Garrett, The Shaving Disciple - Christian, Husband, Father, Writer, YouTuber, Head Shaver
2024 Software Restraint
2024 Software Restraint
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2021, 05:36 PM by SRZ65LE#31.)
'Pre: Warm Water
Soap: C&E Nomad
Razor: Asylum 17-4
Blade: Personna (2)
Brush: Paladin Tulip in butterscotch
24 hrs. of stubble
Two Passes: An irritating, and not close at all shave from a brand new $230 razor . . . .
So, I knew before I even started shaving that this was a defective razor. Phil at Bullgoose has publicly acknowledged that these are all defective razors, due to a machining defect. [Note also that I spotted and reported this defect, being the amateur I am, after no more than five minutes of careful attention]. Phil has also publicly pledged that he will provide full refunds to all purchasers. That’s good, because this razor is a good old-fashioned turkey. When the top cap is screwed down fully it’s literally impossible to get this razor to shave. It was only after I unscrewed the top cap partially (treating the razor like an “adjustable” razor, as touted by certain makers of other razors) that I was able to get the razor to cut at all. Even then, it was rough and irritating and required a very shallow angle.
Now, I fully realize that mistakes happen, and I’m much relieved that Phil is an upstanding and ethical vendor/manufacturer who's publicly pledged to fix this. (I’m also fully aware that this readily distinguishes Phil from the alleged (and not refuted) actions of the razor designer/manufacturer [who shall remain nameless] who “inspired” Phil to manufacture and sell the Asylum 17-4). Still, I can’t help but wonder who would offer for sale, and accept payment for, an expensive razor without first carefully inspecting and actually using the razor?
Well even the best of us make big mistakes and, once all is both said and done, there’ll be no real harm done. On the upside, there might now be one more widely-recognized ethical upstanding person, in the wet shaving community, who has a much deeper appreciation for, and a more evolved understanding of, the difficulties of manufacturing and marketing a high-end razor. (That’s not even mentioning the difficulties of also designing a razor that can command respect and high prices over the long-term).
There’s no joy here. None at all. There’s absolutely no joy in witnessing someone else’s mistakes. Also, there is no joy in being adversely affected by someone else’s mistakes. And that’s all that needs to be said about that particular subject too.
Soap: C&E Nomad
Razor: Asylum 17-4
Blade: Personna (2)
Brush: Paladin Tulip in butterscotch
24 hrs. of stubble
Two Passes: An irritating, and not close at all shave from a brand new $230 razor . . . .
So, I knew before I even started shaving that this was a defective razor. Phil at Bullgoose has publicly acknowledged that these are all defective razors, due to a machining defect. [Note also that I spotted and reported this defect, being the amateur I am, after no more than five minutes of careful attention]. Phil has also publicly pledged that he will provide full refunds to all purchasers. That’s good, because this razor is a good old-fashioned turkey. When the top cap is screwed down fully it’s literally impossible to get this razor to shave. It was only after I unscrewed the top cap partially (treating the razor like an “adjustable” razor, as touted by certain makers of other razors) that I was able to get the razor to cut at all. Even then, it was rough and irritating and required a very shallow angle.
Now, I fully realize that mistakes happen, and I’m much relieved that Phil is an upstanding and ethical vendor/manufacturer who's publicly pledged to fix this. (I’m also fully aware that this readily distinguishes Phil from the alleged (and not refuted) actions of the razor designer/manufacturer [who shall remain nameless] who “inspired” Phil to manufacture and sell the Asylum 17-4). Still, I can’t help but wonder who would offer for sale, and accept payment for, an expensive razor without first carefully inspecting and actually using the razor?
Well even the best of us make big mistakes and, once all is both said and done, there’ll be no real harm done. On the upside, there might now be one more widely-recognized ethical upstanding person, in the wet shaving community, who has a much deeper appreciation for, and a more evolved understanding of, the difficulties of manufacturing and marketing a high-end razor. (That’s not even mentioning the difficulties of also designing a razor that can command respect and high prices over the long-term).
There’s no joy here. None at all. There’s absolutely no joy in witnessing someone else’s mistakes. Also, there is no joy in being adversely affected by someone else’s mistakes. And that’s all that needs to be said about that particular subject too.
Sean, Upstate N.Y.
(03-16-2021, 05:35 PM)SRZ65LE#31 Wrote: 'Pre: Warm Water
Soap: C&E Nomad
Razor: Asylum 17-4
Blade: Personna (2)
Brush: Paladin Tulip in butterscotch
24 hrs. of stubble
Two Passes: An irritating, and not close at all shave from a brand new $230 razor . . . .
So, I knew before I even started shaving that this was a defective razor. Phil at Bullgoose has publicly acknowledged that these are all defective razors, due to a machining defect. [Note also that I spotted and reported this defect, being the amateur I am, after no more than five minutes of careful attention]. Phil has also publicly pledged that he will provide full refunds to all purchasers. That’s good, because this razor is a good old-fashioned turkey. When the top cap is screwed down fully it’s literally impossible to get this razor to shave. It was only after I unscrewed the top cap partially (treating the razor like an “adjustable” razor, as touted by certain makers of other razors) that I was able to get the razor to cut at all. Even then, it was rough and irritating and required a very shallow angle.
Now, I fully realize that mistakes happen, and I’m much relieved that Phil is an upstanding and ethical vendor/manufacturer who's publicly pledged to fix this. (I’m also fully aware that this readily distinguishes Phil from the alleged (and not refuted) actions of the razor designer/manufacturer [who shall remain nameless] who “inspired” Phil to manufacture and sell the Asylum 17-4). Still, I can’t help but wonder who would offer for sale, and accept payment for, an expensive razor without first carefully inspecting and actually using the razor?
Well even the best of us make big mistakes and, once all is both said and done, there’ll be no real harm done. On the upside, there might now be one more widely-recognized ethical upstanding person, in the wet shaving community, who has a much deeper appreciation for, and a more evolved understanding of, the difficulties of manufacturing and marketing a high-end razor. (That’s not even mentioning the difficulties of also designing a razor that can command respect and high prices over the long-term).
There’s no joy here. None at all. There’s absolutely no joy in witnessing someone else’s mistakes. Also, there is no joy in being adversely affected by someone else’s mistakes. And that’s all that needs to be said about that particular subject too.
Can't say I'm surprised. It was a no-win situation from the beginning.
Users browsing this thread: