07-25-2014, 09:09 AM
#1
  • Gago
  • Active Member
  • Rio de Janeirto
User Info
Hello gents!

(First of all, i'm not sure if this should be here, or in "reviews", since its a comparative review. I would ask the oderation to move it accondingly so depending on your decision.)


I'm glad that a brazilian company, especially one that started in my neighborhood and i happen to know the owners, finally entered the american market (through Bullgoose). And i wish to congratulate Phil for his vision.

Of course, the brush was completely unknow for you guys, but i have one since october 2013, and i think i was the first shaving-related-forum-member to buy one of those. I happened to walk in the shopping center stand that sold then and i was amazed that the knot was so much alike the Plisson, that i shared my finding with my buddies in the Fórum Barbear Clássico.

Not long after, the company offered me one of the brushes to review. So i was the first to review it, as you can all see in this topic of November in the Fórum Barbear Clássico: http://www.barbearclassico.com/index.php?topic=5737.0

Since them, the brush became a hit. Everybody in my forum bought one, and i even managed to send some overseas to some friends in Portugal,and US. Some guys from Spaing managed to get some too, through a friend of mine. All this because the company did not ship to other countries.

Since you can all buy from Bullgoose now, i think this a good opportunity to adapt my original review of those brushes in that forum. So here's goes nothing:


- Presentation:

[Image: IMG_2782.JPG]

[align=left]It cames in a velvet bag. Not fancy, but ok. Like all synthetic brushes, it dont have any odor and it's shave-ready out of the box.
The fibers have a nice colour, i like it because they dont try to imitate badger in that white-black pattern like Muhle and Frank Shaving, for instance. The handle is simple, made of quality plastic and it has the company logo nicely engraved (altough i learned that it tends to fade with time).

Measures

Total height:95mm
Loft Height: 52mm
Handle height: 43mm
Base diameter: 35mm
Knot diameter: 25mm
* Theres two tipes of handles available for those brushes, this is the bigger one, available at Bullgoose. The smaller is only available in Brazil for now, but i personally dislike it.

[Image: WP_20140721_009.jpg]
the second white brush is the smaller handle

Note: with time, the company improved significantly the making of the brush. It started to come with a nicely designed bulb-shaped knot. All the brushes are made this way now.

This is a pic with the brush reviewd in this thread, and besides it, a fewm months later made brush gifted for me in a special colour, marble blue: (it was a prototype, the first brush to came bulb-shaped)

[Image: IMG_3094.JPG]


- Ergonomics
Altough small, the handle is nicely ergonomic. It can be hold with the fingertips or like this:

[Image: IMG_2823.JPG]

-Water retention capacity:

Very good for a synthetic brush:

[align=center][Image: IMG_2820.JPG]

comparing to a Plisson...
[Image: IMG_2819.JPG]

...and a SOC 2012
[Image: 20131127_102315.jpg]


- Knot density:

The main complain about the Plisson is the lack of backbone. The grooming co. brush is a very much wider knotted and short lofted brush, giving much more backbone. It lathers in hard soaps much more easilly than some other sythetic brushes, especially Plisson, and in the same time, its great for those who face lather and like a bit of bakbone.

TGC besides a Plisson

[Image: IMG_2795.JPG]

Unlike the Plisson, the TGC fibers can hold its own weight upside down.

[Image: G9Tvq7ppgQTcK7kT_XQqgdmW5EPuBBgtdEkjgd6m...36-h552-no]


- Lathering:

Before the TGC brush i had a Plisson for some months. It CAN lather in hard soaps, but its a pain to do so. The TGC brush lathers incredibly, soaps and creans. It holds a decent amount of water so it can generate a nice thick lather (with decent soaps of course) in a short time, altough in some cases its necessary to add a bit of water, especially in "thirsty" soaps.

Lathering a T&H Authentic nº10 cream:

[Image: IMG_2829.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2838.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2836.JPG]


Comparing with a Plisson:

[Image: IMG_2832.JPG]

Altough it seens to generate more lather, the Plisson is splayed, while the TGC is "packed" with lather in the knot.


Lathering a C&E NOMAD soap:

[Image: IMG_2837.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2821.JPG]

-Suavity X backbone:

The TGC uses the same fibers as the Plisson, but its packed as it was supposed to be; densely.
It compensates the lack of natural backbone with it density and shorter loft, but the acclaimed smoothness of the Plisson fibers are there. Its incredibly smooth, comparable to any high-quality silvetip brushes (maybe more!).
The knot splays nicely but not floppy (like Plisson), and give us all that nice lather inside of it. Its great for those circular movements that we all like to, it does not requires only "painter" moves.

-After the shave:

As a synth brush, you can expect it to dry very fast, and its easy to get rid of any lather that remains. One or two passes in a towel, and its almost completely dry:

[Image: IMG_2831.JPG]

-Price:

In Brazil, the TGC costs R$ 79,90 (1 brl = 2,22 US dollars today), and the Plisson R$ 180,00 in the L'occitane site. So, figure it out who gives you more bang for your buck.
I understand that in U.S the tgc is 50 U$ and the Plisson somewhat like that, but still)


- My conslusions:

The Plisson syhthetic is a nice brush. I had one and liked it very much. But theres simply NO comparison between those two!
TGC is densely-packed, not floppy at ALL, and lathers everything with ease. It can please both face and bowl latherers, cream or soap guys, and it won't disappoint you regardless of your choice.

Is it perfect? no at all. The handle could be more sophisticated and a bit bigger. In taller bowls it can be annoying to hit the borders with your fingernails. The logo could be better engraved,and the knot is glued directly in the handle so it doesn't have that metal ring like Plisson, (some)Omega or Semogue brushes.

Does all that bothers me? absolutely not! Its a great, great brush. I figured that all that could be solved with a three-digit price tag on it, but i totally love it the way it is.

And for your " porn-shave-vouyeur-delight"... MORE PICS:


[Image: IMG_2786.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2787.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2789.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2794.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2797.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2798.JPG]

[Image: IMG_2799.JPG]

[Image: WP_20140630_004.jpg]

[Image: WP_20140406_009.jpg]

[Image: WP_20140406_007.jpg]

[Image: SSctniq-vv7dTPFqjxj0b67tXP9ojDSpfXqYAmoV...14-h835-no]

[Image: IMG_3151.JPG]

4 447
Reply
 07-25-2014, 09:11 AM
#2
  • Agravic
  • Emeritus
  • Pennsylvania, USA
User Info
Nicely done, sir.
Thank you for sharing this comprehensive review.
Viva Brazil!

102 18,668
Reply
 07-25-2014, 09:47 AM
#3
  • goaman
  • Member
  • Lisbon, Portugal
User Info
Nice review my friend!!! Smile

2 152
Reply
 07-25-2014, 09:48 AM
#4
User Info
Can you speak more to the difference you note between the original fan knot vs the current bulb knot?

Thanks again for your wonderful review.

31 8,058
Reply
 07-25-2014, 09:58 AM
#5
  • Gago
  • Active Member
  • Rio de Janeirto
User Info
(07-25-2014, 09:48 AM)SharpSpine Wrote: Can you speak more to the difference you note between the original fan knot vs the current bulb knot?

Thanks again for your wonderful review.

Sure!

First of all, i need to say that you guys wont find the "fan shaped" (it was not supposed to be fan shaped. With time the brushes just became better made) knot. All brushes exported to US are from the most recent batch, and this "issue" was long ago solved.

The bulb shaped knot was a improvement for sure. It gave a even greater backbone to the knot, and a more luxurious feel in the face. Additionally the fibers became less "springly".

It was a great brush then, and its a wonderfull brush now.SmileSmile

4 447
Reply
 07-25-2014, 09:58 AM
#6
User Info
Excellent!
Congrats!

0 191
Reply
 07-25-2014, 12:41 PM
#7
User Info
Nice review, Gago. Smile

0 45
Reply
 07-25-2014, 01:29 PM
#8
  • Stützel
  • Junior Member
  • Rio de Janeiro - Brasil
User Info
Excellent!
Congrats!

0 14
Reply
 07-25-2014, 01:33 PM
#9
  • TheMonk
  • Super Moderator
  • Porto, Portugal
User Info
Very nicely done, Gabriel. Keep 'em coming! Smile

26 4,952
Reply
 07-25-2014, 01:40 PM
#10
  • Gago
  • Active Member
  • Rio de Janeirto
User Info
Many thanks, gents Shy

4 447
Reply
 07-25-2014, 01:50 PM
#11
User Info
Well done! Congrats!

2 1,443
Reply
 07-25-2014, 02:18 PM
#12
  • Deuce
  • Just a guy
  • Cave Creek
User Info
gago-Very much appreciated. I have been very impressed with the quality of the synth brushes. The Plisson is superb, and I now wait on my 2 Muhle brushes (HJM and the 23 mm silvertip type knot) . Nice to chat with you

19 753
Reply
 07-25-2014, 02:22 PM
#13
  • srgjazz
  • Senior Member
  • Santa Monica
User Info
Great post. Will keep an eye out for the next release.

48 684
Reply
 07-25-2014, 04:53 PM
#14
User Info
Well done, Gabriel!

0 375
Reply
 07-25-2014, 04:57 PM
#15
User Info
That was a nicely done comparison. Congrats Gabriel!

1 202
Reply
 07-25-2014, 05:04 PM
#16
User Info
Thank you Gabriel ! Very helpful review !!!

6 1,224
Reply
 07-25-2014, 05:17 PM
#17
  • ben74
  • Senior Member
  • Perth, Australia
User Info
Great review, thanks for sharing!

99 18,011
Reply
 07-25-2014, 06:29 PM
#18
User Info
thanx for the review !

1 495
Reply
 07-26-2014, 06:00 AM
#19
User Info
Great review. I haven't tried this brush but your observations are what I would expect. My constant issue with synthetics has always been that the loft is too high for adequate backbone. The Chubby 2 synthetic addressed this, but many felt the 49mm loft of the initial release was too low for the 28mm knot. These concerns may get addressed by the new release of CH2 synthetic, with a 52mm loft. In my mind, GC got it precisely right by setting a dense 25mm knot to a loft of 50-52mm. A GC knot in a beautiful Plisson handle would be an amazing brush. However, for $50 it looks like GC and Phil have a winner.

50 6,411
Reply
 07-26-2014, 07:43 AM
#20
User Info
Great review

0 24
Reply
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)