Thread: really an 11/16ths

Originally Posted by loueedacat

I don't think anyone is being obstinate or trying to pick a fight. I think the point was that American razor companies don't and didnt' use the metric system, so the inaccuracies can't just be a matter of mistranslating the metric.

My original point didn't just deal with manufacturing designations but also ebay seller designations (because I have German made razors that were pitched, I'm sure sincerely, as 6/8s in some cases and 5/8s in other cases, and all when I measured them were 11/16ths). So I think that's just people being lazy and pretty funny to me because I really thought the "6/8s" ones were bigger because once I was told they were 6/8s, well, I believed them and it imprinted in my mind and influenced my perception of them. I just couldn't figure out why I couldn't decide if I like them better than my "5/8s" which is why I thought this was so funny.

I see what you are saying. On eBay many of the sellers know the difference and many think a straight razor is some sort of archaic gardening impliment, (just kidding of course). I have never been a fan of anything smaller than a 6/8 myself and I believe that most shavers who try larger blades really like them.

John

What I was asking John was why if these are metric would they be sold in English measures???? when they could have just as easily be sold in the metric sizes????

Obstinate no, I just don't believe you to be totally right, thats all.... In fact I actually believe that your explanation to be partially correct but just like so many of your all encompassing statements, I just don't think it is the only explination......

Originally Posted by John Crowley

I see what you are saying. On eBay many of the sellers know the difference and many think a straight razor is some sort of archaic gardening impliment, (just kidding of course).

You may be kidding, but it doesn't make you wrong. From what I've seen, there are a lot of ebay sellers, selling a lot of razors, that aren't much more knowledgeable than that.

I have most of a 7 day set marked 3/4, british blades, and all but one of them were right at 6/8. one though was 5/8, go figure.

Red

Originally Posted by Big Red

I have most of a 7 day set marked 3/4, british blades, and all but one of them were right at 6/8. one though was 5/8, go figure.

Red

That one may well have been a replacement blade.

John

Originally Posted by John Crowley

Why are you being so obstinate? Or is it possibly a lack of gray matter? Or are you just trying to start an argument? I am pretty sure most other people knew what I was saying!

I know what you're saying, but I don't see any reason why what you're saying is any better of a theory than maybe just maybe the manufacturers decided that rounding to the nearest eighth of an inch was perfectly fine!

And let me go ahead and admit that I am obstinate, lack gray matter, and am trying to star- er, foster a (gentlemanly? is that possible?) argume- er, discussion that might yield some accurate results

Maybe it is like the "baker's dozen" being 15 rather than 12. I know I wouldn't be happy if I paid my money and found 11. I have noticed that modern TIs tend to run a bit on the heavy side of 5 or 6/8 IME. Also does anyone know when the metric system came into general use in Europe ? Were they using our standard system of weights and measures in the heyday of the Sheffield and Solingen cutlery industry ? OTOH, even if they were using metric for their own system perhaps they printed 5/8 on a modern Wonderedge box because of the substatial import market? Food for thought.

Here an interesting note:

Another source of information is Gordon Ragg, the last member of the family firm of J & W Ragg, razor and scissor manufacturers. He is 92 years old (in 2006) and passes on much information from his old firm's record books, going back to the early 19th century.
He said that it was only after c.1900 that razors were given a size by width, eg. 3/8", 1/2", 5/8" etc. This seems to have been when the drop stamping of blades came in. Previously, hand forged blades were sized by the distance between the DOT HOLE and the POINT. (The DOT HOLE is where the PIN goes through the BLADE to attach it to the SCALES forming the HANDLE). The sizes were usually about 4 1/2" and no width being specified.

Originally Posted by clavichord

Here an interesting note:

Another source of information is Gordon Ragg, the last member of the family firm of J & W Ragg, razor and scissor manufacturers. He is 92 years old (in 2006) and passes on much information from his old firm's record books, going back to the early 19th century.
He said that it was only after c.1900 that razors were given a size by width, eg. 3/8", 1/2", 5/8" etc. This seems to have been when the drop stamping of blades came in. Previously, hand forged blades were sized by the distance between the DOT HOLE and the POINT. (The DOT HOLE is where the PIN goes through the BLADE to attach it to the SCALES forming the HANDLE). The sizes were usually about 4 1/2" and no width being specified.

That is interesting information. I always suspected that labling them by width was a relatively new practice. I looked at all my W&B and Joseph Rodgers old boxes and no size was ever specified so it makes sense. it is always good to hear from some of the old guys who know first hand.

John