Razor Width Measurement.

When this discussion came up previously, I think we concluded that different manufacturers measured differently. There were one or two that seemed to use the spine-to-hone-wear measurement, but most just seemed to measure edge to spine.

I always measure edge to spine, as it's the most straightforward. I've seen 6/8 wedges that would have to be called 2/8s if you used the hone wear approach.

To me the question is, what are you trying to measure? To me, the measurement should convey the heft and width of the razor. Since a significant portion of the weight resides in the spine, why not include that in the measurement? It's not like that extra 1/16" or more of width would go away when you went to shave just because the hollows don't extend that far...

Josh

When I sell the odd razor, I try to generaize and hope the buyer realizes there is a 5/8 ballpark, a 6/8 ballpark, etc. Or, I'll say a big 5/8 is 11/16. I don't see any need to be that specific. Maybe if its a particularly expensive or rare razor.... :shrug:

Jordan

There are razors with 1/16 inch from the factory measurements..... Dubl Duck just for one, has 4/8, 9/16, 5/8, 11/16, 6/8, 7/8 that I have seen marked on their boxes they might even have more out there... C-MON is another that I have seen the 11/16 size marked....
We are talking about a fairly un-standardized system out there in the past so the top to bottom measurement is still probably still the most useful one.....

How ever you go ahead and measure how ya want.....

I like to stand a ruler up with the blade in front,spine on table and edge up, then look straight at it and use that measurement. What do you guys think of that?

The best way to measure something like a razor is optically so you won't damage the edge. An inexpensive video camera with a reticle attached to your computer. Mount it so it is looking down at a translation stage with a micrometer. I am certain someone with very little computer knowledge could find a camera that would connect to a monitor to show a magnified, real time image. The reticle needs only to be a single thin line across the field of view (in the focal plane). I think it would be pretty easy to rig up someting like this (if I couldn't find one at the scapyard):
423/433/443 Series High-Performance Low-Profile Ball Bearing Linear Stageshttp://www.newport.com/common/images...eTILTStage.jpg

http://www.newport.com/images/web250...es/1122504.jpg Order actuators separately. 423 shown with SM-25 and 433 shown with SM-50.


http://www.newport.com/common/images/new/Enlarge_EN.gif

• Precision ball bearing movements
• Non-influencing lock (except 4 in.)
• Reversible for left- or right-handed applications
• Compatible with Newport manual and motorized actuators
• Stackable for low profile multi-axis positioning

Newport Corporation | Manual Positioning | Manual-Linear-Stages | 423-433-443-Series-High-Performance-Low-Profile-B

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English

I agree it is intuitive to measure in the way you say, Lee, but I don't know if it is correct.

I say this because when I bought a new DOVO, the measurement was taken from the spine bevel and not the top of the spine. Incidentally the blade still measured slightly larger than the 5/8" description. I don't know what TI do, I have never owned one.

---

I guess DOVO has changed their methods. I emailed to ask them how they measure straight razor width and received this reply:

"Lee,

It is measured from the tip of cutting edge to the tip of the spine, so it
is the overall height (or width) of the blade.

Best regards,
Anne
DOVO Stahlwaren Bracht GmbH & Co. KG
Boecklinstr. 10
42719 SOLINGEN
GERMANY"

She didn't say why or how they measure their razors this way, but I guess this is their current method.

If one is going to get retentive about one's razors, there are other qualities and quanties which should be given to more completely describe the tool: what is the length of the blade, what is the thickness of the spine, what is the contour of the spine, what is the length of the shank, what is the length and radius of the tang, is the blade shouldered or no, what is the weight of the blade, what is the grind, what is the polish, what is the material of the scales, pins, wedge, from what point to what point are these data being taken, etc, etc etc. And we may have only scratched the surface and hopefully that has not resulted in any micro-chipping.

Now I'm a high stakes retentive and for the life of me can't really figure out why all the worry about how the width of the blade is measured or why we stop at 16ths (on a good day and with a good ruler, I can get really close to a 64th and with my good glasses may even be able to get closer than that). And...one measurement cannot describe the entire length of the blade if there are any deviations from the straight and true. It's a good thing I'm typing rather than speaking as it's really hard to talk with a tongue stuck in one's cheek.

Good measuring, and here's hoping that your next honing doesn't bollix up your data,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruce

Now I'm a high stakes retentive and for the life of me can't really figure out why all the worry about how the width of the blade is measured or why we stop at 16ths (on a good day and with a good ruler, I can get really close to a 64th and with my good glasses may even be able to get closer than that).

---

Because unlike the SI measurement system, the empirical system get unusable unless you simply memorize all units up to 1/128s.

If I talk about 23/64 or 51/128, I cannot imagine how much that really is.

With mm it would be easy enough, because increased precision does not change the units of measurement.
If I say 12 mm or 12,05 mm, I get a good idea about the size, regardless of how many digits you add after the decimal place.

But switching from 16ths to 32s to 64s to 128s is not easy unless you are trained for it.

I find it interesting that the European razor manufactures don't use the metric system to measure the blade as they do in bicycles and everything else. I guess the current system dates from way back and is what everyone is familiar with so it was never changed. I wonder when the metric system began in Europe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slant-Fan

I find it interesting that the European razor manufactures don't use the metric system to measure the blade as they do in bicycles and everything else. I guess the current system dates from way back and is what everyone is familiar with so it was never changed. I wonder when the metric system began in Europe?

---

I think it was a gradual process of beginning to have widespread use in Europe over the course of the 19th century