Charcoal Good's 3D printed stainless steel razor

Does anyone know what were the tolerances for the vintage production lines?

I have absolutely no science or evidence to support the statement I am about to make but I am going to say it regardless...

It is my guess that the tolerances allowed in manufacturing during the late 1800s through the early 1900s were not even as close as what we would see from current metallic 3D printing media.

"Back then" machines were calibrated by hand using calipers and measuring tools that were also calibrated by hand. As good as those machinists were at what they did, they simply cannot compete with the piece-by-piece accuracy of a computer program. Digital is always more accurate than analogue, especially when it comes to making and producing replicated items.

But that is just an uninformed guess-turned-opinion...

That makes sense Chris. I'm sure those tolerances are fine when you're talking about shaving, but if you're say, making parts for today's car or airplane engines, not gonna fly.

I did check the link for the razor, but I found their handles to be more interesting. I don't think those are 3D printed. They do have some beautiful designs!

Does anyone know what were the tolerances for the vintage production lines?

Digital is always more accurate than analogue, especially when it comes to making and producing replicated items.

I wouldn't go that far, and also, there's more to it than digital vs analog but I catch your meaning. My point was, if the tolerances of vintage items are worse than the ones for the printed method, and you don't see many people complain about their vintage razors, so maybe we got to the point where it shouldn't matter. Just my opinion guys.

I would say a 100 year old razor that still alive, kicking, and shaving well, has some darn good tolerances IMO.

I am all for ancient razors as I am an ancient person.
I defy any modern razor to better my precious single edge GEMs.
Especially those quintuple edge vibrating horrors.
The gauntlet is down.

Mickey

Does anyone know what were the tolerances for the vintage production lines?

Digital is always more accurate than analogue, especially when it comes to making and producing replicated items.

I wouldn't go that far, and also, there's more to it than digital vs analog but I catch your meaning. My point was, if the tolerances of vintage items are worse than the ones for the printed method, and you don't see many people complain about their vintage razors, so maybe we got to the point where it shouldn't matter. Just my opinion guys.

I totally agree. For me, razors just need tolerances that are high enough to align the blade evenly and give me a comfortable and efficient shave.

My point was not to imply that vintage gear was in any way inferior. It makes up the majority of my den.

My point was more along the lines that the expectation of high, tight tolerances is probably unnecessary.

Tight, straight blade held firmly in place at a constant angle. Seriously, how tight do tolerances need to be to accomplish that goal? My guess is not very...

Sent from my LGL34C using Tapatalk

I agree that it looks like it would have a lot of blade exposure. More blade exposure than I would like in a DE razor. I know that may sound strange from a SR shaver, but DE razor blades are an entirely different beast and can be very uncomfortable with too much exposure, gap and reveal. I'll stick with my refinished 1930's Gillette long comb -- which is most excellent.

If a razor gives a BBS shave I am quite tolerant.
A DFS begins to lower my tolerance.
An "Ouch! Oh damn. I am bleeding." No tolerance at all.
And there are variations of toleration between those levels.

Mickey

If a razor gives a BBS shave I am quite tolerant.
A DFS begins to lower my tolerance.
An  "Ouch! Oh damn. I am bleeding." No tolerance at all.
And there are variations of toleration between those levels.

Mickey

Spot on, Mickey!