Shaving the wallet not beard

Economist wrote this on Mar 16th 2006

“For the most cynical shavers, this evolution is mere marketing. Twin blades seemed plausible. Three were a bit unlikely. Four, ridiculous. And five seems beyond the pale. Few people, though, seem willing to bet that Gillette’s five-bladed Fusion is the end of the road for razor-blade escalation. More blades may seem impossible for the moment—though strictly speaking the Fusion has six, because it has a single blade on its flip-side for tricky areas—but anyone of a gambling persuasion might want to examine the relationship between how many blades a razor has, and the date each new design was introduced. “

 I wrote this 6 months back (Sep 2005)

Gillette 5 blades – cuts more wallet than beard

Problem - When I shave with 3 blades, it takes more strokes to cleanly cut the stubs. or worse some show up above the skin (not a clean shave).

Why ?

1. blade can’t reach low enough on stub (otherwise it might cut skin)
2. blade is at angle to the stub (hair stubs grow in multi directions)
3. blade didn’t pass over the area (curves of jaw /skin)

So…

Put another blade following the first one. As the first blade cuts and lifts the hair stub, second blade cuts the extra stub that peeps out of the skin.
Good logic. But why have 3 rather than 2. Because 3 is better than 2. and 5 is better than 3. Didn’t we learn our Maths!!

But … That doesnot solve the problem due to 2 & 3 reasons for bad shave listed above.

Is Gillette solving the problem any better with 5 blades than 3 blades. If not, why should anyone pay more money because Gillette R&D’s ineffectiveness.

Thanks Mark Hurst for your post on this