The refined shave web site posted data long before they revamped the web site to start advertising as an Amazon affiliate. The guy spent a lot of time and money collecting the data on 50 different blades. I can understand him trying to earn some money for his efforts. However, I wish he would resume his testing on blades not yet evaluated.



Personally, I have a coarse beard and sensitive skin, so my face tends to validate most of the results from the refined shave site on the 25 or so blades I have used. The test method used on that site measures the force needed to sever a test medium (which I believe is paper based and thus should be structurally similar to human hair).



In the case of the Bayview Informer web site, the test medium and the test method differ significantly from shaving. Fishing line (presumably monofilament, but not stated) has a significantly different structure than human hair. If the monofilament is nylon based, it has a significant amount of stretch. Applying force over a couple of minutes is also far different than the millisecond time frame in which a beard hair is severed. From my shaving experience, I certainly would not consider a Derby Extra blade to be sharper than Gillette Nacet, yet that is what that test data shows. This leads me to question the validity of the test data.



The author of the original post calls himself "persistent analyst". He joined B&B only 6 months ago. The author of the Bayview Informer article calls himself a statistical researcher. Is it possible that "persistent analyst" is a handle of the author of the article who is trying to funnel traffic to the web site????? The only way I can use Google to find the web site is to search for the exact title of the article "Double Edge Safety Razor Blade Sharpness". Thus, it is rather unlikely that the OP just happened to discover the web site without knowing exactly what he was looking for. If my suspicions are incorrect, I will gladly apologize to the OP.