This was from my haul photo, You can see Kant Rust on the box just below the handle. I'll take more pics this weekend.

Few other tidbits they sold for sure gold plated razors in 1933, 1934, 1936 and 1940. Upon further checking I found and ad dated to 1957 for Cooper blades.

It is the same as your other one and the ads for sure show the second style in 39. At a minimum you have case and razor mismatch. Correct razor to the case not for the case here. I'll look further if Kant Rust was a brand name it does not show up so far prior to 43. I think I need to revise the Monobilt date to 43. I'll show why in the next post once I get the advert formated for upload. That is assuming someone didn't stick a Kant Rust sticker on that case.

It is a bit of semantics here but in 43 they advertise them as a metal razor with kant rust blades, no mention of 1pc or 3pc.

You don't officially see the name Kant Rust razor and blades until 44. I think that case is a 43, razor unless they went back to that style is wrong to the case is all.

With all that then the Monobilt based on that case was being retailed as late as 43 instead of 42 assuming that isn't someone putting a sticker on the case and repacking it with kant rust blades to make more money on the sale by manufacturing an "authentic" complete set. I will also concede they may have put that handle style back into production sometime after 39. There is nothing definitive here especially if that just a sticker on the case and not part of the original case markings.

Here is an ad from 44 to bolster the distinction between metal razor and kant rust razor when packaged with kant rust blades.


It doesn't have that distinct handle style that you see in later ads that say kant rust razor. Is it a 3pc or 1pc.? Hard to tell handle could be like the solid knurled Monobilt but the head looks nothing like a monobilt while that could be the right type of handle for a 3pc.

My guess is it is 3pc simply because if it was a 1pc a retailer would have made the distinction to differentiate it from all other 3pcs not a single 3pc set which there are other sets without kant rust blades being sold in 44. None of the ads make that 1pc or 3pc distinction in 43 and up unlike you do in some ads between 37 and 42 regardless of the model.

Now that we learned something and found some more questions. I am done researching Cooper razors for bit except for a few ads I found I will post that I thought interesting because they show some of sets these razors would have came in and such.

Next shaves for me are with the verified Cooper adjustable on each of the 4 shave settings.

Pulled out the MonoBilt today. Hail to the King:

Here are few other choice ads I found. One is the earliest dated one I could find from 1932, notice it is billed as a new Cooper. The 1936 ad shows a high end Tudor set. The 1945 is the earliest one I found showing the solid guard bar version clearly visible of the 3pc and also the first one with the 2 shoulders on the cap. It is possible this appeared first in 44.

Source newspapers.com

Papers
Jefferson City Post Tribune 08/19/1932
The Capital Times 11/12/1936
The Morning Call 01/10/1945

ads



full page with ads

That is the razor in the 45 ad.

I was looking at the handle in the artists' conception and wasn't sure but it certainly makes sense it would be. Head fits. Does raise the question of the Cooper-Conrad relationship as the Conrad design was patented. I don't know we'd ever know if they were made by Cooper under license or by Conrad for Cooper branding.

There are ads up the wazoo for this razor in 45 I'll find one with the full handle pictured.

Here is another 45 ad with it being sold in a gift box. For sure they switched from open comb to solid guard bar in 1944. Whether it is this razor with the shoulders or a solid guard bar without I can't say from pictures in the ads. We can say for sure this razor is at least a 45 and maybe up if they produced them post war which I didn't check.

Source newspapers.com

paper
Pittsburgh Press 6/15/1944

ad



full page ad

Oh yeah, good work.

The cooper adjustable on it's least aggressive setting is a post war tech before it was cool to be a Gillette post war tech. The only thing besides the handle that makes it any different is however they polished metal on the cap trying to shave with this razor is like driving on snow or ice with no traction. It wants to go everywhere except where you are pulling if you don't dial in the angle almost exact.

I would say Gillette copied Cooper here especially if their non adjustable kant rust shaves the same. Contrary to popular opinion after researching out the Tech a bit they didn't switch from the pre war triangular drain slot design until mid to late 47 not 46 or earlier. More on who is copying who in a bit with the Cooper Kant Rust razor.

the brits adopted the u.s.tech post war design in 49. any any earlier reference to a canadian prewar before 1938 as to their 1932 patent?or did that patent/licence cover any model gillette u.s, allow gillette canada to manufacture ? the brits flat bottom design doesn t appear to be a copy of someone elses design either..

There are a lot of cooky theories about the 1932, that it's a Tech patent date, that it',s a patent number, even that it's a tribute to King Gillette eho died in 1932.

No. It is a patent date as clearly indicated here but it covers the slots and corner tabs of the US patents for the New razor. Thompson filed application in Canada on behalf of Gillette seven months after doing do in the US and the Canadian patent issued April 12, 1932 as patent no. 321508.

It does not cover the stamped sheet metal and solid bar related details of the US patent which wasn't applied for until 1938 and issued in 1942. No Gillette razor patents were issued in Canada 1941-43.

It would not have been unusual for Gillette to do this, the patent numbers on the New include patents for the New Improved.

Short answer the improvements on the manufacturing is what was patentable and incremental improvements on the design. That is what the Gillette patent is. You trademark shape aesthetics and patent functionality of shape and when they overlap you can do both which is what the diamond base plate is all about. Changing the size or shape of the drain slots or adhering to a standardized type of cap and base plate shape anyone can do as long as they don't violate the above.

Chicken and egg which comes first in this case it is straightforward, Gillette Tech is first to market here in 39. These style razors, the Cooper Kant Rust, Hospital Brands Super Fine razor, Sani-Steel Super Fine razor, Club which is a Hospital Brands all show up starting in 43 or 44. Earliest advertised adjustable is the Sani-Steel Super Fine in 45. All share the same handle. Cooper is the earliest razor of all these with the Kant Rust Razor in 44. The Doehler-Jarvis with it's logo couldn't have been named earlier than 45 since Doehler and Jarvis where separate companies and didn't merge until late 44. Hospital Brands Super Fine razor only ad I found was for one in 46.

As far as the handle goes looks like that is Cooper also with the Kant Rust razor since that is the first to market in 44, the adjustable head with the stainless steel spring I can't say since I haven't seen the head on a Sani-Steel.

The only razor I can say for sure based on patents that is a Cooper design even if they didn't make it was the Monobilt.

The 3 pieces are Swee-dos. Whatever the relationship between the Swedish company here and Cooper is I don't know but I would say for sure they were interconnected for the 3pc razors and Kant Rust patented Swedish Steel blades.

The only difference here between the Swee-do and Cooper 3pc open combs are the knurling on the handle.


If Cooper was start up in 32, having done this myself they most likely didn't have to the capital to make or pay someone to make the Monobilt in the beginning and venture capital wouldn't invest until they could prove they were a viable company. The best way would have been to import or license something unique that you could protect a sales stream which in this case was the blade designs. Cooper found a niche and through a combination of means it seems was able to secure an exclusive sales territory in the US for their razor. The competition couldn't crowd them out of the market with knockoff clones which is a major advantage to a start up. It is easier to break into an existing market when you don't have to compete against yourself. That seems to be the case and after 5 years of being in business which is when a company is considered viable they finally were able to get the Monobilt made and to market.

It also looks like WWII killed the Mono-bilt, no war that razor might have survived into the 50s or later.

Probably correct but FWIW the handle is not the only difference, the Cooper center post/hole is diamond shape rather than rectangular as on the Swee-do. The cap is also rounded to match the base plate on the Cooper.

thank you you the explanation sir..

thank you also for the explanation..