Printable View
Hi!
Is there a web page or forum post with explanation (preferably with pictures) what blades with different grinds (like 1/2 hollow, 1/4 hollow) look like? Can someone tell me about this one?
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/5...ghtrazoix7.jpg
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/2...ghtrazoqm2.jpg
It's a Heljestrand no.23 I just bought from an online auction site.
Hi,
Looks like a quarter hollow...
THIS SITE
It's a great resource.
Chris L
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris L
Thanks! Something new and useful to read while commuting is always welcome.
Excellent website. It did a good job of defining the different grinds. Would someone be able to explain the shaving characteristics of the differnet grinds? This was not mentioned in the link. How do a wedge, 1/4 hollow, 1/2 hollow, full hollow, etc. differ in daily use? Do they feel or shave differently? Thanks in advance.
Dave
P.S. Just to be sure, a 1/2 hollow blade is thiner than a 1/4 hollow, right?
Most of the difference in feel that I've noticed is in heft and flex. Hollow blades tend to flex more and have a lighter feel in the hand. They are also more likely to nick you if you are not careful. Thicker grinds tend not to flex, and their weight often makes it feel as though they cut through facial hair on their own. They require a bit less finesse to shave with, but as a tradeoff, they can be more difficult to hone (heavier, more steel to remove).
I have found that framebacks, even if the lower section of the blade is very thin, tend to shave like half or quarter hollows.
Again, these are my own personal experiences, and are by no means universal.
Here's another reference on grinds. I believe it was first posted somewhere on SRP, but I have no idea where or by who.
Holli4pirating, that is a Henckels chart and I don't recall for sure but I think it came from a Henckels catalog early last century
I also have a 22 Heljestrand, and it appears to be about the same grind as my wapienica. I call it a half hollow and maybe 2 1/2 on the henckels scale
It appeared in a 1914 J. A. Henckels catalogueQuote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
I understand the chart/website but what's the difference between a full hollow and extra hollow?
I'm pretty sure an extra hollow is even more hollow than a full hollow. I'm pretty sure the blade becomes thinner closer to the spine.
I don't know; maybe it's just razor marketing language that has no further meaning than hollowQuote:
Originally Posted by Detach
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
two marketing advisors were shaving one day and razor envy enters. The envious one says "my razor is better", "no mine is!" "oh yeah?" "Yeah!" "Mines ice hardened steel" "mines damascene steel" "mines got ivory" "mines got MOP" "mines Full hollow ground" "oh yeah!? well...uhh...mine's EXTRA hollow SUCKA!!"
FIN
Now that I've thought about it for a bit, I'm wondering if it has anything to do with the movement from Sheffield "Hollow Ground" blade (which were typically half or quarter hollow), to "modern" hollow grinds (which seem to usually refer to full hollow razors).
Just a question/theory; my razor history is quite lacking, so I could very well be way off.
I suspect the definition of the term has changed over time. I've got a twin of this (the flat point) wonderful, old W&B shoulderless, which is blade stamped "Extra Hollow Ground" but it is by modern reckoning, a beefy, half-hollow.Quote:
Originally Posted by holli4pirating
shureedgefan, that looks like a full hollow from that angle anyway!
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoglahoo
You're right, on second look, the pic of crichton's W&B looks very much full hollow.
If I can get this pic to load you'll be able to see why I mistook crichton's full hollow for my less than full. It rates about a III1/2 or IV, so call it a 1/2 to 3/4 hollow.
As my camera's about a thousand miles way right now, I'll have to settle for a pre-resto pic I found in the bowels of my HD.
Uggh, I think this is a better picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by shuredgefan