Next big things that never lived up to the hype, failed, or disappeared without a trace... What do you remember??

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

SuperGalactian

Active Member
Gosh, you people are young! Who remembers Rolls Razors? They were the neatest, longest lasting, heaviest and most horrible-to-shave-with gentleman's travel accessory ever. Can't help but admire the concept, though.
 

Sharky

Legendary Member
Location
Kent
Gosh, you people are young! Who remembers Rolls Razors? They were the neatest, longest lasting, heaviest and most horrible-to-shave-with gentleman's travel accessory ever. Can't help but admire the concept, though.

I remember those, built in sharpener. I was too young to need one at the time, must have been my dad's.
 
Location
Widnes
Gosh, you people are young! Who remembers Rolls Razors? They were the neatest, longest lasting, heaviest and most horrible-to-shave-with gentleman's travel accessory ever. Can't help but admire the concept, though.

WOW - never heard of that one

I do remember my Dad shaved with a metal razor that used disposable blades when I was a kid

the sort of blade that was just an extremely sharp piece of metal that kids had to NEVER go near

I was an "inquisitive" sort of kid and looking back I got the impression, based on the warnings, that it could cut you very badly from a range of several yards!

Personally I reckon Gillette pulled a blinder when they send my Dad a free Fusion as a sample just before he died
I had gone to see him and stayed at their house overnight only to discover that my "going away" bag razor has a blade rather closer to a hacksaw blade than I had hoped
so tried this sample and have been using them ever since

That sample had proved to be a great investment!
 

SuperGalactian

Active Member
I remember those, built in sharpener. I was too young to need one at the time, must have been my dad's.
When I (briefly) tried one in the early 1970s, the firm had long since gone bust, but the device was legendary. The shaving experience, however, explained why Gillette took off the way it did. Long after I had dismissed the Rolls as an actual razor, I kept it around for the fascination of the mechanism.
 

SuperGalactian

Active Member
Personally I reckon Gillette pulled a blinder when they send my Dad a free Fusion as a sample just before he died
I had gone to see him and stayed at their house overnight only to discover that my "going away" bag razor has a blade rather closer to a hacksaw blade than I had hoped
so tried this sample and have been using them ever since
My grandad shaved with a cut-throat razor until he was nearing 80. By then cataracts in both eyes were making this a hazardous experience, and his face was covered in cuts. My uncle took him a bag of disposable BIC razors (thus leaping several generations of razor invention), which were a complete revelation to him.
 
Location
Widnes
No, I don't think they've ever been anything but a stupid idea. And sadly they haven't disappeared without trace.

One of those things that seem to have been a good idea

which was modified by several committees that did not appear to have anyone on them that understood how "The People" think and act

and another committee that started its first meeting with
"now - seems like a great idea - but how can we reduce the costs"
 

Profpointy

Legendary Member
The APT could have gone a lot faster, but yeah, 125MPH seemed to become the standard in this country.

To be fair, how much actual time would be saved on a UK run if the train's top speed was 150mph? I suspect very little given all the slower sections, curves, waiting at signals, stopping at stations etc.

In my youth I used to drive way too fast. Even driving well over the speed limits when I could, it only knocked a couple of minutes off a two hour run, as (even I) drove sensibly and legally through villages, didn't do mad overtakes etc. Keeping going at a decent speed makes far more difference than an occasionally high top speed.

I did have an insider story that if they'd done major signalling improvements instead of HS2 they could have significantly improved capacity and journey times on existing track (by safely allowing more trains on a given track) at a fraction of the costs. But of course improved signalling is not as sexy as superfast trains
 

Profpointy

Legendary Member
Was that not similar to the Rabbit system

I used to work for Orange, which was the successor company to Rabbit. The Rabbit had been closed down by then. but amongst the staff there was a big secondary market for old rabbit handsets for use as house phones. Even house phones are obsolete now and I've not had one for years - my landlines are data only, or I've never plugged a phone into the router at any rate
 
Last edited:

No Ta Doctor

Über Member
Several years ago I did the Berlin half marathon with my daughter who was working there at the time. They had an inline skate race before the running event, it was great to watch, insanely fast and the people up the " sharp end " looked just like the Olympic contenders with body suits and state of the art helmets 😎

Several years ago* I played in a drum orchestra at the Berlin Marathon and the skate marathon the day before. This also means that I have officially played a gig at the Berlin Olympic Stadium!



*Just checked and it was 2011 😱
 

MontyVeda

a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
To be fair, how much actual time would be saved on a UK run if the train's top speed was 150mph? I suspect very little given all the slower sections, curves, waiting at signals, stopping at stations etc.
...
Lancaster to Euston is currently 3.5hrs. HS2 would have shaved no more than an hour off that time 'if' it was running from Manchester, which it isn't anymore.
 

Tenkaykev

Guru
Location
Poole
Lancaster to Euston is currently 3.5hrs. HS2 would have shaved no more than an hour off that time 'if' it was running from Manchester, which it isn't anymore.

Iirc, the original costings and justifications included things such as business people spending less time on the journeys would give them more time in the office and costed their time at some fantastical figure. Of course they deliberately ignored the fact that people could do work on the train.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Don't forget that it's sustainable and will run on zero carbon electricity.

That it would have to run at capacity 24/7 for 120 years solid just to offset the carbon emissions for the concrete alone used during construction seems to have escaped the planners attention.
 
Top Bottom