Fusion Pro Glide
Fusion Pro Glide
What are our opinions of of the latest travesty from Gillette called the Pro Glide? They seem to be trying to tell us that a thinner blade is better, which I doubt.
Got one free from Gillette and just tried it today. Very disappointing. It is a powered unit, seems to move across my face and head very slowly. I experienced a slight nick on my lower lip, and a sensation of drag. It also seemed to pull whiskers from time to time.
Over all, it was worth what I paid for it, and at the price of cartridges ($4+), I'll not be buying any more.
Shick's new razor is far superior, but probably will be a travel razor, not a daily shaver.
Over all, it was worth what I paid for it, and at the price of cartridges ($4+), I'll not be buying any more.
Shick's new razor is far superior, but probably will be a travel razor, not a daily shaver.
Jim
-
- Assistant Dean SMFU
- Posts: 9449
- Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 10:32 am
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- rustyblade
- Shaving Paparazzo
- Posts: 10472
- Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 5:27 pm
- Location: Ontario
When I measured DE blades a while back they all seemed to be about the same thickness, so it makes me wonder if making a razor blade thinner actually does anything. Surely some DE blade manufacturer would have tried this? The polish of the edge and coating makes a bigger difference.notthesharpest wrote:I'm sure a thinner blade can be better, if it's made right and implemented in the right way. Whether this design is the way to do it, I don't know - and I probably won't find out except by reports from others.
No doubt the thinner blade and edge would also degrade faster.
But hey...who am I to question such successful marketing?
Richard
-
- Assistant Dean SMFU
- Posts: 9449
- Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 10:32 am
- Location: Vancouver, BC
I haven't seen these new blades.
I think a thinner blade probably wouldn't cut better, but maybe flex becomes desirable in a cartridge. Usually Gillette's marketing avoids outright lies, and instead focusses on things that are not actually important - perhaps that trend has continued here.
Thinner blades use less metal, which makes them cheaper to produce. This increases the amount Gillette can shave off of each paycheque. So they really DO shave better!
I think a thinner blade probably wouldn't cut better, but maybe flex becomes desirable in a cartridge. Usually Gillette's marketing avoids outright lies, and instead focusses on things that are not actually important - perhaps that trend has continued here.
Thinner blades use less metal, which makes them cheaper to produce. This increases the amount Gillette can shave off of each paycheque. So they really DO shave better!
I've used the ProGlide daily for the last couple of weeks and am perfectly satisfied with it. It performs like the old Fusion, except it feels a tad milder. I'm getting two or three more shaves from a cartridge, perhaps because of the improved coating or because the blades are more rigidly mounted in the cartridge frame. I look upon this razor as nothing more than a refinement of an existing design, one that has worked well for me during the last four years.
Porter
Not that one would want to but can the older fusion carts attach to the Pro Glide handle? Personally I have tried thick and thin blades in all possible variations and I have found that the thinner ones ware out faster thatn the thicker ones. I still do not appreciate Gillette's one size fits all approach to shaving. Since every face is different no one blade can be all things to all people. What is your opinion?
JBC
Nuts about wet shaving
Nuts about wet shaving
JBC - The ProGlide package says that all Fusion cartridges fit all Fusion handles. I haven't tried mixing and matching them, however.
I agree that one size doesn't fit all in shaving. It's good to have choices. The Fusion is my choice, but there are plenty of men who prefer another multiblade like the Mach 3, and of course there are others who get better results with various DE's and blades, or even straights.
I agree that one size doesn't fit all in shaving. It's good to have choices. The Fusion is my choice, but there are plenty of men who prefer another multiblade like the Mach 3, and of course there are others who get better results with various DE's and blades, or even straights.
Porter
-
- Posts: 3102
- Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:55 pm
I am skeptical about the “thinner” blade(s) claim. After reading the Verhoven paper I don’t think they actually make blades any thinner in a meaningful way. I believe Verhoven said thinness maxes out at 4000k grit after that it’s all polishing of the sides and reducing friction. The industrial companies achieve this via the teflon coatings. Perhaps Gillette is spending more time polishing the bevel more then coating it? Maybe they’re reducing the thickness of the back end of the blade which is irrelevant and would amount to only the saving of resources?
Whatever they’re doing I’d be willing to gamble that sticking with a DE or a Straight would be preferable to switching.
Chris
Whatever they’re doing I’d be willing to gamble that sticking with a DE or a Straight would be preferable to switching.
Chris
I had two reactions to the commercial - the first being skepticism at the thin blade claim, and the second being a profound hope, on behalf of all men who might use the Pro Glide on their faces, that the angle in the animation isn't representative of the angle of the actual razor.
(I use a Fusion [whatever-the-previous-model-is - amateur glide?] on my head, and it's great for that. I did try it on my face and got a close shave with a tingling face that warned me not to try it two days in a row. A head is a much easier shave than a face.)
(I use a Fusion [whatever-the-previous-model-is - amateur glide?] on my head, and it's great for that. I did try it on my face and got a close shave with a tingling face that warned me not to try it two days in a row. A head is a much easier shave than a face.)
Give us the luxuries, and we will forgo the necessities.
Give a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire, he'll be toasty for the rest of his life.
Dominic
Give a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire, he'll be toasty for the rest of his life.
Dominic
- Blue As A Jewel
- Posts: 3834
- Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:14 am
- Location: Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Head? Shave??? But... but, but... you're avatar... the locks! Say it ain't so!!!ichabod wrote:I had two reactions to the commercial - the first being skepticism at the thin blade claim, and the second being a profound hope, on behalf of all men who might use the Pro Glide on their faces, that the angle in the animation isn't representative of the angle of the actual razor.
(I use a Fusion [whatever-the-previous-model-is - amateur glide?] on my head, and it's great for that. I did try it on my face and got a close shave with a tingling face that warned me not to try it two days in a row. A head is a much easier shave than a face.)
I've never shaved with a Fusion, but have with a Mach3 while I was living in both Toronto and Winnipeg. It's a deceiving shave -smooth and quick - but not sustainable over the long term. I even got to the point where I said, "it's not too bad - it'll do" - but now that I've rediscovered the beautiful shave I get with my DE's (and occasional Feather straight), good n'uff will never do.
- Ravi -
You can mistrust me less than you can mistrust him. Trust me.
You can mistrust me less than you can mistrust him. Trust me.
-
- Assistant Dean SMFU
- Posts: 9449
- Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 10:32 am
- Location: Vancouver, BC
-
- Posts: 3102
- Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:55 pm
Yes, for that purpose back end thickness it relevent but it has no bearing on how keen the blade is.notthesharpest wrote:I'm not really going to defend Gillette
But thickness of the back end of the blade is indeed relevant, if you want it to be thin enough to flex considerably in use. You never want that with a straight or a DE, so it's not relevant for those purposes, but for cartridges...?
Chris
-
- Assistant Dean SMFU
- Posts: 9449
- Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 10:32 am
- Location: Vancouver, BC
None whatever. If they are advertising that a thin blade is sharper, then they're off base.EL Alamein wrote:Yes, for that purpose back end thickness it relevent but it has no bearing on how keen the blade is.notthesharpest wrote:I'm not really going to defend Gillette
But thickness of the back end of the blade is indeed relevant, if you want it to be thin enough to flex considerably in use. You never want that with a straight or a DE, so it's not relevant for those purposes, but for cartridges...?
I still doubt the wisdom of making the blade thinner than normal. I belive that there is a double edge blade that is thinner than normal and I have not heard anyone say anything good about the thinner blades. I believe that Gillette made a thin blade at one point for its double edge razors and latter removed them from the market becuase they were not particularly effective. Trouble is that these events occured long before I was born and my pop is one of those people that doesn't think and follows the crowd. If he actually thought about what he is doing he would be wet shaving like the rest of us here.
JBC
Nuts about wet shaving
Nuts about wet shaving
- paperpundit
- Posts: 2260
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:34 am
- Location: Brandon, FL
As I've always said Porter, if it works for you, use it.
I always enjoyed the shaves I got with a Fusion, but, alas, the bumps and ingrowns would start after a few days.
Still, I might try one on my head in the coming days since its SO BLOODY HOT here right now!
I always enjoyed the shaves I got with a Fusion, but, alas, the bumps and ingrowns would start after a few days.
Still, I might try one on my head in the coming days since its SO BLOODY HOT here right now!
Jack
"All you need is love, love...love is all you need."
"All you need is love, love...love is all you need."
I shave my head in the morning, that photo was taken in the evening. . .Blue As A Jewel wrote:Head? Shave??? But... but, but... you're avatar... the locks! Say it ain't so!!!ichabod wrote:I had two reactions to the commercial - the first being skepticism at the thin blade claim, and the second being a profound hope, on behalf of all men who might use the Pro Glide on their faces, that the angle in the animation isn't representative of the angle of the actual razor.
(I use a Fusion [whatever-the-previous-model-is - amateur glide?] on my head, and it's great for that. I did try it on my face and got a close shave with a tingling face that warned me not to try it two days in a row. A head is a much easier shave than a face.)
I've never shaved with a Fusion, but have with a Mach3 while I was living in both Toronto and Winnipeg. It's a deceiving shave -smooth and quick - but not sustainable over the long term. I even got to the point where I said, "it's not too bad - it'll do" - but now that I've rediscovered the beautiful shave I get with my DE's (and occasional Feather straight), good n'uff will never do.
Give us the luxuries, and we will forgo the necessities.
Give a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire, he'll be toasty for the rest of his life.
Dominic
Give a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire, he'll be toasty for the rest of his life.
Dominic