08-25-2012, 04:27 AM
#1
User Info
Hi all,

I'm going to be adding one of these to the pack shortly.

I was just wondering if there is much of a difference in use?

Will the classic 2 clash with my Chubby 1?

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

Dipesh

7 1,179
Reply
 08-25-2012, 07:39 AM
#2
User Info
The 1 is slightly smaller than a CH1, the 2 is slightly larger than a CH1. Both are less densely packed IIRC.

9 2,988
Reply
 08-25-2012, 09:04 AM
#3
User Info
In the Simpsons catalog online at Em's Place, the approximate total heights listed are CL1 80mm, CL2 82mm, and CH1 85mm.

184 12,003
Reply
 08-25-2012, 09:22 AM
#4
  • Teiste
  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Salt Lake City,UT
User Info
I need to find out that by myself.I have a Classic 1 which is a great brush,and I have been thinking in getting a Classic 2 in a couple months ahead.The Chubby 1 would have to wait.

86 7,123
Reply
 08-25-2012, 11:56 AM
#5
User Info
(08-25-2012, 09:22 AM)Teiste Wrote: I need to find out that by myself.I have a Classic 1 which is a great brush,and I have been thinking in getting a Classic 2 in a couple months ahead.The Chubby 1 would have to wait.

You don't have a Chubby!? I'll need to lend you mine.

9 2,988
Reply
 08-25-2012, 01:12 PM
#6
User Info
Thanks for the response guys. I'm still not sure, I may go classic 2.

7 1,179
Reply
 08-25-2012, 02:28 PM
#7
  • Teiste
  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Salt Lake City,UT
User Info
(08-25-2012, 11:56 AM)asharperrazor Wrote:
(08-25-2012, 09:22 AM)Teiste Wrote: I need to find out that by myself.I have a Classic 1 which is a great brush,and I have been thinking in getting a Classic 2 in a couple months ahead.The Chubby 1 would have to wait.

You don't have a Chubby!? I'll need to lend you mine.

Lee,I had a Chubby 2 Somerset best badger two band on my hands,and that thing was very big,almost like a Kent BK12 brush,so I didnt go for it,either for the Chubby 1.

This is the brush Im talking about (the loft was over 56mm) :

[Image: P1220427.jpg]

I wont get a Chubby 2,since its too big,but a Chubby 1 is a MUST for me,but sometimes I wonder if theres a better brush than the Duke 3 or the Classic 1....Huh Only one way to find it out!Biggrin

86 7,123
Reply
 08-25-2012, 03:41 PM
#8
User Info
56mm is a full 10mm more than a current production CH1!

I dunno Teiste, I wonder if there's a Simpsons better than a CH1 in super....

Looks like we'll have to trade notes. Biggrin

9 2,988
Reply
 08-25-2012, 03:49 PM
#9
  • Teiste
  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Salt Lake City,UT
User Info
(08-25-2012, 03:41 PM)asharperrazor Wrote: 56mm is a full 10mm more than a current production CH1!

I dunno Teiste, I wonder if there's a Simpsons better than a CH1 in super....

Looks like we'll have to trade notes. Biggrin

I know that eventually I will get the Classic 2 and,someday,the Chubby 1.
I remember Mr Gary Young (please Gary, correct me if Im wrong) writing about that the best Simpson series were the Duke,Chubby and also,the Wee Scot.Well,Im sure they are,since the Duke 3 and the Wee Scot are fantastic brushes on their own league,but I will add that the Classic 1 is another superb brush,as,Im sure the Classic 2 is.

86 7,123
Reply
 08-25-2012, 04:03 PM
#10
User Info
The Tulip is so ergonomical though. The hair density is good too. Bulb shape is a little extreme and the hole is pretty deep.

I'd like a Chubby in a Tulip handle.

9 2,988
Reply
 08-25-2012, 05:20 PM
#11
  • oscar11
  • Senior Member
  • North Dakota
User Info
I've spent some time at Superior Shaves web site looking at brushes. Most of the Classic 2's are 23 to 24mm with knot diameters (only one is at 23mm) and from 42-47mm in loft. You know there is a superb face lathering brush in there someplace.Biggrin
And I'd bet we could find it.

12 743
Reply
 08-25-2012, 08:27 PM
#12
User Info
Teiste, you should try the Chubby 1 in Super Two-Band. Wow, these are very nice brushes.
Good luck to you, Dipesh. Why don't you just get both? Biggrin

75 20,883
Reply
 08-25-2012, 09:14 PM
#13
User Info
(08-25-2012, 08:27 PM)celestino Wrote: Teiste, you should try the Chubby 1 in Super Two-Band. Wow, these are very nice brushes.
Good luck to you, Dipesh. Why don't you just get both? Biggrin

It looks like this is going to be the case I think...

But it will be as and when with a little clear out Somewhere I think.

7 1,179
Reply
 08-25-2012, 09:40 PM
#14
User Info
Chubby .5, Chubby 1, & Chubby 1.5? Might as well throw in a Chubby 2 for good measure.

Just sayin'.... Biggrin

9 2,988
Reply
 08-25-2012, 09:46 PM
#15
  • Teiste
  • Moderator Emeritus
  • Salt Lake City,UT
User Info
(08-25-2012, 04:03 PM)asharperrazor Wrote: The Tulip is so ergonomical though. The hair density is good too. Bulb shape is a little extreme and the hole is pretty deep.

I'd like a Chubby in a Tulip handle.

Yah,Im testing a Somerset (David Carter I think) Tulip 2 in super badger,courtesy of David,and I truly like the handle a lot,while the hair is very,very nice.However,for some reason,Im more attracted to the Classic/Duke Simpson handles.

86 7,123
Reply
 08-26-2012, 01:05 AM
#16
  • ben74
  • Administrator
  • Perth, Australia
User Info
I prefer large brushes, but the Simpsons Chubby 1 Manchurian is currently my favourite brush (closely followed by the Semogue TSN LE). I had thought (since acquiring it) that the Duke 3 Manchurian was the ultimate brush, but I've really been blown away by the CH1. I also very recently acquired the Classic 1 Manchurian. However, I'm yet to use the Classic 1 (blame the Semogue). The CL1 looks better than I thought it would. It appears dense, not quite as dense as the CH, but denser than the Duke. The shoulders on the CL1 are slender, IMO this is one of the more prominent differences between the CL1 and CH1. The CL1 is densely packed, but in a much more slender handle, but I guess comparisons between the CL1 and CH1 are not really the focus of this thread.

I don't own a CL2 and I've never used one, but the Simpsons website indicates that both fit the travel case, so I can't image there is a difference in girth. The site states the "Classic 1, turned with 1 ring has slightly less hair than the Classic 2 turned with 2 rings." I presume that must relate to density. The heights are listed as 80 versus 82 and I would surmise that the 2mm height difference is attributable to the handle and not the loft. The CH1 is listed as 85mm.

Given this information and Dipesh's original question, IMO:

The CL1 and the CL2 are both going to feel different in the hand to your CH1.
To clarify the CH1 is definitely wider than both.
The CL1 must be less dense than the CL2 (as it apparently has slightly less hair).
I'm confident that the CL2 will be less dense than the CH1.

So, I'm of the opinion that we should classify the CL brushes in terms of CH as:
CL1 = CH0.5
CL2 = CH0.75
(and the CH1 as... CH1)
Therefore the difference between your CH1 and CL2 will 25% less significant than the CH1 and the CL1 and your wallet will be just over 10% lighter... Tongue

Seriously, I think there will be minimal difference between the CL1 and CL2. And given that, a much more noticeable difference, regardless of which you chose, between (either) CL and the CH, but perhaps Mark can provide a better answer!

91 17,848
Reply
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)