Comparing Grooming Dept Original Moisturizing PreShave Unscented v Latest Formulation

This is a brief response to threads citing Grooming Dept's latest Unscented Moisturizing PreShave as having odours and poor performance when compared to the original release.  These posts piqued my interest as the last of a collection of original tubs of GD Unscented PreShave is nearing an end: Mo's PreShave has become an integral, critical component of a close comfortable shave as I possess extremely sensitive skin and a wiry beard growth.  Various workarounds to apply the very thick waxy original PreShave have been devised such that one hardly notices the inconvenience while appreciating the protection and slickness it provides - BUT truth of the matter is, the application has always left MUCH to be desired - just how it is.  My rationalization had been that the waxy thick difficult to manipulate and apply formulation was a key reason why the protection and slickness lasted through an entire 3 pass shave.

Inspecting the latest Unscented PreShave from GD and finding it to be very thin, almost runny was a less than encouraging sign of things to come.  In fact it was so disconcerting that Mo was immediately placed on notice that it might be a defective batch - which, per Mo, it wasn't.  The tub was set aside for future usage with an expectation that it would be disappointing to use the new PreShave and a resolve to stretch the remaining original formulation for as long possible to delay the inevitable day the new "lesser" formula would have to be adopted.

Recently the postings regarding stench and poor performance of the new formulation began to appear which only heightened my trepidation BUT DAMN IT, today it was endeavoured to confront the issue head on with a side by side comparison which is herewith shared with the forum:

Opening the jars, placed my nose literally into both containers with the lid acting as a shield to contain any scent that might otherwise go unnoticed, took several whiffs from both containers then back and forth and mixing them without looking to be certain: IF ANYTHING, the original had an ever so subtle - and mean SUBTLE - waxy aroma with the new formulation having POSSIBLY a faint unscented soap hint.  Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES would I mention either jar having scent other than it had been cited on the fora that the scent was so strongly unpleasant, the containers were tossed rather than return them to the manufacturer.  

I applied the original to the right side of the face which is relatively unscathed (giving it every advantage which was probably unfair in retrospect) and the new formulation to the left side of the face which has received extensive injuries and disfigurement over the years.  The first thing noticed is just what a hassle applying the original formulation is: dollop a half pea size of wax on absolutely perfectly dry palms and rub like mad until a thin coat of wax is applied to a wet beard being sure to sufficiently hydrate without over hydrating, leaving a thin protective covering then rinsing the hands until all the slickness is washed off prior to handling sharp instruments - Good God - BUT it does perform stellar!  On the contrary, the new formulation can be applied with wet hands if so desired, easily works into the skin and rinses off the hands without issue - but what good is ease of application if the performance is compromised, eh?

Upon shaving found the new formulation to be at least as strong performing as the original - MAYBE more so but so subtly better performing, not confident of stating it flatly.  Undertook a 3 pass shave with perfection and am COMPLETELY satisfied the new formulation is a winner.

To be clear, I am not suggesting people were misleading in THEIR comments regarding the new Grooming Dept. Unscented Moisturizing PreShave, being unable to bear witness to their experiences BUT can state flatly that there is a STRONG PREFERENCE for the new runny version based on ease of application alone (even if there is concern a container may not last as long as the original version).  I really wanted to give a dissenting opinion regarding the new formulation and the reader should bear in mind that I undertook this comparison with prejudice favouring the original version.

Nice review. I am still using the old formula but use it differently than he suggests. I wet my face liberally with water and massage it in for only about 15 or 20 seconds. That seems to work best for me.