Wolfman WR2 Head Discussion

I have the 61 OC. It’s my go to razor when my skin needs a break. I would like to get a 74 or 80 at some point to get a little more efficiency. For the WR2, I would like something efficient enough for when I skip a day or 2, but I also want to be able to use it daily. I like enough blade feel to know that it’s there. I generally prefer OCs. The razors I have been using lately are the Carbon, Charcoal Goods L2 OC, Timeless 95 OC, and Blackbird SB. I can only use the Blackbird about 4 days in a row. The others that I listed can be used daily without any issues. I usually shave with a pretty neutral to slightly shallow angle if that makes a difference.

I'm a little odd in that the 74 was my least favorite. It's good but not as good as a BB, to me. The 80 head shines and they get progressively better.

The L2, T95, and BB are going to share the same WR1 80-86 gap space.

Those all are going to be roughly equivalent to the 115. If you want something to use on multiple days growth....I'd probably put a 135 in your hand. Its smooth enough to use daily and kicks the efficiency up to WR1 .94, L3, Ikon Tech levels....but without as much blade feel.

I'm only talking SB too. As stated repeatedly, I'm no fan of the SS OC WR2 head. I did send my SS125OC to a couple of guys who loved the OC face feel. I like the WR1 OC heads, not the WR2 tho.

If it's too much, you can trade down to a 125 pretty easily, I'd think.

I think if you get a 115, you are duplicating a couple of razors you already have in end result although the WR2 115 would be smoother.

Hope this helps.

Living on your knees, conformity...Or dying on your feet for honesty.  James Hetfield

That does help. The reason I was leaning towards the 115 is because I had the Karve F plate and it was just a little too much at times and I thought the WR2 might be similar.

I had a Karve E and F plate. I used the F plate one time and knew, while it was a great shaver for the $$$, it just wasn't going to replace anything in my den. The WR2 is on another level.

Living on your knees, conformity...Or dying on your feet for honesty. James Hetfield

Living on your knees, conformity...Or dying on your feet for honesty.  James Hetfield

I contacted James and I asked about the exposure.  I think this information might help some other as well.  The exposure is neutral on the 115 WR2.  He suggested that a 125 is similar to the WR1 74.  Now, I'm thinking either a 125 OC or I might do a DC with 125 OC and 135 SB.

Living on your knees, conformity...Or dying on your feet for honesty.  James Hetfield

I contacted James and I asked about the exposure.  I think this information might help some other as well.  The exposure is neutral on the 115 WR2.  He suggested that a 125 is similar to the WR1 74.  Now, I'm thinking either a 125 OC or I might do a DC with 125 OC and 135 SB.

I hate to argue with the man on gear he created, but the 125 is just a tick up from an 86, on my face. YMMV.

DuFour replied, upon my request to build the first 1.45mm:
"1.45.....I think the material is there, but I'm not sure I have the proper clearance for shipping dangerous goods across the border."

Living on your knees, conformity...Or dying on your feet for honesty.  James Hetfield

I contacted James and I asked about the exposure.  I think this information might help some other as well.  The exposure is neutral on the 115 WR2.  He suggested that a 125 is similar to the WR1 74.  Now, I'm thinking either a 125 OC or I might do a DC with 125 OC and 135 SB.

Who the hell am I to disagree with the guy that makes them ? OTOH ... James lists a 1.25 as 'aggressive' on his site. IIRC the .61 WR1 used to be listed aggressive ? Anyway, I have the .74 and I think it is a smooth and efficient shaver but I wouldn't call it aggressive, nor do I find it 'similar' to the 1.25 WR2.

In my hand the WR2 1.25, either OC or SB is a bit aggressive, but it is also smooth as silk. In that sense it might be like the .74 .. IOW, the smoothness. 

Then again, in my hand a Karve E plate was a one time try out, just didn't deliver the goods, and the F OC, and G SB are the usual shavers. I don't find them uncomfortable. 

I rarely shave with the same razor twice in a week, so maybe I'm not the best person to judge these things.

I'd say minimum a 1.25 in the WR2. YMMV.

Living on your knees, conformity...Or dying on your feet for honesty.  James Hetfield

I contacted James and I asked about the exposure.  I think this information might help some other as well.  The exposure is neutral on the 115 WR2.  He suggested that a 125 is similar to the WR1 74.  Now, I'm thinking either a 125 OC or I might do a DC with 125 OC and 135 SB.

Who the hell am I to disagree with the guy that makes them ? OTOH ... James lists a 1.25 as 'aggressive' on his site. IIRC the .61 WR1 used to be listed aggressive ? Anyway, I have the .74 and I think it is a smooth and efficient shaver but I wouldn't call it aggressive, nor do I find it 'similar' to the 1.25 WR2.

In my hand the WR2 1.25, either OC or SB is a bit aggressive, but it is also smooth as silk. In that sense it might be like the .74 .. IOW, the smoothness. 

Then again, in my hand a Karve E plate was a one time try out, just didn't deliver the goods, and the F OC, and G SB are the usual shavers. I don't find them uncomfortable. 

I rarely shave with the same razor twice in a week, so maybe I'm not the best person to judge these things.

I'd say minimum a 1.25 in the WR2. YMMV.

He may have been comparing the 2 based on feel rather than efficiency. I mentioned that I thought I would probably like the 74 better than I like the 61, so he suggested the 125 based on that. I actually like the 61 OC. It’s smooth and comfortable. I just have to keep the angle pretty steady to get enough efficiency.
How would you compare blade feel and efficiency of the 125 OC & SB to the Karve F? I’ve used to own both F plates, so the comparison would be helpful.

For me the WR2 SB has less blade feel and is much smoother than the Karve E or F plate SB. I am not a fan of the OC on the WR2 but really like it on my WR1 .74 & .94

I contacted James and I asked about the exposure.  I think this information might help some other as well.  The exposure is neutral on the 115 WR2.  He suggested that a 125 is similar to the WR1 74.  Now, I'm thinking either a 125 OC or I might do a DC with 125 OC and 135 SB.

Who the hell am I to disagree with the guy that makes them ? OTOH ... James lists a 1.25 as 'aggressive' on his site. IIRC the .61 WR1 used to be listed aggressive ? Anyway, I have the .74 and I think it is a smooth and efficient shaver but I wouldn't call it aggressive, nor do I find it 'similar' to the 1.25 WR2.

In my hand the WR2 1.25, either OC or SB is a bit aggressive, but it is also smooth as silk. In that sense it might be like the .74 .. IOW, the smoothness. 

Then again, in my hand a Karve E plate was a one time try out, just didn't deliver the goods, and the F OC, and G SB are the usual shavers. I don't find them uncomfortable. 

I rarely shave with the same razor twice in a week, so maybe I'm not the best person to judge these things.

I'd say minimum a 1.25 in the WR2. YMMV.

He may have been comparing the 2 based on feel rather than efficiency. I mentioned that I thought I would probably like the 74 better than I like the 61, so he suggested the 125 based on that. I actually like the 61 OC. It’s smooth and comfortable. I just have to keep the angle pretty steady to get enough efficiency.
How would you compare blade feel and efficiency of the 125 OC & SB to the Karve F? I’ve used to own both F plates, so the comparison would be helpful.

Perhaps I didn't give the Karve E plate enough of a chance, but I don't 'like' razors that will do the job 'alright' but are inefficient compared with the higher gaps. Saying that to say ... I like the Karve F OC, and G SB for efficiency, but I did not find them 'smooth.' That is to say, they are smooth enough for me to continue to use them, but they don't compare in smoothness to the WR2 1.25 for me. That being with the SB or the OC. 

But, this is such a YMMV pursuit. For instance, I read through the Charcoal Goods thread and was shocked - shocked ! to see LOOT say that he found the Lv 2 SB to be an efficient shaver. To me it is good in OC, but ain't worth a hoot in SB.

So yesterday evening at about 8PM, having read that the Lv 2 is efficient from LOOT, and countless others, I shaved 2 days of growth with a Lv 2 SB. My usual 2 pass WTG/ATG. I really savored the shave, trying to see what it was that gave me my prior impressions on this head. Well, it got the job done, but, like the Timeless .68, I have to work too hard to get it done. Hard to explain.

I ended up with a DFS, but not on the scale of a CG Lv3, or even the Lv2 OC. This was confirmed for me this morning at 10AM when I could already feel stubble on the neck and jaw line. Had it been with the WR2 1.25 it would have been a breeze, and I might not feel that amount of stubble until late afternoon or evening.

So I'm saying if LOOT, experienced wet shaver, with a shave arsenal second to none, finds a Lv 2 good, it goes to show that the differing whiskers/skin types we have enter into the equation. One man's meat being another man's poison as the old saying goes. If you've got a face/beard like mine what works for me should work for you, otherwise YMMV.

Who the hell am I to disagree with the guy that makes them ? OTOH ... James lists a 1.25 as 'aggressive' on his site. IIRC the .61 WR1 used to be listed aggressive ? Anyway, I have the .74 and I think it is a smooth and efficient shaver but I wouldn't call it aggressive, nor do I find it 'similar' to the 1.25 WR2.

In my hand the WR2 1.25, either OC or SB is a bit aggressive, but it is also smooth as silk. In that sense it might be like the .74 .. IOW, the smoothness. 

Then again, in my hand a Karve E plate was a one time try out, just didn't deliver the goods, and the F OC, and G SB are the usual shavers. I don't find them uncomfortable. 

I rarely shave with the same razor twice in a week, so maybe I'm not the best person to judge these things.

I'd say minimum a 1.25 in the WR2. YMMV.

He may have been comparing the 2 based on feel rather than efficiency. I mentioned that I thought I would probably like the 74 better than I like the 61, so he suggested the 125 based on that. I actually like the 61 OC. It’s smooth and comfortable. I just have to keep the angle pretty steady to get enough efficiency.
How would you compare blade feel and efficiency of the 125 OC & SB to the Karve F? I’ve used to own both F plates, so the comparison would be helpful.

Perhaps I didn't give the Karve E plate enough of a chance, but I don't 'like' razors that will do the job 'alright' but are inefficient compared with the higher gaps. Saying that to say ... I like the Karve F OC, and G SB for efficiency, but I did not find them 'smooth.' That is to say, they are smooth enough for me to continue to use them, but they don't compare in smoothness to the WR2 1.25 for me. That being with the SB or the OC. 

But, this is such a YMMV pursuit. For instance, I read through the Charcoal Goods thread and was shocked - shocked ! to see LOOT say that he found the Lv 2 SB to be an efficient shaver. To me it is good in OC, but ain't worth a hoot in SB.

So yesterday evening at about 8PM, having read that the Lv 2 is efficient from LOOT, and countless others, I shaved 2 days of growth with a Lv 2 SB. My usual 2 pass WTG/ATG. I really savored the shave, trying to see what it was that gave me my prior impressions on this head. Well, it got the job done, but, like the Timeless .68, I have to work too hard to get it done. Hard to explain.

I ended up with a DFS, but not on the scale of a CG Lv3, or even the Lv2 OC. This was confirmed for me this morning at 10AM when I could already feel stubble on the neck and jaw line. Had it been with the WR2 1.25 it would have been a breeze, and I might not feel that amount of stubble until late afternoon or evening.

So I'm saying if LOOT, experienced wet shaver, with a shave arsenal second to none, finds a Lv 2 good, it goes to show that the differing whiskers/skin types we have enter into the equation. One man's meat being another man's poison as the old saying goes. If you've got a face/beard like mine what works for me should work for you, otherwise YMMV.

I think the L2 OC is more efficient than the SB as well. I’m nice sure why since gap and exposure seem to be the same. I also liked the efficiency of the Karve F plates, but I had trouble getting a smooth first pass.

Who the hell am I to disagree with the guy that makes them ? OTOH ... James lists a 1.25 as 'aggressive' on his site. IIRC the .61 WR1 used to be listed aggressive ? Anyway, I have the .74 and I think it is a smooth and efficient shaver but I wouldn't call it aggressive, nor do I find it 'similar' to the 1.25 WR2.

In my hand the WR2 1.25, either OC or SB is a bit aggressive, but it is also smooth as silk. In that sense it might be like the .74 .. IOW, the smoothness. 

Then again, in my hand a Karve E plate was a one time try out, just didn't deliver the goods, and the F OC, and G SB are the usual shavers. I don't find them uncomfortable. 

I rarely shave with the same razor twice in a week, so maybe I'm not the best person to judge these things.

I'd say minimum a 1.25 in the WR2. YMMV.

He may have been comparing the 2 based on feel rather than efficiency. I mentioned that I thought I would probably like the 74 better than I like the 61, so he suggested the 125 based on that. I actually like the 61 OC. It’s smooth and comfortable. I just have to keep the angle pretty steady to get enough efficiency.
How would you compare blade feel and efficiency of the 125 OC & SB to the Karve F? I’ve used to own both F plates, so the comparison would be helpful.

Perhaps I didn't give the Karve E plate enough of a chance, but I don't 'like' razors that will do the job 'alright' but are inefficient compared with the higher gaps. Saying that to say ... I like the Karve F OC, and G SB for efficiency, but I did not find them 'smooth.' That is to say, they are smooth enough for me to continue to use them, but they don't compare in smoothness to the WR2 1.25 for me. That being with the SB or the OC. 

But, this is such a YMMV pursuit. For instance, I read through the Charcoal Goods thread and was shocked - shocked ! to see LOOT say that he found the Lv 2 SB to be an efficient shaver. To me it is good in OC, but ain't worth a hoot in SB.

So yesterday evening at about 8PM, having read that the Lv 2 is efficient from LOOT, and countless others, I shaved 2 days of growth with a Lv 2 SB. My usual 2 pass WTG/ATG. I really savored the shave, trying to see what it was that gave me my prior impressions on this head. Well, it got the job done, but, like the Timeless .68, I have to work too hard to get it done. Hard to explain.

I ended up with a DFS, but not on the scale of a CG Lv3, or even the Lv2 OC. This was confirmed for me this morning at 10AM when I could already feel stubble on the neck and jaw line. Had it been with the WR2 1.25 it would have been a breeze, and I might not feel that amount of stubble until late afternoon or evening.

So I'm saying if LOOT, experienced wet shaver, with a shave arsenal second to none, finds a Lv 2 good, it goes to show that the differing whiskers/skin types we have enter into the equation. One man's meat being another man's poison as the old saying goes. If you've got a face/beard like mine what works for me should work for you, otherwise YMMV.

Ha! I did like the L2, Jimmy. Perfectly capable of an 8 hour, typical 2.5 pass BBS. It was right there with my 17-4 (a tad smoother). The 115 replaced both as I found it a better shaver. I liked the L3SB too but it could get a little bit of harshness to it.

I have no issues with a CG Level 2, it’s currently my favourite and only razor. When my number comes up, I’m looking forward to seeing if the 95 WR2 can dethrone it.