just bought a vintage Gillette off eBay. Then and only then, I found FrenchBlade's
guide - telling me not to!

Anyway I bought this

[attachment=4275]

Can anyone tell me what it is, please?

It is described as

BRAND NEW !

1973 GILLETTE SAFETY RAZOR

(Manufactured 2nd Quarter 1973... Code T2)

The handle is made of Aluminium and the blade holder parts are made from Stainless Steel.

Collectors Item

Never been used

Made in England
 

Attachments

  • 1973 Gillette.jpg
    1973 Gillette.jpg
    24.5 KB · Views: 86
Yep, a fairly late English Tech. I think I've owned about 6 Techs, I bought one like yours from Frenchblade and eventually gave it to my Father in Law as a gift. They're too mild for me but I like them as objects, a bit of a design classic.
 
Thanks, guys! I was hoping it was a Tech - people keep recommending me to use one for a variety of reasons.

But why are vintage razors so popular when all tose shiny new designs are about?
 
I have 2 modern razors,a R41 and a slant and while they are nice and shiny there is something just,well,nice about using a tech,or a new, or a fatboy.think its because they have survived this long and have such a feel to them really. Dont get me wrong I like my modern razors but they lack a certain something in my opinion.
 
For me it's because they're beautifully made and it gives me a kick out of using something my grandfather could have used.

My oldest razor was made in 1905. I think it's great that it's still being used for it's intended purpose over a century later.
 
Bechet45 said:
But why are vintage razors so popular when all tose shiny new designs are about?
Click to expand...

attachment.php


Vintage razors are shiny too but they are better by virtue of also coming in shiny boxes with shiny blade holders. That's three more elements of shinyness therefore they're three times better than new ones. In fact the quality of a razor, be it new or old, can be measued by shining a light on to it and measuring the intensity of light reflected back. The best razors out there are so shiny that they actualy reflect more light than falls upon them. Just as particles being capable of travelling faster than the speed of light have led physicists to question the laws of physics so to would the fact about the best razors. However as everyone knows, proper physicists have beards (similar to razors, the better the physicist the bigger the beard) so they have never witnessed this phenomenon.

I hope this helps clarify the situation.
 
tadpole said:
Vintage razors are shiny too but they are better by virtue of also coming in shiny boxes with shiny blade holders. That's three more elements of shinyness therefore they're three times better than new ones. In fact the quality of a razor, be it new or old, can be measued by shining a light on to it and measuring the intensity of light reflected back. The best razors out there are so shiny that they actualy reflect more light than falls upon them. Just as particles being capable of travelling faster than the speed of light have led physicists to question the laws of physics so to would the fact about the best razors. However as everyone knows, proper physicists have beards (similar to razors, the better the physicist the bigger the beard) so they have never witnessed this phenomenon.

I hope this helps clarify the situation.
Click to expand...

:icon_lol::icon_lol:

A high quality explanation (especially the bit about beards)!
 
If you'd posted this up 6 months back I'd be saying how great they are.

These days I much prefer newer stuff made out of better materials like stainless steel and innovation.

I still do have some vintage razors that i'll never part with but I doubt I'll add any more to my collection.
 
I never really did get on with vintage razors, they are nice to look at, they are a talking point and I like the designs but I never really got a great shave from one. So while I see some of the appeal, I prefer my modern razors to actually shave with.
 
Vintage ... Find that before '28 aren't bad. If you'r interested in vintage I'd advise going to the beginning the Gillette '04's J's and before. No ball ended handles. You'll have a reasonably priced piece of history that will last you for another 100 yrs.
I suggested to stay away from anything with a crack in it's handle, you need to alway ask.
 
OK! Got it! You explain so lucidly, gentlemen!

Less elegantly, vintage razors are better than modern razors in a way similar to vinyl giving better sound quality than CDs - if you ignore the crackling and hissing, that is.
 
Bechet45 said:
Less elegantly, vintage razors are better than modern razors in a way similar to vinyl giving better sound quality than CDs - if you ignore the crackling and hissing, that is.
Click to expand...

Interesting, this one. I use both vintage and modern razors, and also have a strong interest in music and guitars, so another comparison actually springs to mind.

I have Gillette DEs that are over 50 years old - they were well engineered, built to last, and are attractive to look at too. They also happen to shave wonderfully, but so do my modern Merkurs, so in that sense vintage is not 'better'.

Part of the appeal for me of vintage gear is the indefinable character or 'mojo' that comes with it - the sense of having a history and coming from a different era. It's the same for me with guitars. In fact, some musos prefer vintage equipment every time - John Frusciante, to name one of many, favours guitars built in the 1960s or earlier for that very reason.

I believe the vinyl/CD comparison is slightly different. While some people may have a nostalgic preference for vinyl, there is another reason: Vinyl can reproduce recorded music more authentically because it does not suffer the compression/frequency loss that occurs with CD (and to an even greater extent mp3). For this reason, many people will argue that it is an inherently superior format in terms of musical 'quality'. And coming back to razors, I think it's hard to argue that vintage razors (I'm talking DEs here, not straights) are inherently superior at doing the job (ie removing stubble from your face).

At the end of the day, razors (and guitars) are just tools - and they either perform the job well or not. But I think we humans have a curious need to attach a personality to our tools, and sometimes vintage gear fulfils that need in a way that modern gear cannot.
 
If razors are just tools, I'll stick with modern ones every time - superior manufacture, materials,de dah.

The history of an article adds something quite intangible but that can reach to my soul. I always walk through the Bargate in Southampton, never round it, and imagine/sense the people who have walked there before me. Handle a piece of pottery, 100 years old and irreplaceble - it tingles all my senses.

I guess I am seeing vintage razors as tools, then - no tingle so far. Maybe when I've shaved with one? I'm looking for one the same age as me - 1945.
 
Seems Zamak came on the scene in 1929 so I'm guessing a lot of vintager razors are plated Zamak, if not aluminuium or even "some sort of alloy" and even weirder stuff (WWII). All my new, metal razors are plated brass, as are many vintage ones. So I guess you pays your money and buy the quality you can afford.

With a powerful lead from Johnus, I found my birth year razor types and soon tracked down samples for sale. Seems I just do not have the vintage razor bug! At the money being asked, I just could not countenance purchasing one.

I did the same exercise for my first ever (disasterous) shave in 1960 and instantly recognised the Slim Line I used to cut my cheeks to ribbons - and there's the reason I cannot get excited about vintage razors. I hated them so much when they were modern razors and still have that association.

New razors are a whole new ball of wax - in my mind - and I just love new DE shaving, even if I am still learning - or re-learnng - the art.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom