Just received a near-mint Schick injector, and wish to pose a few question to those better versed in the variants of these cool little razors: It's stamped "Schick Injector" with the patents 1806807 and 1969945, parallel grooves on the safety bar, molded (seamed) handle, fixed spring. Now...were all E types fitted with the caramel/amber/butterscotch (and *unseamed*) handles? Did some G types *not* have "Eversharp" stamped on the spring base? It came in the clamshell case with the 20 year guarantee on the back (dated 1940). I'm referencing Alan Appleby's Schick chart while I'm posting this, hence my inquiries. I'm assuming the Eversharp name didn't appear until 1946. I'm thinking this is an E4, but the handle & patent numbers say G type.
First..There were No Mis Matching or Using Left Over Parts with the Schick E & G Types..That's a Forum Myth & Misunderstanding..Secondly..Whilst the G Type was Introduced in 1946 After the Ever Sharp Takeover the Early G Types Had the Old Schick Injector Stamp..The Only Exceptions were the 1946 & 1947 Xmas Edition Gold Plated G Types which Had Ever Sharp Stamped on them.. This was Part of the Takeover Deal by Ever sharp & the Schick Repeating Razor Company..So..You have a G Type that was Made Between 1946 & Summer 1947 with the Schick Injector Stamp..The Type E 4 Has Only One Serial Number & Other Pending..See this Old Thread of Mine on the Matter.. http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...ReHtoGBBc9LyLGdwdrD76Q&bvm=bv.146496531,d.ZGg Billy..
The patent numbers are definitive, because the second one could only appear after the patent was issued, which was post series E. If it has two patent dates, then it absolutely CANNOT be an E, which with that style of handle makes a G the only possibility. For the rest, Schick wasn't in the business of making well-documented collectibles for 21st century razor buffs; it was in the business of pushing as many usable Schick injectors out into the marketplace as quickly and cheaply as possible so it could make money selling blades.
I know you feel as strongly about this as you do about the impossibility of a good tallow free soap...but as a lay observer your handle clone theory, absent solid evidence, seems conjecture contrary to logic. If Schick-Eversharp had a stock of E handles in 1946 why would they clone new ones for the G particularly if the E were still in production? If I were an Eversharp accountant I would certainly object. As an owner of an early 1962 Studebaker with 1961 paint I am skeptical that Schick-Eversharp would choose to mold/stamp new parts (including spring components) where old stock would suffice. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
I'm going to have to go with the "use up the left-overs" theory, because (1) the stiff competition for razor sales, and (2) the times. 1946, the world just out of a global war, and the shortage of materials. If perfectly good stock was available, no one in their right mind would toss it aside & make all new stuff. I've got two '46 Ranger Tech heads on Super Speed handles as evidence.
Not Conjecture My Friend I Have Owned Every Type E & G On the Market & I Have Found this Out through Piecing My Research Together..I Have No Theory..Believe What You Will..I Have Owned the Complete Timeline on Both Type G & E Injectors..Also..Ever Sharp Managers were Dying to get Rid of the Schick Brand & Stamp their Own Companies Name to the Point it Nearly Broke the Companies Back..Poor Management & Huge Egos.. Billy..
So when you say clones re handles, which is your characterization, you don't really mean clones? Because if the like handles on E/G models are exactly the same, i.e. clones, you can have no idea if they were newly manufactured or (more likely) old stock. If they are only similar that's another kettle of kippers but then they are not clones. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
They were Not New Old Stock as the Resin is Different in the Later G Type Seamed Ivory Handles..Since 1946..As I Said..I have Owned them All & Sold Many More.. Billy..
Making "collectibles" has nothing to do with saving money. It's only smart business to use up perfectly good material
Precisely. And if that means you use parts that "belong" on an older model on a newer model, who cares? As long as it gets a usable razor out the door and into the hands of a consumer quickly and cheaply, making sure all the parts are "right" is completely irrelevant.
The E3s were made during wartime so excess inventory seems unlikely as materials were scarce. However, to put the matter to rest in a more definitive manner, here are some photos of an E3 and G1. At first glance the handles look the same. Notice the coloring and the seamed handles. But, upon closer inspection it can be seen that the G1 handle is slightly larger. By placing them end to end this can be seen a little more clearly. Close, but not the same. The E3 has some nice history as well. This one was issued to the Navy during WWII.
Hehe wishful thinking. I don't believe anybody confused the two standard handles there. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]
