07-31-2019, 08:14 PM
#1
User Info
Thanks to Glenn's website covering the history of Gillette's adjustable razors, I found a very important number... the number is one million, five hundred and ninety nine thousand,  seven hundred and ninety three. As in US patent number 1 599 793, that is.

To quote from the patent description, it
Quote:...relates particularly to an index'adjusting device for use in connection with safety razors of the Gillette type wherein a flexible and elastic blade is provided with cutting edges that are adjustable toward and from the guard member of the razor
In short, it's about how to make an adjustable razor adjustable.
[Image: US1599793-drawings-page-1.png]
As can be seen from the image, everything interesting is happening in the head or right below it. Adjusting the dial 16 makes the top cap move up and down in relation to the base plate, while the base plate stays fixed in relationship to the handle. In order to remove or insert a blade, the shaver would turn the dial around and around to unscrew the cap. In other words, this very early version of the Gillette Adjustable works much the same way a Merkur Progress does - although without the central bar the Progress have.
I don't think Gillette ever manufactured - apart from prototypes - this razor, although it must be pointed out that the method of adjusting this razor bears a lot of resemblance to how Gillette suggested one could "adjust" an Old type razor back when it was first offered:
Quote:If a close shave is desired, turn the end of the handle back a little and the edges of the blade will lift slightly from the guard thus permitting closer contact with the face. A moments practice will show the proper adjustment.
The patent is expired, and thus anyone can make a razor like this today; however bear in mind that other aspects of a good adjustable may still be covered by patents. It would still be interesting if a machinist decided to have a go though, so we could compare how far this version is from the other adjustable safety razors.

3 6,492
Reply
 08-01-2019, 04:35 AM
#2
User Info
I don't believe Gillette had anything to do with this patent. It would have been assigned to the Gillette corporation if it had been done under their purview or for their benefit It is cited in the first Toggle patent application but that's really neither here nor there.

In the US Segal introduced their click indexed adjustable prior to Gillette and likely would have been sued by Gillette (as they had done re Segal's TTO) if Gillette had a remotely relevant patent in its possession at the time. Likewise in France and Germany where indexed adjustable DEs were popular long before the Toggle was imagined (eg Gibbs 1937), it doesn't seem likely Gillette had any relevant patents registered until much later.

By the way, this was not Schieren's first adjustable patent, the earlier patent was applied for in 1921 (No. 1445452).

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
[Image: 673c7299e47b21ebf603b9420fd25044.jpg]

2 407
Reply
 08-01-2019, 11:26 PM
#3
User Info
(08-01-2019, 04:35 AM)jmudrick Wrote: I don't believe Gillette had anything to do with this patent. It would have been assigned to the Gillette corporation if it had been done under their purview or for their benefit It is cited in the first Toggle patent application but that's really neither here nor there.

In the US Segal introduced their click indexed adjustable prior to Gillette and likely would have been sued by Gillette (as they had done re Segal's TTO) if Gillette had a remotely relevant patent in its possession at the time. Likewise in France and Germany where indexed adjustable DEs were popular long before the Toggle was imagined (eg Gibbs 1937), it doesn't seem likely Gillette had any relevant patents registered until much later.

By the way, this was not Schieren's first adjustable patent, the earlier patent was applied for in 1921 (No. 1445452).

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
[Image: 673c7299e47b21ebf603b9420fd25044.jpg]

Thank you for this earlier patent. I will check into it and update my website accordingly.

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 12:04 AM
#4
User Info
[Image: d138480eb41436b7f396e19d3b40f5c9.jpg]

I found this earlier adjustable patent but it is not a double edge. As far as George Arthur Schieren and his double edge patent goes he was not associated with Gillette. His company was some kind of leather goods operation. Maybe because the old type was considered by K C Gillette to be adjustable, they didn’t feel another patent was necessary yet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 12:34 AM
#5
User Info
[Image: 986df3c904c7c5966ccd524fcb3cad4c.jpg]

Gillette’s original patent 775134 says his razor is adjustable. It wasn’t until the introduction of the one piece razor with tto (like 1935) that real or better adjustability was needed by Gillette. But it would take them another 20 years to deliver.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 01:02 AM
#6
User Info
So, from 1903 to 1937 Gillette had 3 piece razors that he believed were adjustable. Others would disagree as to how convenient or accurate is the adjustability of a 3 piece razor. But again Gillette considered his 3 piece razors as adjustable. However when the one piece was introduced to make it easier to change a blade and therefore more blades would be sold (meaning more profit). That is Gillette caused a problem with introduction of the Sheraton and Aristocratic tto razors. Yes Gillette sold more blades because they were easier to change but he introduced YMMV and the quest to find the perfect razor handle. I consider this a big disservice to the shaving customer. All the tto one piece razors from 1937 to 1958 did not work effectively for a good portion of Gillette’s customers. They knew they had a problem and introduced the trio of super speeds. Red tip - blue tip etc. But the normal consumer was probably upset that they had to purchase multiple razors to find the right “fit”. Then came the Fatboy. Tto plus true adjustability. Gillette then had one razor that could meet the needs of a diversity of faces and beard and skin type PLUS easy blade changing so lazy people didn’t push their blades longer than they should. Everyone was happy and that is why the Fatboy is so so so great!! Lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 01:38 AM
#7
User Info
(08-02-2019, 12:04 AM)glennconti Wrote: [Image: d138480eb41436b7f396e19d3b40f5c9.jpg]

I found this earlier adjustable patent but it is not a double edge. As far as George Arthur Schieren and his double edge patent goes he was not associated with Gillette. His company was some kind of leather goods operation. Maybe because the old type was considered by K C Gillette to be adjustable, they didn’t feel another patent was necessary yet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The key to the early adjustable patents was the indexing not the adjustability.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

2 407
Reply
 08-02-2019, 01:41 AM
#8
User Info
(08-02-2019, 01:02 AM)glennconti Wrote: So, from 1903 to 1937 Gillette had 3 piece razors that he believed were adjustable. Others would disagree as to how convenient or accurate is the adjustability of a 3 piece razor. But again Gillette considered his 3 piece razors as adjustable. However when the one piece was introduced to make it easier to change a blade and therefore more blades would be sold (meaning more profit). That is Gillette caused a problem with introduction of the Sheraton and Aristocratic tto razors. Yes Gillette sold more blades because they were easier to change but he introduced YMMV and the quest to find the perfect razor handle. I consider this a big disservice to the shaving customer. All the tto one piece razors from 1937 to 1958 did not work effectively for a good portion of Gillette’s customers. They knew they had a problem and introduced the trio of super speeds. Red tip - blue tip etc. But the normal consumer was probably upset that they had to purchase multiple razors to find the right “fit”. Then came the Fatboy. Tto plus true adjustability. Gillette then had one razor that could meet the needs of a diversity of faces and beard and skin type PLUS easy blade changing so lazy people didn’t push their blades longer than they should. Everyone was happy and that is why the Fatboy is so so so great!! Lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LOL. Marketing is what it was friend. Fatboy free and loving life.

King Gillette was dead in 1932 and would have had nothing to do with the TTO razors. He likely had little to do with the New razors either. He was wandering around Palm Springs in a bathrobe in 1930 (or losing money in real estate).

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

2 407
Reply
 08-02-2019, 02:48 AM
#9
User Info
Yes Gillette was dead before the Tto. I was using Gillette the man and Gillette the company interchangeably. Fatboy free? You are not a hater are you? PS while the Fatboy was great and iconic, the Slim was a technological improvement, so in Gillette’s eyes (the company not the man - he was dead by then) the Slim was even better. One razor to rule them all. That is a single product to provide customer satisfaction to 99% of all customers. By the introduction of the Platinum-Plus blade, most all people could be satisfied with just one blade and one razor (the 109 Super Adjustable). YMMV? - apparently Gillette (the company) didn’t think so. Gillette (the company) had perfected the DE shaving system, but they didn’t care. They needed profits and proprietary technology so they moved every body to cartridges.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 03:45 AM
#10
User Info
(08-02-2019, 01:38 AM)jmudrick Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 12:04 AM)glennconti Wrote: [Image: d138480eb41436b7f396e19d3b40f5c9.jpg]

I found this earlier adjustable patent but it is not a double edge. As far as George Arthur Schieren and his double edge patent goes he was not associated with Gillette. His company was some kind of leather goods operation. Maybe because the old type was considered by K C Gillette to be adjustable, they didn’t feel another patent was necessary yet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The key to the early adjustable patents was the indexing not the adjustability.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Makes sense. If I get what you are calling indexing properly, the Gillette Adjustables are superior. Even now the Progress gives me trouble every time I change a blade. People need a setting system that is reliable so that a preferred number can be easily found. By indexing you mean finding a particular preferred adjustment setting very easily?

Oh and by the way the Superman Adjustable was an adjustment to the guard to change exposure with no indexing (a number and a position indicator).

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 04:06 AM
#11
  • chazt
  • Senior Member
  • Queens, NY
User Info
(08-02-2019, 02:48 AM)glennconti Wrote: Yes Gillette was dead before the Tto. I was using Gillette the man and Gillette the company interchangeably. Fatboy free? You are not a hater are you? PS while the Fatboy was great and iconic, the Slim was a technological improvement, so in Gillette’s eyes (the company not the man - he was dead by then) the Slim was even better. One razor to rule them all. That is a single product to provide customer satisfaction to 99% of all customers. By the introduction of the Platinum-Plus blade, most all people could be satisfied with just one blade and one razor (the 109 Super Adjustable). YMMV?  - apparently Gillette (the company) didn’t think so. Gillette (the company) had perfected the DE shaving system, but they didn’t care. They needed profits and proprietary technology so they moved every body to cartridges.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is pretty brilliant as far as combinations go. Yesterday’s shave was as you describe, albeit with an IP platinum coated blade.

15 3,598
Reply
 08-02-2019, 04:25 AM
#12
User Info
(08-02-2019, 02:48 AM)glennconti Wrote: Yes Gillette was dead before the Tto. I was using Gillette the man and Gillette the company interchangeably. Fatboy free? You are not a hater are you? PS while the Fatboy was great and iconic, the Slim was a technological improvement, so in Gillette’s eyes (the company not the man - he was dead by then) the Slim was even better. One razor to rule them all. That is a single product to provide customer satisfaction to 99% of all customers. By the introduction of the Platinum-Plus blade, most all people could be satisfied with just one blade and one razor (the 109 Super Adjustable). YMMV? - apparently Gillette (the company) didn’t think so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hater no, it's a fine razor I'm just not into cults and I have 150 or so other razors I prefer.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

2 407
Reply
 08-02-2019, 04:50 AM
#13
User Info
[Image: 6a2b566d4780d4ee9d37aa1d878c876b.jpg]

Not in the top 150? You sir are one of the point 3 percent (100 - 99.7).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 05:58 AM
#14
  • chazt
  • Senior Member
  • Queens, NY
User Info
I’m at the apex of the curve. Setting 5 is my sweet spot.

15 3,598
Reply
 08-02-2019, 08:05 AM
#15
User Info
(08-02-2019, 04:50 AM)glennconti Wrote: [Image: 6a2b566d4780d4ee9d37aa1d878c876b.jpg]

Not in the top 150? You sir are one of the point 3 percent (100 - 99.7).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cult. Has nothing to do with gap or exposure. Aggressive Le Coq to mild Stahly there are myriad designs that interest me more. Are you aware of other manufacturers than Gillette?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

2 407
Reply
 08-02-2019, 09:01 AM
#16
User Info
(08-02-2019, 08:05 AM)jmudrick Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 04:50 AM)glennconti Wrote: [Image: 6a2b566d4780d4ee9d37aa1d878c876b.jpg]

Not in the top 150? You sir are one of the point 3 percent (100 - 99.7).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cult. Has nothing to do with gap or exposure. Aggressive Le Coq to mild Stahly there are myriad designs that interest me more. Are you aware of other manufacturers than Gillette?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Sure my friend I have about 100 different razors myself. For me the RAD killer was a Wolfman Dual head - Open Comb/Solid Bar stainless. But, think about it... What are you searching for with your purchasing 150 different razors? Many people could just select a good old Gillette Adjustable and stop there and be happy.

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 10:16 AM
#17
User Info
(08-02-2019, 09:01 AM)glennconti Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 08:05 AM)jmudrick Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 04:50 AM)glennconti Wrote: [Image: 6a2b566d4780d4ee9d37aa1d878c876b.jpg]

Not in the top 150? You sir are one of the point 3 percent (100 - 99.7).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cult. Has nothing to do with gap or exposure. Aggressive Le Coq to mild Stahly there are myriad designs that interest me more. Are you aware of other manufacturers than Gillette?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Sure my friend I have about 100 different razors myself. For me the RAD killer was a Wolfman Dual head - Open Comb/Solid Bar stainless. But, think about it... What are you searching for with your purchasing 150 different razors? Many people could just select a good old Gillette Adjustable and stop there and be happy.
Not searching for anything (ok maybe a Leresche 77), I'm into variety and history, not particularly interested in settling down with one . If I were a Gillette adjustable would not make the short list, regardless of what these many people might do.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

2 407
Reply
 08-02-2019, 04:09 PM
#18
User Info
(08-02-2019, 10:16 AM)jmudrick Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 09:01 AM)glennconti Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 08:05 AM)jmudrick Wrote: Cult. Has nothing to do with gap or exposure. Aggressive Le Coq to mild Stahly there are myriad designs that interest me more. Are you aware of other manufacturers than Gillette?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

Sure my friend I have about 100 different razors myself. For me the RAD killer was a Wolfman Dual head - Open Comb/Solid Bar stainless. But, think about it... What are you searching for with your purchasing 150 different razors? Many people could just select a good old Gillette Adjustable and stop there and be happy.
Not searching for anything (ok maybe a Leresche 77), I'm into variety and history,  not particularly interested in settling down with one . If I were a Gillette adjustable would not make the short list, regardless of what these many people might do.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk




Well thank you in any case! Your commentary has helped me improve my web site on this page: Pre-History of Adjustables

I added the concept of indexing as required for proper adjustability (I assumed it but now I have made it explicit), I have used the prior patent from 1921 (US1445452) and specified that it was not a Gillette patent. Thanks again.

0 62
Reply
 08-02-2019, 04:17 PM
#19
User Info
(08-02-2019, 04:09 PM)glennconti Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 10:16 AM)jmudrick Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 09:01 AM)glennconti Wrote: Sure my friend I have about 100 different razors myself. For me the RAD killer was a Wolfman Dual head - Open Comb/Solid Bar stainless. But, think about it... What are you searching for with your purchasing 150 different razors? Many people could just select a good old Gillette Adjustable and stop there and be happy.
Not searching for anything (ok maybe a Leresche 77), I'm into variety and history,  not particularly interested in settling down with one . If I were a Gillette adjustable would not make the short list, regardless of what these many people might do.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk




Well thank you in any case! Your commentary has helped me improve my web site on this page: Pre-History of Adjustables

I added the concept of indexing as required for proper adjustability (I assumed it but now I have made it explicit), I have used the prior patent from 1921 (US1445452) and specified that it was not a Gillette patent. Thanks again.
You're very welcome .

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

2 407
Reply
 08-02-2019, 04:37 PM
#20
User Info
(08-02-2019, 04:09 PM)glennconti Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 10:16 AM)jmudrick Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 09:01 AM)glennconti Wrote: Sure my friend I have about 100 different razors myself. For me the RAD killer was a Wolfman Dual head - Open Comb/Solid Bar stainless. But, think about it... What are you searching for with your purchasing 150 different razors? Many people could just select a good old Gillette Adjustable and stop there and be happy.
Not searching for anything (ok maybe a Leresche 77), I'm into variety and history,  not particularly interested in settling down with one . If I were a Gillette adjustable would not make the short list, regardless of what these many people might do.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk




Well thank you in any case! Your commentary has helped me improve my web site on this page: Pre-History of Adjustables

I added the concept of indexing as required for proper adjustability (I assumed it but now I have made it explicit), I have used the prior patent from 1921 (US1445452) and specified that it was not a Gillette patent. Thanks again.
Nice website .

If I can make one historical observation around the development of the TTO. I think it's worth nothing that while you give the impression that Gillette solved the TTO problem, Gillette was in fact responding to competitors who had beaten them to it, ASR who introduced the Micromatic TTO series in late 1930, and Segal, who introduced their TTO DE months later.

When Gillette introduced their TTO technology for the Aristocrat in '34 Segal sued for patent infringement. While that case sat Gillette went after Segal in a counter lawsuit by purchasing a prior TTO patent and cllaimng Segal had infringed upon it. The courts ultimately found in Segsl's favor, finding that the old 1925 O'Malley patent had nothing to do with Segsl's design, not for that matter that of the Aristocrat as Gillette had claimed.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jzJoC8B...p=drivesdk

Segsl's adjustable TTO razor was patented in 1933 with the click index version probably introduced around 1946.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
[Image: 29a6425c8a055c78098981e9df8cc299.jpg]


[Image: 9cd50c137c1c6b651af7cbf6658e732d.jpg]

Gem Micromatic was announced immediately after patent issuance in 1930.

[Image: af14d84ee4bd15ceba65ba4d8047eb77.jpg]

2 407
Reply
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)