Page 1 of 1
Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Sun Oct 20, 2019 8:00 pm
by slackskin
I am a long time wet shaver and today was my first use of a Col Conk shaving soap. I rubbed the puck on my face as if a stick. The results, for me, were as good as any other plain glycerin-based shaving soap -- of which I have tried several. Given the very affordable price point, I was pleasantly surprised. I will use it again. Have others tried it? What was the experience?
Re: Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Sun Oct 20, 2019 10:44 pm
by CMur12
I've never tried Col Conk, but I have tried other glycerin-based soaps and I always liked them.
I sometimes think I should get some more and give it another try, as these soaps carry scent well. A good glycerin-based soap with a lime EO scent can be uplifting.
- Murray
Re: Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 4:22 pm
by John Rose
slackskin wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2019 8:00 pm... today was my first use of a Col Conk shaving soap. I rubbed the puck on my face as if a stick. The results, for me, were as good as any other plain glycerin-based shaving soap -- of which I have tried several. ...
Which scent was it?
Re: Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 6:12 pm
by EL Alamein
I've used Conk soap successfully about 20 some odd years ago. But since I've aged and gotten more sensitive I can't use it anymore. Tried it once in the last year (old cake from bygone days so may be a factor but seemed to be alright) and it caused a lot of irritation. It also lacked the cushion I find hard soaps provide.
For those that can use it I say good on them but for me, no more.
Chris
Re: Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:11 pm
by CMur12
I think the reason these soaps worked for me (though I haven't tried the Col Conk brand) is that I want maximal lubricity and minimal cushion.
I normally make my lather on the wet side to get this combination of characteristics, which, in turn, works well with a mild razor.
When I get more cushion, I feel like I have to battle it to get to the surface and make the cut.
- Murray
Re: Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:34 am
by FireDragon76
EL Alamein wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 6:12 pm
I've used Conk soap successfully about 20 some odd years ago. But since I've aged and gotten more sensitive I can't use it anymore. Tried it once in the last year (old cake from bygone days so may be a factor but seemed to be alright) and it caused a lot of irritation. It also lacked the cushion I find hard soaps provide.
For those that can use it I say good on them but for me, no more.
Chris
I liked how slick it was, but the Amber irritated my face alot. The scent is not really all that mild, so maybe it's a fragrance sensitivity. Also, like many cheap soaps, it's on the harsh, drying side.
Van Der Hagen Luxury or Deluxe are better choices as far as glycerin soaps go.
Re: Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:38 am
by FireDragon76
CMur12 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:11 pm
I think the reason these soaps worked for me (though I haven't tried the Col Conk brand) is that I want maximal lubricity and minimal cushion.
I normally make my lather on the wet side to get this combination of characteristics, which, in turn, works well with a mild razor.
When I get more cushion, I feel like I have to battle it to get to the surface and make the cut.
- Murray
That works for some people, though I generally prefer at least some cushion. Conk has almost none.
If you are doing the "beard reduction" approach you want some cushion just because you are doing multiple passes. With Conk I can only do one pass then it's time to wrap up the shave.
Re: Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 1:39 pm
by CMur12
Most shavers do want more cushion. It just doesn't work for me, and I use the beard reduction approach.
As long as I get good lubricity, I get the protection I need.
- Murray
Re: Col Conk Soap -- a plreasant surprise
Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:51 pm
by slackskin
@ John Rose - you asked which scent. I prefer muted-to-none (long story) so used Almond, which provided a negligible scent as desired.