Discussion: Why do we use pivot washers?

I've thought about this a lot and I still cannot come to an end answer. Why do we use washers at the pivot between blade and scales? I'm looking for a real answer that explains a serious advantage. Most old blades didn't have them. Some did, but they were always very thin- much more so than most that a lot of guys today use. I personally use .003" thick material and make them myself, but why? I've NEVER seen a razor with problems on the blade or scales (besides rubbing, but no real wear) due to not having a washer at the pivot. So why do we bother?

Having a bushing between a friction point is always better than not having one IMHO. Alex, you've forgot more than I ever knew about restoring and making razors but that is my story and I'm sticking to it. BTW, if I buy a high end custom from any maker I would feel something was missing if those thin washers weren't between the blade and the scales. :)

I guess it just helps with friction as Jimmy says, as well as stopping the shank rubbing on the scales and helps centre the blade.

The washers prevent binding on the scales which may reduce scale breakage and reduces wear over time which keeps the blade snug in the scales.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philadelph

I've thought about this a lot and I still cannot come to an end answer. Why do we use washers at the pivot between blade and scales? I'm looking for a real answer that explains a serious advantage. Most old blades didn't have them. Some did, but they were always very thin- much more so than most that a lot of guys today use. I personally use .003" thick material and make them myself, but why? I've NEVER seen a razor with problems on the blade or scales (besides rubbing, but no real wear) due to not having a washer at the pivot. So why do we bother?

---

I would disagree here, A much higher percentage of the ones I pop have them, then don't, I would say in the neighborhood of 80% and many of the scales that don't have actual washers, have a raised dais that serves as a washer in effect...
Do you need them??? I would really tend to say it depends on what the scales are made of first, then how you set up the flex and bow, as to the angle of the scales touching the razor....

With what you do Alex using mostly CF, and ultra thin at that, plus making your own razor with the tang angle where you want it, I bet you don't need to use washers...

For the record: it's just something I think about, not that I'm planning to not use washers! (ahem, Jimmy, ahem)

Hmm, I think eliminating friction might be the answer that makes the most sense.

I don't think it helps to center the blade at all- there are far too many other factors that decide this and if both washers are the same thickness (which they should be IMO), it makes no difference.

Scale breakage and wear is no concern really with any of the stuff I use. With wood I suppose it contributes.

I would pretty much guess the opposite Glen- 80% without washers. Maybe closer to 60 or 70% though. Just my own experience. Your observation on scale material, flex and bow all bring up a good question though- maybe on new, high strength scale materials that were never used in the 19th or most of the 20th century the NEED for washers and their purpose changes?

Keep the conversation coming, I like it!

I was talking with Max not too long ago, and one advantage he mentioned is that the washers prevent the razor from rubbing on the scales, which can scratch the razor. Probably not a huge deal, unless the razor has a highly polished finish in the pivot area. Washers can also make it easier to blow water out of the pivot, should it get wet.

In my extremely limited experience (none, compared to any of you guys) in pinning scales, all I can say is this:

When I use washers, I have found that I am forced to do a really good job of peening the rod heads so that the blade is nice and tight (Many many many many many light taps :)).

If I don't use washers, I can "get away with" not peening a razor perhaps not as tight as I should to make sure it won't come apart later. The friction of the blade against the scales means I might stop peening before I should.

If I do it correctly (I think) then the blade still moves easily because of the washers, but it's tight enough to not flop around. Plus, those rivet heads look really nice afterward.

Just my $0.02.

Gotta agree with gssixgun, I've only seen a couple razors that didn't have the washers....maybe 80% of the ones I pick up have them. I see it like this...at least it's easier to get some mineral oil into the pivot when I oil the blades. Likewise, if water has accidentally soaked into the natural material of the scales, I don't want the whole tang sitting in water. The washers keep enough room that hopefully the scales have some airflow to dry out without causing damage.

I think that I buy the different materials approach that you guys are talking about. I doubt that you need a washer with your CF scales Alex, but I'd prefer to use them on wood scales to prevent friction and wear.

:gth Just to fan the flames, I have not done as many as Alex or Glen, but I think only 1 out of the 20 or so of just my own razors I've worked on did not have washers. *pulls pin and walks away

I think that years ago razor makers knew that there would be a gap in time where much razor knowledge would be lost, and then one day a bunch of razor enthusiasts would try to regain that lost knowledge.
The head razor guy of the razor guy league thought it would be funny to put washers in there so that one day people would say, "I wonder what these are for?"

I reckon about 50 - 60 per cent of the ones I dismantle have them - BUT - if I grouped them into groups according to the age of the razor, then in certain groups 80 per cent or more would have them.

I don't think it is anything to do with blade centering - like Alex says, adding equal thicknesses of washer on either side of the tang cancels any biasing out.

As far as I can make out it is to do with scale thickness and adding clearance for the tang to pivot - a real concern with faceted tangs and stiff scales; scale delicacy - never seen ivory scales without them; and high-end razors where the scales may scratch the tang.

I'm not sure that it has much to do with friction - I think 'friction washer' is a modern term and we are backdating modern terminology to make it fit in with what we percieve the name to mean.

I don't think that they help clear water from the pivot - to the contrary in fact - the layer of water trapped between the tang and the washer would be next to impossible to blow away.

I have seen the raised area that Glen mentions, and also - rarely - a sort of cupped or sprung washer which acted not to centre the blade but the oversized hole in the tang.

If I had to choose a reason, I guess I would go for avoidance of wear due to abrasion, both on the scale and the tang.

Regards,
Neil

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neil Miller

If I had to choose a reason, I guess I would go for avoidance of wear due to abrasion, both on the scale and the tang.

---

IOW, to avoid friction :rofl2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

IOW, to avoid friction :rofl2:

---

Damn you Jimmy - I sense another 'LMAO Old Fart' coming in from Glen...

Mother said that there would be days like this...

Nope I'll let the "Old Fart" remark slide (this time) but I am still giggling :)


Times like this is when I really enjoy this forum ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I would disagree here, A much higher percentage of the ones I pop have them, then don't, I would say in the neighborhood of 80% and many of the scales that don't have actual washers, have a raised dais that serves as a washer in effect...
Do you need them??? I would really tend to say it depends on what the scales are made of first, then how you set up the flex and bow, as to the angle of the scales touching the razor....

With what you do Alex using mostly CF, and ultra thin at that, plus making your own razor with the tang angle where you want it, I bet you don't need to use washers...

---

Interesting....
Is there a bias to material. Wood, horn, plastic...
I would expect them under ivory.

Neil had some good points there. I also don't think it has anything to do with water clearance.

In terms of scale thickness and tang clearance- this is still the best explanation that I can justify. On ivory scales they might have indeed NEEDED them, but the washers were never really thick enough to make a huge difference there. I guess this ties in with my thinking that they needed to make the best out of what they had, but today, with more stable, flexible, thinner materials, maybe it is growing into a different sort of need? Personally, I almost think a razor functions better (opening/closing) without them in lots of the scale materials I use. I think I mostly use them for clearance of the tang (because a thin washer can still make a little difference there rather than no washer) and honestly because it is what we've come to expect- that's not necessarily a bad thing either.

maybe the "older" razor has thinner washers because they are most worn?

Is that the reason you guys have made opposite observations- in defining what an older razor is? I assumed Alex meant oldest razors and perhaps Glen was thinking all vintage razors in a group? If it is the oldest razors that do not have them.

I don't think the washer can help centering on an oversize tang pivot hole-it would have to be attached to the tang. Nor reduce wear as I dont feel the scale material will care much whether it rubs on brass or steel.

If the washer was formed so it had a burr or "tooth" to lock to the scale then it would function as a wear plate on the scale-maybe they did it like that. or maybe it is only a spacer.

Leaving a raised dai on the scale is pretty awesome craftsman delux methodology- that is a really cool observation. I like that

I have only scaled a few razors, only once using washers. there was a situation with that set very weak material and the spacer that leaves that one loose in the scales. The others are still working well without any extra parts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevint

maybe the "older" razor has thinner washers because they are most worn?

---

As for the thickness of old washers, I don't think 'wear' makes them seem thinner. The washers people get from microfasteners (or similar) to generally use as this type of washer are about .017" if I recall. I haven't seen any vintage razor with washers that thick- most all are around .005" or less. Also, if the thin washers were only thin because they are worn, then there would be too much space between the scale and blade (material lost) and the blade would be loose. This isn't usually the case (in my experience). The washers would also only wear to the point of the scales being loose and then not wear anymore. I just think they used thinner washers for a reason, but I'm still not sure what that reason is. I prefer them aesthetically and think they give a razor a better opening/closing action than thicker washers do- but that's just me.

If I may ask about another point, and that is one concerning corrosion. Brass between two different materials like horn and steel tend to make electron transfer (corrosion, rust) less likely. I would think that would help with rust.


Take Care,
Richard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philadelph

As for the thickness of old washers, I don't think 'wear' makes them seem thinner. The washers people get from microfasteners (or similar) to generally use as this type of washer are about .017" if I recall. I haven't seen any vintage razor with washers that thick- most all are around .005" or less. Also, if the thin washers were only thin because they are worn, then there would be too much space between the scale and blade (material lost) and the blade would be loose. This isn't usually the case (in my experience). The washers would also only wear to the point of the scales being loose and then not wear anymore. I just think they used thinner washers for a reason, but I'm still not sure what that reason is. I prefer them aesthetically and think they give a razor a better opening/closing action than thicker washers do- but that's just me.

---

Nope. It's not just you. tight fit looks good.
I see your point, and even though it is old doesn't mean it was used for an especially long time

Just thinking out loud here but the function of a washer under the head of a bolt or screw is to protect the material from the edges of the bolt/screw head and to distribute the load to a wider surface area. When we tighten the pin on a razor pivot with no washer the pressure is applied wherever the tang and scale are in contact. With washers the load is limited to the area of contact between the washers, scales and tang. I think that is a better situation, or maybe it doesn't make a dime's worth of difference ?

Well as far as i understand it...

The pivot is a movable joint between hard and a soft material. For the joint to be reliable (tight) there must be another material of medium hardness placed between them as a buffer, if not then the hard material will abrade the soft material in short order… I am sure some of us have used “plastic” (nylon) bearings (washers) instead of brass, only to discover they didn’t last long because we substituted one soft material for another.

Very old razors with horn scales did not have bearings (washers) because that mechanical technology did not progress to the manufacturing of razors at that time. But to keep the razor tight in the scales, the old guys roughened the insides of the scales at the pivot... I have see the same done to some Ivory and Bone scales too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevint

I don't think the washer can help centering on an oversize tang pivot hole-it would have to be attached to the tang. Nor reduce wear as I dont feel the scale material will care much whether it rubs on brass or steel.

---

The washers I have seen that are cupped in the middle have a small hole the size of the pin in the centre, so the washers are effectively locked in position cntre-to-centre by the pivot pin, which is held in position by the tight holes in the scales, which in turn are fixed in relation to each other at the wedge end. The oversized hole was then taken up by the opposing cups or bosses in the centre of each washer, effectively turning it about a fixed point - centering it was probably not the best word to use. The last set of washers I saw like this came from a circa 1950s razor and were made of strong sprung steel with a blued finish and were obviously made to do a particular job. I have only seen two or three examples and I kept the washers, preferring to bush the pivot hole with brass tube.

The 'wear' I meant was not at the exact location of the washer, but at the junction of any flared/projecting part of the tang and scale material - by adding clearance.

Like Alex, I don't find the modern use of thick washers particularly attractive. The old ones - from Sheffield, anyway - were made from an extremely thin brass-type alloy called 'latten' (the word itself means 'thin' and comes from the german 'latte' meaning 'slat') - the stuff they used was made even thinner than usual by hammering or rolling.

A small bonus - though I am not for one second suggesting that this is why they were used - is that the copper content of the latten makes it germicidal to some degree - they say that brass doorknobs effectively kill most germs on them in about 8 hours!

I have seen those rasp marks that Smythe mentions, but always thought that they were just last-minute alterations to the inside of the scale to make the blade centre properly, but Smythe might be onto something there as I also find them at the wedge end of old and not so old razors - they certainly help in holding an unglued wedge in place, and all the wedges seem to be used without glue.

Regards,
Neil

All right! I'm learning stuff now!

I've only taken apart about 15 razors, with about 10 being Sheffield blades and have found that with the Sheffield razors only 2 or 3 had the washers. However, all of the solingen razors I've done(5 I think) have used them. Of course I'm sure you guys have done much more restorations than I have, so I don't mean to use this as a point for disagreement, just an observation. When I use them on razors that did not have them originally I find the blade does not pivot as easily, almost like the washer adds friction to the blade.

Just to jump in here, I think it's the clearance that the slight thickness of the washers provide. In particular, the shoulder/stabilizers could hit on the inside of scales without enough flex. It's really frustrating, and adding a washer bows out the scales just enough (sometimes) to fit. If Glen or Neil or someone went back and actually counted the percentage of washer occurrences, I'd be interested in the thickness of the tang and shoulder design as well. Anyone up for a research project?

Without multi-quoting the whole thread...

I don't know the percentage of "washered" razors I've seen, but they are usually much thinner than the washers I have on hand. I would agree with Alex that it's almost certainly not a function of wear. As Neil said, they just used really thin stuff. I hammer my washers from microfasteners.com or clean and reuse the originals.

I think water gets trapped in between the washer and tang just as easily, if not more, than between scales and the tang without a washer. However, there is a smaller surface area in contact between a washer and tang than in left alone. (Depending the on flex of the material when closed, a lot of the tang could be contacting the inside of the scales.) Could be a benefit to a washer.

As for wear, Neil pointed out the little divot or taper in a lot of washers, which lends me to believe that washer is still spinning and rubbing against the material of the scales. What it does, I don't know. Want to know the result? Look inside an old set of scales with washers and see if there's a circular grove.

Although all the previous posts had some real merit to them, I believe I know the answer. It was all started some years ago when a group of industrious washer manufacturers planted the seed that it is imperative they be used at the pivot pin knowing that you'd lose at least 2 or 3 in the process which would in turn make you buy more washers. Pretty that's why.

One thing just occurred to me that may have some merit. If it wasn't worth the cost of the material and labor they wouldn't have used them. Keep in mind that individuals made up those companies and those individuals who lived through the great depression didn't waste anything. Sort of like what some of us learned during the recession in the early '70s, precipitated by the Arab oil embargo, and other younger folks are beginning to learn now.

Jimmy that was probably the most intelligent observation of this whole thread.... :beer2: have a beer...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevint

Leaving a raised dai on the scale is pretty awesome craftsman delux methodology- that is a really cool observation. I like that

---

Here's that raised scale dais Kevin - along with a built in plug for a third pinning:



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...s/IMG_5991.jpg

Still a bit thicker than the old-style washers, though. The surface is roughened too for some reason - it would make the blade bind a little (friction again Jimmy - told you there was something in that idea... :) ) as well as maybe let water out a little easier - I don't really know...

Regards,
Neil

FWIW (I'm new to this) --

This thread is fascinating -- thanks to everyone. I'm sorry to revive it, but I have an new idea . . .

Without washers, if the scales aren't perfectly parallel at the pivot, or the sides of the tang at the pivot aren't perfectly parallel, the frictional drag will vary when opening and closing the blade into the scales.

Making the scales parallel, at the pivot, requires a wedge (or parallel spacer) inside the scales, between the razor shoulder and pivot (or molding-in the subtle curve, for molded-plastic scales). And some razors (many razors?) have a tang which gets thinner, from the pivot to the end.

With washers (or raised "buttons" on the inside of molded scales), the frictional drag will be much more constant if the scales are not parallel, or the sides of the tang aren't parallel. All friction happens between the tang and the washers -- the non-parallelism is working over a much shorter distance, and the (negative) clearance between tang and washer is more nearly constant.

I also suspect that the old washers were stamped. A stamped "flat washer" isn't flat. It has a slightly-rounded side, and a slightly-cupped side. If the slightly-cupped side is set against the (much softer) scales, it will lock into place against them when the pivot pin is peened and the joint comes under pressure.

All movement -- and wear -- when the razor is opened and closed, will occur between the tang and the washer. "Metal-on-metal" will last longer than "metal on plastic". "Metal-on-metal" with a bit of oil will last a long, long time.

Now I can get back to sleep. I know that I'm going to use washers (either manufactured, or hand-made) on my first re-scale.

Thanks again --

Charles

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cpcohen1945

I also suspect that the old washers were stamped. A stamped "flat washer" isn't flat. It has a slightly-rounded side, and a slightly-cupped side. If the slightly-cupped side is set against the (much softer) scales, it will lock into place against them when the pivot pin is peened and the joint comes under pressure.

All movement -- and wear -- when the razor is opened and closed, will occur between the tang and the washer. "Metal-on-metal" will last longer than "metal on plastic". "Metal-on-metal" with a bit of oil will last a long, long time.

Charles

---

A good point Charles!

I got fed-up with bashing down fat micro-fasteners washers to make them thinner and decided to stamp my own out of shim brass. As you say, one side is slightly dished, the other raised. It also made me realise why so many of the old washers are mis-shapen: they appear to have crescents cut out of the edges - from making my own the reason became clear - if you don't move the sheet of shim brass enough before stamping the next washer, it goes over the cut-out left by the last one to be stamped out.

Regards,
Neil