Only a Ming Shi 2000S, which may come off the same production line as the Q-Shave clone. I recall someone recently swapped a piece of their Clone onto an actual Futur. Base component I think. If that's the case there may be very little difference between the Original and the Clones. Except for the price
That was me. I would not however draw the conclusion that there's no meaningful difference. The Futur is 25g heavier, with a wider handle. While I usually don't prefer heavier I do prefer the handling of the Futur to the clone. There are some construction differences but the head geometry is essentially the same, so handling aside shave is indeed about the same once gap is equalized between the two. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
I have both but threw the. Ming Shi away. It was very difficult to adjust and the cap didn’t line up perfectly. I also prefer the weight of the Futur. It sounds like others had better luck than I did with the Ming Shi.
Good day! My name is Sam and I'm a newbie to this forum. I have them both and completely agree with the other assessments. The true Futur is heavier (although the MS does feel rather solid) . The adjustment of the Ming Shi is more difficult as the blade Gap is variable over the length of the head on any given setting, plus I feel like the MS is more aggressive than the Futur when "wide open.". Just my $0.02, happy shaving Pics (L to R): GOLD Futur Chrome Futur CeraKoted MS (black/FDE) 1st: side-by-side 2nd: head comparison 3rd: max. setting 4th: min. setting Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Point taken. My observation is not based on comparison, but on information from others that do own both. I appreciate your DE frankenrazor experiments. Never would have assumed parts were interchangeable between the two. Except for the smaller handle, tighter adjustment mechanism, and wonky cap - the Ming Shi gives similar shave? For the difference in price, I'm glad to hear the clones give similar shave. I'm guessing the quality control on the Chinese production wasn't up to the Merkur standards. At 20% the original's retail price how could it be? Sorry to hear yours was a dud. Does the Futur have "click stop" adjustments? My Ming Shi allows for infinite variable, i.e. 4-1/8, 4.25, or somewhere inbetween. (Thank you Randy @BaylorGator for getting those with both to share!)
You can see in Sam's photo the difference in the bottom plate. They are still interchangeable though. The dozens of reviews of the Ming Shi are all over the map as to how the shaves compare, I would not trust any one review (mine included) as representing how yours will perform. They are cheap enough to just try one. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
The major differences are weight and handle diameter. Beyond that, you could argue that you get what you pay for, although Merkur isnt exactly known for high levels of QC. I recently picked up a Qshave, which is the same thing as a Ming-Shi, mostly because I wanted to try a Futur but didnt want to drop $60 on one and the Qshave was only about $10. Mine seems to be pretty good, with even blade gaps, good fit of parts and all in all seemingly good quality. I would say that if someone wants to try a Futur, the Ming-Shi is a good idea because theyre so much cheaper. If you try it and dont like it, youre only out a few bucks.
I have a QShave, and bought many Ming Shi razors, to hand out to family. My wife loves her QShave. I have inspected each and every one, and all have even blade gaps, and show no defects. For around $7 delivered, for the MS, it can't be beat. I guess I got lucky with all I've bought. If I had more relatives open to DE shaving, I would buy many more.
Definitely agree, sir. The QShave is super nice, I bought a few of them as well as the shave stands. It's quality has been very consistent more so than the MS, which usually end up as a GunKote/CeraKote project. Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
It has been a long time since I had an actual Futur. A coup,e of years ago, I bought a clone called an NT Vigour. I could not tell a difference at all, from my memory at the time. I bought a Ming Shi, and I’ve had no issues with it, but it is 30 grams lighter than my other clone, and does have a skinnier handle. Still a good razor, especially for the price, but a definite difference in feel.
I don't know about what other differences there might be but I recall that the NT Vigour was a bit even heavier than the Futur. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
The only other thing I can think of, is that the adjustment has no stops. You can keep advancing it until it comes apart. So mine actually does go to eleven.
Translate: Support Chinese intellectual espionage and abusive labor practices, or not. Dollar votes matter.
I mostly agree. If the original Futur wasn’t a breakage prone design with (at times) abysmal quality control, and wasn’t still being sold at a price considered pretty high by wet shavers, and if the patent hadn’t been expired for over a decade..... I tend to really, very seriously put my money where my mouth is. Locally sourced and produced is like a ripple. It spreads outwards, and I step up, sometimes big time where my check book is concerned. I don’t think of Futur clones as crossing a moral line. I also probably wouldn’t buy a name brand Rubik’s cube anymore. I also work pipeline and drive Toyotas; vote conservative/Libertarian and am a card carrying member of two labor unions. We we could get into all sorts of macro economics discussions about buying American and where the money ends up. Again, I can sleep soundly knowing I have two Futur clones in my bathroom. I am a conundrum wrapped in an enigma.
For the purposes of the database, my QShave at setting 2.5 has somewhere between .01-.10mm more gap than my Futur based on the scientific how many spent blades can you squeeze in there test. That's maybe half a setting then. Maybe a lot less as with no blade on board they are equal in the squeeze test. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk