Last year, starting from the theoretical data, I made this evaluation scale.
ilrasoio.com/viewtopic.php?p=281084#p281084Very well done.
However, after doing experience, I find it misleading.
In the latest generation synthetic fibers of the delicate type (low consistency), much more than in all the other types of fibers (even natural), the setting of the brush radically changes the practical result with respect to the mechanical characteristic theoretical.
Unlike Mother Nature, a synthetic fiber can be produced from the same material with many different details.
By changing the thickness of the stem, the tapering profile, the shape of the tips ... a totally different tuft can be created in practice.
Especially if you then play on density, knot width, tuft length.
That ranking has a theoretical maximum total of 15:
• Density 5
• Backbone 5
• Sweetness 5
Therefore, he places the Yaqi Cashmere (2/3/5, total 10) well below the Oumo Mother Lode (5/2/5, total 12).
Instead, to reach the balance of a Cashmere 24x50mm, I had to take a Mother Lode 28x53mm.
The one is compact and super efficient, the other is bulky and requires more work.
The second is even sweeter and "natural", and lather even better, but is inconvenient for other reasons.
Volumes, maintenance, difficulty setting.
Just look at the difference in the handle, necessary for the loft.
With the right density and the right handle / tuft setting, I find that my Bat71 "Cashmere" has very different numbers (5/3/5, total 13).
And in general the other numbers in comparison to the natural ones are very different.
With an efficiency comparable to the absolute best of (fantastic animals) Silvertip Badger Two Band High Mountain White Super High Density.
ilrasoio.com/viewtopic.php?p=291768#p291768But without the need for exploratory surgery to find a kidney, or worse.