Thread: HART Razor

Originally Posted by richmondesi

Back to the Hart Razor, I'll repeat the question that I asked earlier that went unanswered:

Would any of you gentleman that have a Hart Steel razor characterize it as a "good value"?

Thanks

In my humble opinion......No, not as of today. Any day I shave I use a straight, and that is almost every day. I expect any razor that I have to be used every day. A daily razor, for me, should be easy to strop and hone, keep an edge for at least 10 days of smooth shaves, and be a pleasure to use. The Hart that I have only meets the latter requirement.

All this is as it stands now. I have rehoned the razor, slightly differently, and if I have the same problem I am going to contact Hart. To be fair they could have such an awesome customer service department that this is all something that will be a mute point in the near future.

Take Care,
Richard

I see this is here now too so I am going to say the same thing again...

When Lee and I measured razors randomly one night we found blade angles from the 12's to the 22's the ones I measured were proven shavers and I assume Lee's were too... These were all Vintage blades of different makes and grinds so I really question when somebody says that the optimum angle should be 17 degrees, as none of the ones I measured had edge deterioration problems... Saying that the average angle is 16 /17 degrees is one thing, but saying that is the "industry standard" or the "best" is a stretch.. and you are going to have people putting 6-8 layers of tape on their razors to get it "inline"...Or even worse grinding away on their spines...

BTW our average and majority was 16 degrees...

Addendum:
I'm not trying to be a d-bag. I'm just saying it doesn't seem right. While you mentioned Dovo's- I was thinkign about getting the Ebony SS for a while but nixed that idea. It sells for $130, shave ready from a variety of trustworthy places (SRD, VB, etc). It has ebony scales and gold wash. I am in (not quite but close to) dire need for a stainless razor, and I have still put off buying this because I can't justify spending $130 on a razor. If I rusted through 5 of my current razors I'd still end up spending less.

And its not that I demand perfection. My blades aren't perfect either. But they didn't cost $200+. I guess I am indeed just a cheap college student.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

If layers of tape (even one) is what it takes it is a serious design error for Hart. I would hope that they would take a look at it and make the required changes in their future production to correct the situation. Sort of equivalent to removing the 'new posts' button on the tool bar above.

I'm going to assume, for the sake of this post, that the designers of this razor know what they're doing. It's pretty much common sense that, given two edges of equal sharpness, the one on the thinner wedge can cut through material more efficiently. So then, a thinner wedge resulting from a lower honing angle will, in theory, be more efficient. The downside is, it will also be more fragile (as witnessed in this thread). One method that can be used to compensate for this increased fragility is to employ multiple bevels. So, hone with no tape or just one layer to create the initial bevel and sharpened edge, then add a few more layers to create a secondary bevel and sharpened edge. You wind up with a very thin wedge from the creation of the initial bevel, reinforced by the secondary bevel created with an increased honing angle. You get the same sharpness at the edge with a thinner wedge behind it that, once again in theory, will be more efficient.

Considering Tim Zowada's involvement with Hart, this makes a reasonable amount of sense. Of course there is the very real possibility that I am barking mad!

OT for the Hart discussion, this is more for the above argument in general:
I feel your argument is flawed for this reason- once the bond between two hair particles is broken it offers very little resistance to shaving. Therefore almost all of the work is diverted to the very very tip of the edge- where it is literally splitting the hair. After that maybe there is a little friction, but the bevel angle closest to the edge I feel would have the most impact on the shave. Please correct me if I am wrong.

If I might propose an analogy of sorts, imagine an axe (a felling axe, not a splitter). Would it work better or worse or no different if you took a stone and widened it's edge angle? I would imagine it would be less effective, and not any more durable.

A second bevel does have it's purpose but I'm not sure if that purpose is to strengthen blades. I thought it was to correct for concavity formed by using slurry or pastes.

Originally Posted by radaddict

One method that can be used to compensate for this increased fragility is to employ multiple bevels. So, hone with no tape or just one layer to create the initial bevel and sharpened edge, then add a few more layers to create a secondary bevel and sharpened edge.

This was discussed either here or the other forum, can't remember which.

This is what the Hart website has to say about the matter:

"At Hart Steel, we use one layer of electrical tape, to protect the spine, while honing. The tape is placed lengthwise on the spine and then folded over the sides. The tape is optional, but we like it."

Originally Posted by mparker762

Let me ask you a variant on that same question.

There's a razor at Classic Shaving with similar features as the Hart - plastic scales, no decoration, heavy stiff grind that costs $55 less than the Hart.

What should be the quality level of the Hart that would justify that price premium? How would *you* expect it hold up compared to the lower-priced razor? Say the lower-priced razor can hold its edge for 90 shaves? How many would you expect the Hart to last? 120? 150? 5? 7?

Using that razor as a standard to measure the Hart razor against, I would expect the Hart razor to shave 115 times prior to honing.

Originally Posted by khaos

Addendum:
I'm not trying to be a d-bag. I'm just saying it doesn't seem right. While you mentioned Dovo's- I was thinkign about getting the Ebony SS for a while but nixed that idea. It sells for $130, shave ready from a variety of trustworthy places (SRD, VB, etc). It has ebony scales and gold wash. I am in (not quite but close to) dire need for a stainless razor, and I have still put off buying this because I can't justify spending $130 on a razor. If I rusted through 5 of my current razors I'd still end up spending less.

And its not that I demand perfection. My blades aren't perfect either. But they didn't cost $200+. I guess I am indeed just a cheap college student.

In your original post, IIRC you were critical of the Hart razor's price. If I understand correctly, your criticism is not directed toward the Hart razor directly, but to any razor with a price higher than $75, perfect customs excluded? I'm often wrong, but I don't remember as I write this whether you mentioned in your initial post that you have an issue with ANY production razor which has a cost higher than $75. I just want to make sure I understand where you're coming from and I think you've explained it now. Originally, I got the impression that you were down on the Hart razor wheras if I understand correctly your issue again, is with any razor with a cost over say $75 (except for a custom razor).

Chris L

Originally Posted by khaos

I feel your argument is flawed for this reason- once the bond between two hair particles is broken it offers very little resistance to shaving. Therefore almost all of the work is diverted to the very very tip of the edge- where it is literally splitting the hair. After that maybe there is a little friction, but the bevel angle closest to the edge I feel would have the most impact on the shave. Please correct me if I am wrong.

You are wrong, unfortunately. The friction behind the cutting edge as it forces the whisker open is significant. The teflon that the manufacturers add to their razors doesn't change the fundamental sharpness of the blade, but it does reduce that cutting friction a whole lot. There are other ways of reducing the cutting friction, like polishing the bevel. Verhoeven demonstrated in his knife sharpening paper that the edge stops getting sharper somewere around 2k grit, beyond that what happens is the bevel gets more polished. there's a reason we refer to high-grit hones as polishing hones, and place so much emphasis on getting that bevel sharpened right before moving on to polishing.

We see the effect of narrow honing angles in a macro form in the axe or splitting wedge example. Widening the angle dramatically increases the cutting friction as the blade bites into the wood.

Similarly, a shallow honing angle does make it easier to achieve a sharp-feeling edge, by reducing this cutting friction. I mentioned this in my early posts on this subject, and this possibility of a combination of lowered cutting friction and long blade life from the Hart razor is the reason I've been holding off on posting a review. My edge hasn't failed completely just yet, however. This morning I stropped it 100x on the linen side of my craftsman strop and got a decent enough shave. Like riooso I'll be rehoning it differently when the time comes, and see how it goes.

Edit: for a description of cutting friction and teflon coatings on the blade, see this article Making of the Modern Blade on the Schick USA website.

Originally Posted by ChrisL

Using that razor as a standard to measure the Hart razor against, I would expect the Hart razor to shave 115 times prior to honing.

So if I understand you correctly, what you're saying is that using that standard a fair price for a Hart razor like Riooso's is $14.30?

Originally Posted by khaos

OT for the Hart discussion, this is more for the above argument in general:
I feel your argument is flawed for this reason- once the bond between two hair particles is broken it offers very little resistance to shaving. Therefore almost all of the work is diverted to the very very tip of the edge- where it is literally splitting the hair. After that maybe there is a little friction, but the bevel angle closest to the edge I feel would have the most impact on the shave. Please correct me if I am wrong.

If I might propose an analogy of sorts, imagine an axe (a felling axe, not a splitter). Would it work better or worse or no different if you took a stone and widened it's edge angle? I would imagine it would be less effective, and not any more durable.

A second bevel does have it's purpose but I'm not sure if that purpose is to strengthen blades. I thought it was to correct for concavity formed by using slurry or pastes.

I see your point and I don't disagree. However, put your hands together so that your palms touch and the tips of your fingers line up. Now, let's assume that the tips of your fingers form a very sharp edge. Now, while keeping your finger tips together separate your palms down by your wrists and continue to move them apart. In essence you are keeping the same sharpened edge, but increasing the angle of the bevel. Which would you rather drag across your face, a sharp edge with a narrow bevel, or a sharp edge with a wide bevel? They would both cut hair, but the narrow beveled edge would provide a more comfortable, more efficient shave because it could cut closer to the skin with a lower blade angle and (since I've just read mparker762's reply to your post) less friction.

Of course, when considering the difference this all makes on a razor and the difference in angles, I doubt you would feel much, if any difference (assuming that the edge had the same sharpness). This is why I was saying "in theory" in my previous post. I merely speculate for the sake of discussion.

Who knows why Hart designed their razors this way. Perhaps it's as simple as their testing determined that, for the majority of people, it provided a superior shave. I will wait awhile before I decide to buy one or not. I want to see how this story unfolds. However, I do wish them success!