(01-30-2021, 12:12 AM)Aultmore Wrote: I definitely agree that Karve > Rockwell. But in the end I wasn't impressed by Karve either. I think both are just not very efficient compared to better razors out there. Individual thoughts about each: the Rockwell is too mild in all settings, people equate the mildness with smoothness which I think is wrong. If the razor feels good on the face but isn't removing hair efficiently then that's problematic. I think the Karve moves more towards the right idea and is more efficient, but still I feel like for the face feel it does provide the efficiency is still severely lacking. I have had all the Karve plates, the face feel goes up but the efficiency is mediocre on all of them IMO.
This becomes obvious if you try something from Tatara or a Wolfman, where for the same face feel equivalent plates on either Rockwell or Karve the efficiency is much better. My Wolfman feels like a B or C plate but cuts better than the G plate. Made the Karve superfluous, what's the point of it if it's less comfortable, doesn't cut as well, and you have to own multiple plates to figure this out fully .... MOIMO YMMV etc
What you just wrote makes absolutely no sense. There is no such thing as this mythical "efficiency", hence the Kool-Aid drinkers who are never satisfied and cannot stop buying razors in their quest for this purported "El Dorado". Blade gap/exposure is everything. Period. A razor is merely a blade holder. What you call "efficiency" is merely aggression. Makers can only put the blade closer to the skin and vary the exposure. Nothing else can be done to change these two factors other than what I just mentioned. It is pure science and not alchemy. But hey, keep throwing barrels of cash to artisanal "alchemists" who claim to be able to turn lead into gold. It's sad that some people actually buy into this crap and funny thing is.............they never seem to find that perfection. Unbelievable.