Gentlemen, I have come out of hiding to shed my views in this interesting thread…
1) Manufacturers spend quite a lot of resources in the design and cosmetics of a razor… because their bottom line depends on it. Now while we may expect a “standard” model to have a few cosmetic flaws, it is highly unlikely they would allow out the factory a “hi-end” unit with a misaligned etch and such an "amateur-ishly" ground rounded-point.
2) Bear in mind that the razor in question is supposedly 6/8th wide, however if you look carefully, the blade has the proportions of a 7/8 or 8/8 blade, this is a dead giveaway that the 6/8 blade has been cut short:
Here is a quote from a Sticky Article in our Razor Hospital (the relevant text)
Smythe said:
If you are an aspiring collector and/or concerned about Cosmetics/Originality, <snip>
- Become accustomed to the “proportions” of the various sizes of a straight razor blade… that’s is to say, whatever the size in width (4/8th, 5/8th, 6/8th, 7/8th or 8/8th), most blades are between 2.75 to 3 inches in length. So a “full” 8/8th Square point blade, may appear to be a “chopped” or “shortened” 6/8th square point blade… they are roughly the same proportions, but I am sure you want to avoid the chopped one.
Now from time to time you will see “shorter” blades (around 2.5 inches in length). In fact, many razors were manufactured shorter than average (some Swiss blades come to mind). Some shorter blades were named (but not always) Dwarf, or Junior and the original scales fit the blade nicely… so don’t scorn all short blades.
Please note: Some amateur restorers may shorten a blade (because the point was damaged) and then realizing the blade will no longer “fit” in the original scales, will cut the scales shorter, drill new holes and re-pin in the now adjusted scales, or they may simply use the ones from another razor whose scales happen to be the right size… so you may want to watch out for that… but while there is nothing wrong with placing such a re-fitted razor for sale (there are many folks who prefer a shorter blade), I believe it is “dishonest” when the fact is not mentioned up front.
<snip>
Original article can be found here:
http://www.coticule.be/the-cafeteria/topic/676.html
3)[part removed by forum moderation]
4) Now here is a photo of the razor in question set against known 6/8th razors… the photos have all been resized to approximate the same blade width (the other two were conservatively resized to give the blade in question the best chance to prove its mettle… and unfortunately is appears to come up short).
The lower blade is a Clauss… these Clauss models are known for a “flatter” round profile at the point (as if someone modified a square point) it is one of the few razors I know of with such a flat-point profile out the factory. The one in the middle is a Kismish, vintage, manufactured in Germany.
The other two are both longer by approximately 1/8th inch, in fact, if the razor in question was as long as the Kismish the etching would be centered perfectly.
5) The Puma in Question is missing the black rubber grip at the tang… (Perhaps it has seen better days).
A theory:
Though I am not all too familiar with the Hi-Class line of Puma razors, I do believe the scales have numbers stamped at the pivot end indicating the blade intended for it… perhaps the scales do not belong to the blade in question… of course I could be wrong. It would be a good idea if folks who own un-altered Puma razors of this model check the numbers on the scales.
6) [part removed by forum moderation]
You’re Honors… I rest my case and now return to my cave.