Older razors, are they better?
I have had three razors to date: Revisor 5/8 with thermoplastic scales(first blade, bought direct from Mfr), Cadman Bengall 6/8 with celluloid scales (Etsy purchase), Henckels 472 6/8 with celluloid scales (ebay purchase), and I am now about to take delivery of a new Dovo Encina 6/8.
I have only been straight shaving for 4-5 months and I know a real expert will get better results, and as always YMMV, but I feel comfortable enough to chart these as follows:
Ergonomics (balance, handling, control etc):
1st - Bengall (by a country mile)
2nd - Revisor
3rd - Henckels
Comfort of shave (problematic due it boiling down to it being my honing vs factory honing vs another's):
1st - Henckels
2nd - Bengall
3rd - Revisor
Build Quality:
1st - Henckels
2nd - Bengall (not much to call between the Henckels and Cadman here, both feel very sturdy, they possess heirloom quality)
3rd - Revisor (blade did not sit tight in scales, the scales themselves felt insubstantial, did not feel of heirloom quality, to be frank it felt cheap)
Now this is only a subjective comparison and one provided by a relative newcomer to straight shaving, but I have read comments from renovators - honers that suggest a preference for the old blades; one particular honer compared the new blades to being hard, rough to use, harder to hone than the older sheffields. All that being said I have, as mentioned, bought a new Dovo, and so the experiment goes on.
Does anybody have a particular opinion (dangerous question I know)?
Older razors, are they better?
Are old razors better?
Not necessarily.
I have new razors (Aust and Mastro Livi) that shave as good as my vintage Henckels.
I have so far stayed clear of new Dovos and some other brands, as there are too many posts suggesting that these companies may no longer achieve the quality levels that made their razors once so popular.
Which means the answer may differ from brand to brand.
B.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk