From what I understand the only "Q" was the Q1. Then they switched to "R". I have an "RR" I found at a local fleamarket. Cost me a buck. Used it for the first time Sunday with a Gillette Silver Blue. Shaves like a champ.
Correct. The Q was only made for one quarter. The R code was used for quarters 2-4. I don't know as anyone has ever determined that a RR code was anything other than a factory misstamp.
That is my understanding also. Be interesting to find out if the RR signifies the second quarter or maybe the first?
It's possible, but all Q codes are from the first quarter. It's entirely possible that someone caught the Q error and told the stamping operator to change the wrong code to R, resulting in the RR date code being used until someone noticed that was wrong as well. I've seen a JJ coded razor as well. The RR is almost certainly a factory error, but who knows how many were made? A hundred thousand? More? Gillette was making millions of razors a year at that time.
We tend to forget those razors were so prevelent then that as you said millions were being manufactured. Now we get super excited if we manage to find one at a fleamarket
Does anyone really have a photo of a Q series razor? I have seen many advertised as Q codes, but they all turned out to be O coded razors. I have had two or three R1 coded razors, so I am not sure that they were used in lieu of a first quarter Q code. Not to throw water on anyone here, but I must remain somewhat skeptical. And I would be happily interested to see either of the rare date codes mentioned here. Here's one of the R1 models:
She was a little grungy when I found her. Took about half an hour of TLC and she was ready to rock. Auditioning blades. Currently have a Gillette Silver Blue locked and loaded. Next up, a Feather black
Are we suggesting that a double R code equals a Q? How do we know that? It seems to me a more simple explanation is Gillette just skipped Q all together and went from P to R. I always look for the more simple explanations first. I suggest the double R code to be a stamping anomaly that had nothing to do with skipping the Q code. A more interesting and compelling question is why did Gillette have year and quarter date codes at all? I'm not impressed with the "to control inventory" argument. A metal razor does not become "stale" like a loaf of bread in a bakery if the razor lays around in a factory for several years.
Nothing to explain. The visual evidence in Achim's post right above yours proves beyond all doubt that Gillette did, in fact, use Q.
Brother Swarden43, that is assuming that the O has not been altered by a private owner for some reason to be a Q. There are people who do things for devious or strange reasons. Who knows how many owners that razor has had over time? This issue of a Q code comes up periodically on the shaving forums. It probably will never be resolved to the satisfaction of all. If life had no mysteries it would be to our loss.
I agree. The only thing that seems odd to me is why they would have had a 'Q' die to use in the first place. As I see it, one of the startup procedures for the line on the first day after the New Year would be to change the letter in the stamping machine. I have no problems with the idea that some random worker who perhaps was still recovering from NYE figured that the next letter after 'P' had to be 'Q' and dutifully installed the proper die. But why would the 'Q' have even been available in the first place to use?
I don't think Gillette had date codes for the benefit of razor collectors in the distant future. And I don't think it was for inventory control reasons. There are easier ways to count how many razors are in a bin, or whatever, without staring at quarterly date codes. The cost to stamp the date codes was formidable, and would not be done for a frivolous reason. But the why escapes me. It does not compute. Oh how I wish some of the Gillette exec's were still around to explain. I fear the issue and the real answer is lost to the ages. Wait. One possibility just came to mind. The earlier razors had serial numbers, and if nothing else, serial numbers might add to "the status" of the product in the eyes of some consumers. Date codes might have replaced serial numbers as a low cost concession to the consumer. Date codes would have cost far less to do than serial numbers, as serial numbers had numerous digits and would change with every item made.
The last time I checked, even Mr. Zapruder's film was very controversial, and in the eyes of many it caused more heat than enlightenment. Photography is a funny thang. Five persons can view a picture or a film and have maybe six differing interpretations.
