fancontroller said:
Fergiebilly said:
Yes ! I am placing a shim of thin metal under the spine of the original blade .....The shim should be the same width a length of the SPINE ONLY .......I have not measured these tolerances scientifically as yet......Still to come as I haven't a micro meter.....
It doesn't take much.....:icon_rolleyes:.
I used a RIZLA cardboard cover from their paper packet as a template as a starting point replicated the width of the paper ......I am sending away for ENGINEERING METAL SHIMMING TAPE ......for a more precise tolerances.......But as one does not need a strobe light to set the ignition timing on an engine once you have learned the listening skills......you don't need engineering skills to shim your blade ......Go by listening and feeling......:angel:
This shimming method changes the angle of the blade in the 1912.....so that their is an even gap (space) between the comb and blade.........It can be seen by the naked eye and felt with the new shaving experience even with a new blade.....
I will post some photos.......later......:idea:
Regards
Billy
Here's an idea - what about using a strip of that flexible magnetic tape/plastic they use for fridge magnets and notepads etc? If it were available thin enough, I guess we're talking only a mm or so. It would just stick to the razor spine and once in the razor would be held in place anyway.
Does that amount of shimming really affect the blade angle that much? I can see it only making a fraction of a degree angle difference at the cutting edge. Also wouldn't modern SE blades flex a little which would defect the object?
I've tried checking out how the blade is held in my razors when the cap is closed and it does seem that the force pushing the blade against the comb-stops may flex the blade a little.
Anyhow, I suppose if you've already experimented and can feel a difference then that proves that it must work.
Hi Mike
Never thought of the magnet strips.....Not sure if we will get them thin enough. Nothing like a millimetre, I am using a 0.28 mm shim at the moment.........we are working with small tolerances here......The angle of the blade does get altered significantly.......And yes the blade does flex by a small amount, however, I have observed that the Old Original Blades flex to what appears to me by the naked eye equally as well.......
I found this an interesting observation....... As both the MODERN/OLD ORIGINAL BLADES are under the same pressure from the rear spring and forward blade stoppers.....
In theory the flexing should be equal due to the equal length and width of the blades under equal pressure.....I have come to the conclusions that this is indeed the case......Surprisingly !
This modification and change of angle of the blade and changes the working tolerance's of the blade and razor more to where the Manufactures intended with original blades........
I have attempted to use the spines from an Old Blade's which are thicker than Modern blades by around 0.28 mm ........
I found that the modern blade sits deeper into the old thicker spine and therefore shortens the length of the blade......
This is an easy modification !
Regards
Billy
Norfolkdick said:
Greetings
I think the chances of getting a duff blade in a box of 100 quite possible, I am less than sure that the quality control on GEM Stainless coated blades is that great. I have personally had a blade with no spine at all and another that had no edge ground on it so 'duffers' can and do occasionally happen.
York Neil on this forum got a whole box of 100 that were all awful dull as could be (Neil sent me a couple to try) Connaughts to their absolute credit unhesitantly changed them for him.
A small but relevant point when experimenting with Feather SE blades in razors other than Valets is to remember that the Feather blades are nearly a sixteenth of an inch deeper than the GEM blades (with a spine added or comparing both blades spineless) therefore you need to take it real steady when closing the flip top of the razor, if it feels really tight, do not carry on or you will knacker the top cover spring.
Some models accept the Feather blades without a problem on others they are just too tight, there is quite a bit of variation between models and even within the same model eg old well worn 1912's where the spring has already been compressed a bit will normally accept them without a problem.
You cannot of course fit them in any of the Micromatic range because of the side blade location lugs.
Regards
Dick.
Hi Dick
Thank you once again for your guidance on these blades !
Regards
Billy
pjgh said:
Super! It's a razor that often gets looked over, but aside from the 1912 which had a long run, the design of that G Bar is an inheritance from the Micromatic and continued through the Featherweight, Pushbutton and onto the Contour. It's a design of head that does seem to like to be almost flat on your face.
I'm rather partial to the Contour, of all things, having shaved with one just last night - an excellent daily shaver for someone like me who likes a shave every other day; mild, not too close, just right. I also like the Feathweight, which is very close to the G Bar in design, finding it anything but a featherweight when it comes to mowing away a fews days of growth.
Aye Paul
The GEM G BAR is an excellent shave ......If someone sentenced me to having to shave every day........
The G BAR would be my salvation from a sentence of daily shaving ! :icon_razz:
Billy
UKRob said:
This suggests that the spine on the modern Gem is thinner than, say, a Corrux blade. Why not try swapping the spines over and see if it has the same effect.
Hi Bob
The spine on the modern Gem is thinner than a Corrux blade. I have swapped the spines, but the modern blades seats deeper into the thicker spine and shortens the working length of the blade.....
I can get around this for a one off shave, but its not practical for regular use as the old spine would get damaged quickly and they are not easy to prise off from the old blade either. In fact, it could be decidedly unhealthy ! MMMMMMmmmmmmm:icon_rolleyes: