Re: Craftsman shaving razor?

From: Uncle Al (UncleAl0_at_hate.spam.net)
Date: 09/21/04 

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 08:09:13 -0700

aSkeptic wrote:
>
> I've seen the topic of razor materials on sci.materials before but I
> just had to resurrect this thread of discussion. I use sensor xcell
> razors. I get 2 excellent shaves with one of these, followed by 4
> tolerable shaves, followed by a really poor shave and then I toss the
> $1 sob into the trash. This means I spend nearly $50 a year on these
> damn things and only get a really good shave 30% of the time.
>
> I want a non-disposable razor that will outlast me. No, I don't mean
> those straight razors of the 1800's. I want a non-disposable razor
> that works like a safety razor. I would have no problem spending $150
> on such a razor if it gave me an excellent shave 100% of the time for
> decades of proper use.
>
> I don't care if Gillette etc go out of business, I want a good shave
> ALL THE TIME damn it.
>
> I have "craftsman" in the title because of their reputation for
> replacements. If it goes bad, take it back, get it replaced for free…
> That sort of arrangement would be stellar.
>
> I presume these disposable bastards are made of stainless steel. About
> the only practical thing this material affords that super materials
> won't is flexibility and biocompatibility. Even with its flexibility I
> still cut myself on a dull blade around the chin and places where my
> face isn't very flat.
>
> A super hard material like cemented tungsten carbide is probably not
> biocompatible, even with nickel binders. I'm not sure about binderless
> WC, or B4C, or TiC. How about a sapphire blade? Sapphire isn't hugely
> expensive and it can be polished and sharpened on a lap. I don't see
> why it wouldn't be biocompatible.
>
> I think the flexibility issue can be resolved with a narrower blade.
> Xcell blades are 1.5 inches wide. How about a sapphire blade ¾ inches
> wide? It usually takes 4 passes to get a clean shave on an xcell, if I
> can do it in 2 with an ultra sharp sapphire blade, I'd be happy with
> it.
>
> Sapphire's Vickers hardness is about 1400, stainless is about 200.
> Sapphire is only 7 times harder, how long do you think it would last?

We milled medical grade poly(methyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses
with two-flute diamond burrs. New burrs did a lovely job. Older
burrs did not and were progressively replaced. Scanning electron
microscopy of a selection of both presented double-blind could not be
visually separated by any of a large mixed panel of employees. When
they were evaluated, some burrs gave good product and other poor
product - new and used without exception.

One doubts even a CVD diamond razor blade would last. Diamond
phonograph needles degraded. Razor blades are already edged with
exotic ultrahard intermetallics. Perhaps an erodable Damascus steel
or Talonite edge would be interesting for sharpeness retention - but
not for smoothly slipping down your face! They are serrated edges. 

-- 
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
 (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Quantcast