Interesting Tech Vid

Messages
7,014
Wow!! Lots of great info on the Tech variations. All the ones I have measured are circa 0.025" as good as I can measure with a feeler gauge. I don't agree 100% with what he says at the 10:15 mark, I could be wrong, but not based on what I have measured. Still, the Tech is the best daily shaver ever designed IMO. Just a great "meat & potatoes" DE.

 
What is he saying there?

He has the pre-WW2 Canada 1932 patent example at 0.030" and then talks about the post-WW2 period 1946-1966 as 0.020" ... but 1951 with the first date code as 0.025" and then mentions a 1953 example at 0.030" before talking about 1966 returning to the 0.025" standard which appears not to be a standard given examples in the 1950s could be 0.020" 0.025" or 0.030". That's all over the place.

Maybe the rule is, there is no rule.

Maybe certain machines stamped parts with specific gaps and there was disparity between them.

That, and finishing, as a gold-washed brass would almost certainly have a different gap to a nickel plate over brass versus plated and etched.
 
pjgh, in the mid 1950's Gillette called in an outside QC consultant as quality had taken a nosedive and it's possible that sampling a razor from that period would skew results IMO. I have one Contract Tech, all metal, that is milder and has a different blade gap. I attribute that to wartime, i.e., hurried, production.
 
Wow!! Lots of great info on the Tech variations. All the ones I have measured are circa 0.025" as good as I can measure with a feeler gauge. I don't agree 100% with what he says at the 10:15 mark, I could be wrong, but not based on what I have measured. Still, the Tech is the best daily shaver ever designed IMO. Just a great "meat & potatoes" DE.

this vid has kinda confused me even more lol

whats that thing called he go from amazo to gaurge the blade gap? he didnt post the amazon link to it
 
I thought the Contract tech had a different handle shape, not a black fat handle as he showed ?


Edit - 7:03 he shows them

Honestly I quit the vid after the 11:00 mark. The differences in the gaps is so small I see it as incosequential. I need my wife to watch this so she will think I'm normal again......:ROFLMAO::LOL::ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
Dave, there are different Contract models and yes it is confusing to say the least. :oops: Mine has the fluted handle and the top plate is a tad bit different. It seems more sloped/angled.

I have no problem getting a perfect shave (at least for me) with a Tech and can get BBS if I go ATG. (y)
 
Well, I broke out the feeler gauges and gauged my 1950's "Ol' Reliable" (well worn) BE English Tech and also my T 4 (1973) Tech. Both gauged right at 0.025" with a + or - of 0.001 on one side of both which is probably caused by torque IMO. I used a Wizamet blade. For me the Tech, Schick Krona and RR GC .68 all fall into the "Goldilocks Zone" of approx. 0.025" + or - 0.003". YMMV.
 
Hmmm!

ModelBlade AlignmentManufactureBlade Gap (inches)
1930s pre-War (NDC)Long Slot/Diamond BaseAmerican0.030
1930s pre-War (NDC)Long Slot/Diamond BaseAmerican0.030
1930s pre-War (1932)Twin Slot/Diamond BaseCanadian0.025
1940s Contract (1939-1945)Long Slot/Diamond BaseAmerican0.025
1940s post-War (W1)Long Slot/Diamond BaseAmerican0.025-
1940s FB #44Twin Pin/Twin SlotBritish0.025
1940s FB BrassTwin Pin/Twin SlotBritishDeplated
1950s FB BrassTwin Pin/Twin SlotBritishDeplated
1940s HybridTwin Pin/RFBBritish0.020
1950sTwin Pin/Diamond BaseBritish0.025
1950s (Z4) GoldLong Slot/Diamond BaseAmerican0.020
1950s (B3) GoldLong Slot/Diamond BaseArgentinian0.020
1950s (B3)Long Slot/Diamond BaseAmerican0.025
1950s French (Diamond Stamped)Long Slot/Diamond BaseBritish0.025
1950s AluminiumLong Slot/Diamond BaseBritish0.025
1960s (K4) GilletteFlat Head/Diamond BaseAmerican0.025
1960s (L2) Gillette TravellerFlat Head/Diamond BaseAmerican0.025
1970s (P2) GilletteFlat Head/Diamond BaseBritish0.025
1970s (T2) Gillette BallFlat Head/Diamond BaseBritish0.025
1970s (U3) Gillette Ball TravellerFlat Head/Diamond BaseBritish0.025
1970s Double Edge/G1000Flat Head/Diamond BaseBritish0.025
1970s French (Diamond Stamped)Flat Head/Diamond BaseBritish0.025
1970s French (Diamond Stamped O3) Open CombFlat Head/Diamond BaseBritish?0.025
1970s Gillette (Z) PlasticFlat Head/Plastic BaseBritish0.025
1970s Rotbart (Embossed)Flat Head/Diamond BaseBritish?0.025/+
1980s [Blank] (24)Flat Head/Diamond BaseBritish0.025+
LordFlat Head/Diamond BaseChina?0.045
SterlingFlat Head/Diamond BaseChina?0.025
1950s? Psycho (B3)Flat Head/Diamond BaseBritish?0.030

Maybe my technique is wonky but I'm not finding much to talk about here ...

While the 0.025" feeler had some play in most, it was 0.025" and not 0.020" which had way too much slop nor the 0.030" which wouldn't go in without angling or forcing.

But, some comments ...
  • My pre-War NDCs both easily took the 0.030" while my Canadian 1932 patent did not (and measured 0.025" quite clearly)
  • My inter-War Contract Tech was clearly 0.025"
  • My post-War first date code (W1) was maybe a tad under 0.025" but certainly not 0.020" as that had too much play
  • My Hybrid Tech came in very clearly at 0.020" and different to other 1940s British Techs
  • Both of my gold washed Techs came in at 0.020" and certainly not 0.025"
  • By the very end of the Tech production (I have on with no date code but a 24 stamped on the inside of the cap) was 0.025" but quite a lot of play (not enough for 0.030")
  • Likewise, my Rotbart branded Tech which I think is late 1970s, some play but not as much ... again, not 0.030"
  • I didn't measure the two British brass Techs as they have both been deplated
 
Last edited:
1940s HybridTwin Pin/RFBBritish0.020


4BtQqz3.gif
 

Yep! There's a difference! Just that tiny sliver of a gap making all that magic happen :geek:

But wait! It's rhodium plated. Is that rhodium over nickel, as in two plating processes? Either way, the point of the process is to enusre that the razor remains super-shiny and less proned to degredation from knocks while in use so guess it's a thicker plate.

Notice the gold wash are also 0.020? Maybe they're prepared with a double plating and then gold wash?
 
Last edited:
I had to re-test my Canadian 1932 patent Tech as other sources were pointing this at 0.030" but mine is most definitely 0.025" ... until that is, I put a long bar/slot post-War cap (date code W1) on it and then it measures 0.030". That in itself is interesting because (well, because that post-War example of the first date code measures 0.025" iteself, but also) it is very easy to get mismatched caps/plates over the years, especially once these things have been through the hands of collectors who assemble better looking examples out of what they have without full knowledge of the details.

I don't have a point of authority on which cap should be on the Canadian 1932, but all of the examples on Mr Razor have the twin bar/slot cap (akin to the 1940s British) rather than the long bar/slot (as per the American examples). I believe I have the correct cap. Maybe the chap(s) who have measured theirs at 0.030" have mismatched examples? Anyone else with a Canadian 1932, can you check?

The other very interesting outcome is the Psycho. I have a B3 model, which puts it at 1956 yet the top cap is reminiscent of the cap from the 1970s (1966 on) which has the flat (no bar) underside. Unless, of course, it's a 1981 model? The fat handle would have been out of favour by the 1980s and would have been in vogue in the 1950s, so ... I'll take it as a 1950s razor but it does seen to be a bit of an anomaly with the top cap.

Looking at Mr Razor, both his examples of the Psycho (one from 1958 and one from 1973) have the same baseplate with the four corner cut outs to suit the 1970s style cap. Mine is even earlier at 1956. So, we were seeing the 1966 on style cap/plate out there a decade beforehand!

... and 1940s Bakelite Techs come in at 0.040"
 
Last edited:
Well, I broke out the feeler gauges and gauged my 1950's "Ol' Reliable" (well worn) BE English Tech and also my T 4 (1973) Tech. Both gauged right at 0.025" with a + or - of 0.001 on one side of both which is probably caused by torque IMO. I used a Wizamet blade. For me the Tech, Schick Krona and RR GC .68 all fall into the "Goldilocks Zone" of approx. 0.025" + or - 0.003". YMMV.
How do you find the Schick krona compared to the tech?

Got a krona although not used it yet but I heard good things but mild like a tech
 
How do you find the Schick krona compared to the tech?

Got a krona although not used it yet but I heard good things but mild like a tech

Chalk and cheese - different blade loading and differnt blade holding mechanisms. In terms of aggression? Yeah, ordinary ... by which I mean medium. I don't count the Tech as mild, not because I find them no so but because there are way milder razors. The Personna/PAL Tech clones are mild!

I don't particularly like TTOs and got rid of practially all from my collection some years ago. I do like the Gillette Rocket HD and I do like the Wilkinson Sword Sticky. Two exceptions.
 
Back
Top Bottom