synthetics, synthetic badger

[Bezoar]

FM HIS synthetic brushes claim to be a synthetic badger type of brush. small diameter knots with short to medium loft. seem good, low cost and west coast shaving.

My issue is I have been seeing synthetic "badger" brushes having the same prices as genuine badger brushes from kent and vulfix. My question is on actual performance.

 

[Blademonkey]

FM HIS synthetic brushes claim to be a synthetic badger type of brush. small diameter knots with short to medium loft. seem good, low cost and west coast shaving.

My issue is I have been seeing synthetic "badger" brushes having the same prices as genuine badger brushes from kent and vulfix. My question is on actual performance.

You have more than one issue.

 

[Steve Bowles]

My Muhle synths seem softer than my badgers, but still work well with creams and croaps. I tend to go for the real badger when reaching for the Haslinger.

 

[Bezoar]

so no real quantifiable help then.

 

[Steve Bowles]

How do you quantify a subjective non-empirical data set? The way a brush performs is completely subjective; you like a brush or you don't. I use synths on creams because there isn't any resistance to brush on cream; I use badgers because the ones I have have a shorter loft than the synths and can really dig into the soap.

 

[nick_s]

so no real quantifiable help then.

It is all down to personal preference. Personally for me, all the synths I've tried have a quality about them that natural hair doesn't have when wet (the synths are far too springy, leading to a bit of a lather party in the bathroom). I find I can't dig in to the face when building a face lather with my synths in anywhere near the same way I can with my badger/boar brushes.

I'd give one of the cheaper synths a bash (say the RazoRock range) that way you know one way or the other if you're a fan

 

[Bezoar]

well that's what I have a abeen afraid of. its bad enough trying to decide if a badger brush is genuinely worth 200$ these days, or if a synthetic brush is worth 13 or 60. some ive seen for 145..

 

[Bezoar]

its just that I am a dedicated face lather maker. It just feels so good, and seems to give improved performance for me as compared to bowl lathering and simply brushing it on my face.

my omega 48/49 is way way to springy to face lather with unless I want to decorate the bathroom walls.

 

[SmurfK]

How do you quantify a subjective non-empirical data set? The way a brush performs is completely subjective;

Not necessary. We can measure the easiness to load, the amount of soap necessary, how fast do they build lather, the drying time, required maintenance, chances of finding a brush that's losing hairs, lifespan, and in most of these cases, modern synthetics rate better than natural hairs.
Things like face feeling or looks are subjective.

 

[nick_s]

its just that I am a dedicated face lather maker. It just feels so good, and seems to give improved performance for me as compared to bowl lathering and simply brushing it on my face.

my omega 48/49 is way way to springy to face lather with unless I want to decorate the bathroom walls.

On that basis, I would give the synths a miss. I always reach for my badgers (as per this morning) for a wonderful face lather.

 

[AlexNoodles]

I primarily facelather and prefer synths. Just grab an Omega S from ebay for £7 delivered and have a go

 

[Steve Bowles]

Not necessary. We can measure the easiness to load, the amount of soap necessary, how fast do they build lather, the drying time, required maintenance, chances of finding a brush that's losing hairs, lifespan, and in most of these cases, modern synthetics rate better than natural hairs.
Things like face feeling or looks are subjective.

Now we're getting into empiricism. Anyone building a database?

 

[nick_s]

Now we're getting into empiricism. Anyone building a database?

As it happens...I am Obviously like you say there is a degree of subjectivity involved in as much as my findings vary in comparison to others.

 

[Steve Bowles]

Not necessary. We can measure the easiness to load, the amount of soap necessary, how fast do they build lather, the drying time, required maintenance, chances of finding a brush that's losing hairs, lifespan, and in most of these cases, modern synthetics rate better than natural hairs.
Things like face feeling or looks are subjective.

All of these variables are what drove me to synths. I still think you'd have to assign a numerical value to each of these and how would you define a 1 versus a 3 for lather building, etc.? Would you have to give a weight to each of these for each respondent? @nick_s is building a database on some of these parameters. It will be very interesting to see the results, and how he designed his paradigm.

 

[SmurfK]

I can't really make the comparison anymore, as I just sold my last badger brush today. I also think that it can be hard to create such an experiment. You would need some gear to gather that data, and I don't know how that would look.

I mean, in my experience, I'm creating better, consistent lather with a synthetic, and I'm doing it faster. But I would have problems in demonstrating it, or quantify it, even if, in theory, they are quantifiable, but I don't think they are by the home shaver.

 

[Steve Bowles]

I can't really make the comparison anymore, as I just sold my last badger brush today. I also think that it can be hard to create such an experiment. You would need some gear to gather that data, and I don't know how that would look.

I mean, in my experience, I'm creating better, consistent lather with a synthetic, and I'm doing it faster. But I would have problems in demonstrating it, or quantify it, even if, in theory, they are quantifiable, but I don't think they are by the home shaver.

Yep. I agree completely. Of course if I could get a grant or funding to set up this experiment, I'm sure I could do it for under £5 million.