Who's afraid of Virginia Woolfat?

[pjgh]

Sorry, I don't have a code, but I purchased a refill puck from Amazon UK in June 2020, and it's definitely not as good at creating a lasting lather as previous pucks I have had.

As I have posted previously, I normally find that MWF lathers up superbly.

That certainly seems to be in line with what we're finding, generally. From other threads, reports started creeping in at the end of spring and certainly into the summer months. At the top of this thread I talked of a puck that the buyer could not lather, but I found perfectly good - it was difficult in the earlier weeks of these reports to distinguish "those who can't" from genuinely dud pucks.

If more folks can come forward with the batch code (which is on the inside flap of the packaging box), we might be able to list out one, two or more batches which are no good. It will also enable folks who buy existing stock to check before use and return to supplier if necessary. So far, we have two codes identified: one which has two reports as bad (from summer 2020) and one from October which is reported as good. While lathering is subjective and our personal definitions of good or acceptable may well differ, the bad batch was so appallingly bad ... you'd know. So, I think MWF is back to as was. Well, I hope it it. Let's keep our eye on it ...

Again, if folks have bought MWF after, say March 2020, and stashed it then please give it a go and and report your findings along with the batch code.

 

[pjgh]

Update ... a couple of years on

@exists sent me some from batch 9027 which (as an admitted newcomer to traditional shaving and to MWF) he's struggling with and just wanted to know that it wasn't a dud. It's not. It lathers and makes stable lather that you'd happily shave with.

8287 [purchased Summer 2020] - Dud
8345 [purchased October 2020] - Good
9027 [purchased September 2022] - Good*

* I put a star there, didn't I? Why?

Lathering up batch 9027, it was immediately a LOT more foamy than I am used to with MWF and initially I thought it likely to be another dud. My usual routine of ten swirls in each direction would not have been sufficient and seeing the foamy behavior simply continued to lather on the soap until that was gone ... some 50ish swirls in total. This is common practice with triple milled soaps.

Building lather in my hand or on my face was just as I'm used to. Again, "but" perhaps not as yogurty thick as I'm used to and cross-checking with another ostensibly new puck from pre-2020 that I have waiting in the wings suggests that there have been formula or ingredient changes as that lathered up with the same yogurty thickness that I'm used to.

I think there's been a change ...

I think that summer 2020 was when it happened and it was a mess. I think they rescued it, but whatever the change was has left the soap itself changed. Don't get me wrong here, it's still a good lather and may well improve as that puck is used ... but it's just not as immediately dense and does require a longer loading.

 

[donnie_arko]

Update ... a couple of years on

@exists sent me some from batch 9027 which (as an admitted newcomer to traditional shaving and to MWF) he's struggling with and just wanted to know that it wasn't a dud. It's not. It lathers and makes stable lather that you'd happily shave with.

8287 [purchased Summer 2020] - Dud
8345 [purchased October 2020] - Good
9027 [purchased September 2022] - Good*

* I put a star there, didn't I? Why?

Lathering up batch 9027, it was immediately a LOT more foamy than I am used to with MWF and initially I thought it likely to be another dud. My usual routine of ten swirls in each direction would not have been sufficient and seeing the foamy behavior simply continued to lather on the soap until that was gone ... some 50ish swirls in total. This is common practice with triple milled soaps.

Building lather in my hand or on my face was just as I'm used to. Again, "but" perhaps not as yogurty thick as I'm used to and cross-checking with another ostensibly new puck from pre-2020 that I have waiting in the wings suggests that there have been formula or ingredient changes as that lathered up with the same yogurty thickness that I'm used to.

I think there's been a change ...

I think that summer 2020 was when it happened and it was a mess. I think they rescued it, but whatever the change was has left the soap itself changed. Don't get me wrong here, it's still a good lather and may well improve as that puck is used ... but it's just not as immediately dense and does require a longer loading.

It'll be a real shame if they had reformulated it.

Btw, a superb title for the thread!

 

[Bogeyman]

1. Football
2. WWII
3. Health Care
4. Mitchell's Wool Fat

The comprehensive list of topics for an American to never mention to a Briton.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

1. Football
2. WWII
3. Health Care
4. Mitchell's Wool Fat

The comprehensive list of topics for an American to never mention to a Briton.

At least you didn’t call it soccer.

 

[PHR]

1. Football
2. WWII
3. Health Care
4. Mitchell's Wool Fat

The comprehensive list of topics for an American to never mention to a Briton.

Cricket?!

 

[Bogeyman]

At least you didn’t call it soccer.

I was talking about REAL footbail, i.e., NFL.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

I was talking about REAL footbail, i.e., NFL.

Oh that game, soft Rugby, with padding.

 

[donnie_arko]

I was talking about REAL footbail, i.e., NFL.

 

[Bogeyman]

We need an eye roll smilie.

 

[Shaveguru]

We need an eye roll smilie.

 

[isaiah53]

1. Football
2. WWII
3. Health Care
4. Mitchell's Wool Fat

The comprehensive list of topics for an American to never mention to a Briton.

Or fannies...

 

[Bogeyman]

Or fannies...

Huh???? Butts???

 

[Satanfriendly]

Huh???? Butts???

The only but being, but is a fanny a fanny?

Terrible word either way

 

[donnie_arko]

Update ... a couple of years on

@exists sent me some from batch 9027 which (as an admitted newcomer to traditional shaving and to MWF) he's struggling with and just wanted to know that it wasn't a dud. It's not. It lathers and makes stable lather that you'd happily shave with.

8287 [purchased Summer 2020] - Dud
8345 [purchased October 2020] - Good
9027 [purchased September 2022] - Good*

* I put a star there, didn't I? Why?

Lathering up batch 9027, it was immediately a LOT more foamy than I am used to with MWF and initially I thought it likely to be another dud. My usual routine of ten swirls in each direction would not have been sufficient and seeing the foamy behavior simply continued to lather on the soap until that was gone ... some 50ish swirls in total. This is common practice with triple milled soaps.

Building lather in my hand or on my face was just as I'm used to. Again, "but" perhaps not as yogurty thick as I'm used to and cross-checking with another ostensibly new puck from pre-2020 that I have waiting in the wings suggests that there have been formula or ingredient changes as that lathered up with the same yogurty thickness that I'm used to.

I think there's been a change ...

I think that summer 2020 was when it happened and it was a mess. I think they rescued it, but whatever the change was has left the soap itself changed. Don't get me wrong here, it's still a good lather and may well improve as that puck is used ... but it's just not as immediately dense and does require a longer loading.

I was delivered a few from the Kent Black Friday sale, and they are batch 9029. I'll post here again on how I find it lathers.

 

[pjgh]

I was delivered a few from the Kent Black Friday sale, and they are batch 9029. I'll post here again on how I find it lathers.

This bodes well because @exists has bought from this batch (9029) as he's finding it a country mile different (from a test lather) from the MWF Batch 9027, which admittedly I summarised as capable of a stable lather but not as immediiately loadable (without excessive foaminess) and not as yogurty thick as I am used to with MWF.