Deep in the bowels of my basement I opened a drawer and found something. After I ran screaming and it scuttled off I found something else there that I must have purchased over 10 years ago on Ebay. It’s an odd bit of writing history and technology for sure.
The pen manufacturer (Wahl-)Eversharp made some mistakes in the 40s that led to its eventual doom. Besides a homely looking line of fountain pens they also had a major fiasco with the CA, an early ballpoint. By 1957 it was all over and Parker bought what remained of the writing division and for a while used the Eversharp brand on some of its products.
One of those Parker/Eversharp products I found in that drawer and you can see it here: The Tip-Wic. What is it? Well, basically it’s a felt tip marker made to use fountain pen ink. I think the blister pack I took a picture of shows the benefits nicely.
I don’t know what prompted its creation or how long it was sold but the package is dated 4-65 and so that gives you an idea of the era. It’s a simple looking writing instrument reminiscent of a Parker 45 in shape and size. How well does it work? Well, here is where the fun starts!
You can win this pen and the extra converter and cartridge in the pack for almost no effort! OK, to be honest some effort. If I inked this pen I’d write a few lines and probably forget about it since I’m not a fan of markers. However, I am interested in learning how it works and someone might want to give that a go. So the deal is first write a comment below about anything since I’m not picky. I’ll use a random number generator to choose the person who gets this almost new item (I did remove the pen from the pack but will put it back in). The tricky part is the winner must agree to use this pen and within a month write a short summary of how they like it. I’ll post that as an update here so everyone can see the results. Just to be clear: You have to write something about how this pen works within 4 weeks and email me it. What if you don’t? Well…I’ll really be grumpy and you will not get any candy if I decide to hand some out in the future.
Let’s say this contest ends in one week on 9/26/2010 at 9:00 PM Easter Standard Time. Good luck to whoever feels the urge to try! Oh, don’t forget: It’s the tip; It’s Porosyn; It glides!
Whitefort, the place, looks to be mostly a road sign on a country road in Ireland near Thurles with no industry I can see. The length of the nave of the French cathedral of Saint Etienne of Bourges is 333 feet. Now you know the irrelevant information I discovered in a search about the pen I’m holding now: the Whitefort 333.
The Whitefort 333.
Not everyone loves a mystery and I would like to know more about this intriguing pen but that info seems lost in the sands of time. It’s an amazingly crafted piece precisely made from machined clear plastic like most mid-20th century display pens. All the parts have exacting tolerances and fit perfectly. Was this one of a few demonstrators made or one of a thousand production models? No idea. Nothing looks prototypical about it under close inspection. The only clues of identity is a clip engraved “W 333” and a nib and cap band engraved “Whitefort 333”. There are no markings on the barrel or other plastic parts.
The Whitefort 333 taken apart.
The nib itself deserves some further comment. It’s marked “14ct” and is two-tone with a band of bright silver plating on the leading edges. Seeing “ct” instead of “kt” here indicates it wasn’t made in North America so that’s at least a bit of useful detail. This is a nicely made nib which reminds me of the similar two tone ones some vintage Onotos had on them.
Can we make any useful guess on this fountain pen’s provenance after this examination? Maybe a half-baked guess is the best we can do. The gold content marking and the name leads me to believe this pen was made in English speaking Europe somewhere. It seems to be made of Lucite (also known as plexiglass) which came into use for pens right before WWII. Lastly, the visual style of the pen is similar to British products from the 1950s. This leads to a very unsteady deduction that it is an UK pen made after WWII and before the flower power decade.
Enough now about the origin of this pen and on to the most interesting facet which is the filling system. This is the most complex bulb-filling system I’ve seen in person or in books. It’s usually a simple system not taken to an extreme like this and I’ve put together a little diagram help me explain the major sections of it (click it for a larger version):
The A section of the illustration is the rubber bulb itself. Pressing and releasing the bulb creates the pressure and vacuum that fills the pen. This fits through and then wraps under a collar which screws into the barrel. The threads for the blind cap are also here.
The B section is an area that I will call the vacuum chamber for no other reason then I have to call it something. The tube that enters this chamber from below allows for the air flow but also keeps this chamber dry. You can see the tube goes quite a ways up so no fluid will be able to get past it and into here theoretically. I don’t know if there is a benefit to this other than the bulb stays ink free so leaking from it would not be possible.
The C section is the ink chamber. There is a divider in the barrel between this and the previous chamber where two tubes come together. Air is evacuated through these and then out the tube connected to the section due to pressure from the bulb. Ink will then flow back through the section tube (if dipped into the bottle) due to the vacuum created by the release of the bulb. Repeat this action until the pen is filled. The height of this section tube marks the upper limit of the ink level in the chamber which it just about to the top. The reason the upper tube in this chamber hugs the side of barrel at the far end is a mystery to me. Possibly they felt that capillary action would pull any ink that got into this tube out again?
The D section is the nib, feed, and section of the pen.
How well does this filling system work? Well, I’m not going to fill this pen despite my usual lack of reluctance to using NOS or rare-ish pens. I have no idea how many of these are left and I like looking at it empty and clear. Using water I can tell you that the upper chamber can get liquid in it if you are over enthusiastic with your filling which would not be a good thing since it has no place to exit from up there. The system’s all a bit silly really. The rest of the pen should function normally since it has a standard construction.
So now you’ve seen this bit of history too and I hope you found it interesting. There’s always something out there that can befuddle and confound it seems.
I’ve got a quick follow-up on my last post about the Hicks-Sackett pen. The long “feeding stem” was missing from the pen when it arrived. Not surprising since it seemed the weakest part of the design being made of hard rubber and spindly. Somewhere in the past an owner was a bit rough refilling the pen and it snapped off. Besides acting as an ersatz feed that piece also seemed to provide a bit of locating support for the nib/feed plug. What I tried to do was construct a replacement using stone knives and bearskins which are about as advanced as my tools get. In the end I had a main shaft and a smaller hard rubber feed on top that ran down about 1/2 the length. Not perfect but workmanlike.
Mr. George H. Sackett designed a pretty poor pen. Of course that sounds harsh a 124 years after the fact, but I’ve been examining the results of his fertile imagination and have come to that conclusion. Before discussing this curiosity more let me say I can’t blame him too much since early fountain pens are odd beasts as inventors and companies in the early days tried to morph them from glorified dip pens with a built in ink supplies to dependable instruments which would not alter your finger color. It was a free-for-all at the time since it was easy for someone to take a tube, stick a nib on the end, and engineer what was between based on simple physics and bizarre notions.
The Hicks-Sackett and writng sample.
I’m not sure if back then people thought building the perfect fountain pen would have the world beating a path to their door but it seems so. Type the word “Fountain Pen” into the Google patent databases and you’ll see enough listings to bug out your eyes. We tend to think the implement we nib fanciers use is a proven mechanical device and focus on aesthetics or usability but these early patents are an indicator how long the development process took. Nozzles, tubes, valves, and other tiny internal workings are intricately drafted in the old records and illustrate the inventor’s genius or insanity. Time and time again great self-assurance shines through in the pages and pages of descriptions and diagrams that are found.
The designer of the pen in question, Mr. Sackett, had at least three patents for a fountain pen (here, here and here) which show seemingly the same construction. Why the individual patents were filed and granted (just months apart in 1886) is confusing. The last tidbit is that an advertisement for this pen listed an 1885 patent but I can’t find it. This muddle aside it does seem there was little time wasted before manufacturing started since ads can be found from 1885. I’m neither a good researcher nor a patent expert so I can offer no explanations for all this. I’ll chalk it up to something unfathomable from the distant past which is another way of me saying I didn’t bother any further with the mystery.
Who was the inventor? Thanks to a family history I did find out a few factual items. His entry read as below:
GEORGE HENRY SACKETT, 1826-, of Providence, R. I., and Brooklyn, N. Y., son of Isaac and Mary Johnson Sackett, was married at Providence, R. I., July 27, 1857, to SARAH SWEETSER SHELDON. He was, from 1855 to 1878, a member of the firm of Sackett, Davis & Co., jewelry manufacturers, of Providence, R. I., and is the inventor of the Sackett fountain pen.
As you can see Mr. Sackett’s eponymous pen was considered an important enough achievement to be listed as one of his two accomplishments.
In that biographical tidbit it’s interesting to see that he was jeweler like many people involved in the nascent fountain pen industry. His invention seemingly got him out that business and by 1890 the Sackett Fountain Pen Co was located at 169 & 171 Broadway in New York City – at the corner with Maiden Lane, which was a hub for Jewelers in the city as well as many writing instrument companies as Waterman’s and Mabie, Todd & Co. One of the companies neighboring the location was the William S. Hicks Company which sold fountain pens both under its own name and for such high end establishments as Tiffany’s and Cartier. Many of these were beautiful, expensive pens and pencils made from precious metals and are prized today.
I’ve not found when or why Sackett and Hicks got together to brand and sell the pen designed by the former. Advertisements from the beginning list the pen as the “Hicks-Sackett”. Being an older and more established firm Hicks could have offered manufacturing capabilities and a proven distribution channel which must have been appealing. The elder firm may have wished for a low cost line of pens to market and latched upon this design as the one that fit the bill. Either way the pens were made from around the patent date till at least late into the first decade of the 20th century. By the late oughts the pen was quite a dinosaur since its competitors had invaluable features as modern channeled feeds to regulate ink flow and combs to catch excess ink. Add the use of screw caps and self-filling systems in some marketed pens and – even at a low price – the Hicks-Sackett pen was a doddering holdover from an earlier era.
The following might be dry, boring, and maybe even confusing in describing how this oddball pen works and includes illustrations that may make you squint and get a headache. With that caveat lets look at the pen parts and the basic principles of how they function. The first image below is from the patent that is best represents the actual pen sold. The second scan is a detailed illustration from an advertisement that also backs up that claim.
The Sackett patent drawing.1885 Advertisement.
Externally it’s unremarkable except for probably the first thing you’ll notice: The slip cap has a smaller diameter “crown” on the end. In my opinion this is the cleverest feature of the pen since the protrusion into a hole on the opposite end to allow posting. It’s a nice, tight fit and there’s no chance of a ring around the barrel ever forming from the friction of a cap being placed over it.
Internally what you see illustrates its origins in the late 19th century when fountain pens were in their infancy. As stated earlier the Hicks-Sackett is without the later innovations which made pens reliable and predictable in use and throughout the long period it was manufactured was frozen like this. In a nutshell it is basically a chased thin black hard rubber tube with an odd feed rod inside and flat triangular bit acting as a rudimentary feed.
The most prominent part that extends inside the barrel front to back is the “feeding stem”. This long grooved bar looks like a narrow feed on steroids but the patent text tells you the reason for it is to transmit the last bit of ink clinging to the walls of the pen to the nib via capillary action. That’s a reason but a silly one indeed. As seen in some of the Hicks-Sackett advertisements in the gallery below using the last drops of ink was brag worthy and for some reason the period around the turn of the 19th century was one where pen manufacturers fretted about this ability in their products. If you look at how pens like the Parker “Lucky Curve” touted their ink evacuation ability it seems like this was something the masses were demanding. From the hyperbole of the advertisements violent mobs must have gathered to chant “No ink left behind!” Of course this was just a marketing ploy since everyone wanted their pen to stand out in some way and this was flashier than saying “our cap stays on!” or “the pen that makes lines on paper!” The entire idea seems to have been abandoned as other things could be patented and harped upon like filling methods or interchangeable nibs. History shows people were alright with refilling their pens prior to that last drop being used since later pens phased out the gimmicks that were supposed to throttle the last of the ink out.
So the snake-like “feeding stem” which was inside the pen got a lot of thought. Unluckily nothing much else seems to have, especially the feed. Many contemporary pens had an over and under feed in the Hicks heyday and one could justify how elaborate these were since the super flexible nibs of the time needs a ink to gush down to where the rubber (read nib) met the road (nee paper). The Hicks-Sackett didn’t even bother with the underfeed that is still currently used in fountain pens and instead has a triangular sliver of hard rubber above the nib which has a standoff to make a gap which pulls ink out via capillary action. What is desperately missed is something like feed groves to allow air back up into the reservoir to fill the void ink leaves behind in a metered fashion. Everything happens on this pen through the same tiny slit behind the nib which the patent gobbled gook says will work just awesomely. In reality it allows air and ink enter an exit willy-nilly resulting in the occasional glob of ink coming out when air rushes through too fast. Aesthetically I love the way the nib looks – like a dip pen’s from underneath but that doesn’t compensate for the poor functionality.
My criticisms wouldn’t hold water with the copy writers who created the ads for the pen as profuse praise was heaped upon by them. What kind of drugs they were on as they wrote these I don’t know, but one claim is that you will not get your fingers inky when refilling it. Possibly they had soot blackened fingers (Dickensian image) so they never noticed this pen almost guarantees ink stained digits. There is no section at the front and the barrel just continues jauntily on till it comes to an abrupt end. Here the feed and nib is held in place by a plug that friction fits into the hollow of the inside void. Removing it means you have to grasp the feed and nib between your finger and thumb and you know what liquid is on them? Yes, ink.
None-the-less the ads I dug up for this pen are a fun romp through a time long past. Look at the hyperbole in them for a quick giggle. I’ve found as many as I can so you can see that the pen never altered over its marketing life. If you do see these and wish to go back in time to purchase I recommend you first look at a certain new pen by a Mr. Sheaffer he calls a “lever filler”. I also heard Mr. Waterman makes a fine product too.
What I love the most about researching this pen was finding the original patents and taking in their lovely language. On both you see Mr. Sackett tried to cover as many bases as possible by explaining alternative ways of executing his design. I have to say you can almost buy that this pen will revolutionize the field as the grandiosity of the design is teased out for you. If it only had a tiny steam engine and flapping wings you could see this as a prop in some modern steampunk fiction and called “Dr. Hermes’ Incredible Levitating Ink Fountain Marking Machine”.
The Hicks-Sackett pen is fascinating, odd, frustrating, and wonderful to explore. Some questions remain like why Hicks was associated with this pen and how it continued to be sold when as it become so inferior to its competition. But I’ll not trouble myself with that since I am not a historian but an observer. The pen that is pictured in this post has been passed to its new owner who has used it in part to create the wonderful illustration below. This proves that talent trumps technology – or something like that.
I can’t believe it’s been a year since my last visit and post about the Washington, DC Super Show. It’s full of pens, ink, stationary, pen manufacturers and pen repairers. If you are close and didn’t go you missed a lot. But where did the time go? I’m checking behind the couch for it right now.
The show this year surprised me by being even bigger than last year. In our still flailing economy I expected a niche show like this to remain about the same size. However I immediately noticed that some extra space was allotted to the vendors this year and more people were wandering about. So, things seem to be looking up for pens and those who collect them.
I won’t bore you with anything but the highlights of my trip. I’m a bit of an adjunct member of the Fountain Pen Network- Philippines group that has existed for over two years now. I’ve blogged about what a nice group of people they are and how many friends I’ve made there but the odd fact is I’ve not met more than two of them. This show the opportunity presented itself to meet one of the founding members: Chito Limson. The meeting started out rather poorly with the fact my texts were not reaching him and my phone would not call his Manila number. I kept swiveling my head while wandering about looking for him to no avail. Luckily later in the day I heard my name called by a gent sitting in the lobby. It was Chito and we ensconced ourselves to talk about pens, ink, and people over coffee and tea. He had a number of pen’s nibs worked on at the show that I got to try and drool over. Since he’s a big fan of Brian Gray’s Edison pens he had purchased a Huron Grande like this one and let me ogle it.
Mr. Chito Limson and myself. I'm the silly looking one.
On Sunday I went back and had some great conversations. First I ran into the aforementioned Brian Gray at his table along with Ernest Shin who is working on the fine lacquer finish of the Urushi Pearl which is the newest Edison LE. Ernest and I chatted for a bit and he’s a fascinating fellow. His skills are beyond reproach as shown by work he’s done applying different finishes on vintage Snorkels and Parker 51s, for example. The amazing Sheaffers he has decorated caught my interest of course.
Sunday is always the day I buy things on when at a show since I’m overwhelmed the first day I attend them. I shot a beeline over to the Goulet Pens table to get some of my favorite Rhodia pads. While there I saw Brian Goulet and Karen Doherty talking about stationary and such. Karen works for Exaclair (the distributors of fine stuff from Rhodia and Clairefontaine among others) and has provided me with some of the items I’ve reviewed over the years. Later on I had great chat with her that reinforces my opinion that her company is one of the most responsive and receptive to its customer’s wishes.
That wraps it up for my comments on the show. As always if you want to drool over pens this is the location to do so and I recommend it. I’ll be back next year for sure.
It’s obvious that old pens don’t work as well as newer ones. Take a look at the first fountain pens to be produced and how poor the ink delivery was due to feeds like tongue depressors. Like with any technology it takes a while to reach perfection. Another factor in early pens was that flexible nibs need a lot of ink to make those wide lines when the nib is under pressure. So in the late 19th century you wound up using a pen that would give you a nice ink blob in the middle of a word.
Various methods were attempted to make the better mouse…er…pen trap including some which were half or quarter baked. What is called an “overfeed” was effective enough to have lasted on some pens like Onotos and Swans for nearly 20 years. I won’t go into great detail but what the overfeed does is the same as the underfeed: ink saunters down it to the point from the reservoir. This gives it a double dose of inky goodness needed by super flex nibs.
Swan 4571 slip cap eyedropper with overfeed showing.
I have a great example of this type of setup in an export Swan slip-cap eyedropper you see above. Why I say “export” is that this was sold in France where legally calling something “gold” meant that it had to be 18kt or above in quality. When I removed this nib I saw the text verifying this as well as the word “broad”. I think this is more a stub nib than a broad and with its flex is quite a joy to use.
French Export 18kt Nib.
If you want to see the few parts that go into this simple pen take a gander it during cleaning and restoration. There’s a barrel, a feed, a plug with wire retainer, a nib, the overfeed, and the cap. It’s such a graceful pen in how few bits make it up. Plugs go into holes and in this case it’s an alternative way to fill the pen. You can pull the plug (the Swan will not keel over) and use an eyedropper in that spot. The only confusing thing you might see is the modern addition of an o-ring on the section to seal it better.
Fallen to pieces.
Another interesting fact is that this is an American made Swan. The company that made Swan and other model fountain pens, Mabie Todd & Bard (just Mabie Todd in later years), goes back to the mid-19th century making dip pens and pencils. By the turn of the century they had been making fountain pens for a while and started a British subsidiary. That UK arm really took off and their product was a success while the U.S. sales slowly dropped. The single company became two and parted ways. The U.S. firm closed up shop in the late 1930s while the other advertised itself as “The Pen of the British Empire”.
I’ve never quite seen a pen that can put down a line as wide as this pen does when flexed. When ink runs out in these instances you get “railroad tracks” or a double line since there’s not enough ink to fill the center. So, one can see the odd feed is doing the job. Yay for old tech!
Everyone loves cheap and cheerful. Who doesn’t want to get something fun for very little money? OK, so maybe the filthy rich don’t care but for me when I see something new, cool, and affordable I’m all over it. Of course the results are a lot of junk I’ve used one time or less sitting about but that’s the way it goes for those of us with impulse buying syndrome (IBS). Sure, that tiny battery operated egg whipper looked so cool in the package but when you realize what it gives eggs is more like a lashing you find a spot in the junk drawer for it. There it lives until the bi or tri-annual household junk cleansing where, if lucky, your embarrassment goes into the charity box with the unit.
Since I collect fountain pens I was thrilled to see an announcement form JetPens that they would be selling some writing instruments that fall into this category. Now let me state here that I still think the best value in fountain pens remains restored or NOS vintage models. Often the less sought after can be had for only a few dollars (Sheaffer’s NoNonsense line for example) or tens of dollars (Sheaffer’s mid-market pens from the 60s) and they are usually made to higher standards than you’ll find in cheap pens today. When I saw that the new Noodler’s fountain pens were ready to ship I couldn’t help myself and picked up a few. I also received a few extra purchased by friends in faraway places so after delivery I am swimming in Noodler’s pens which makes it good time to review them.
The pens in a row.
History
If you don’t know what Noodler’s is I’ll give you a quick summary here: Nathan Tardiff was well known a dozen years or so ago when I got into fountain pens in a big way. Considered a knowledgeable collector and ace repair person I even bought a pen or two from him. In recent years he started a line of well-respected and innovative (and sometimes controversial) inks. Noodler’s inks give you a huge color range and a good value which I don’t think anyone can dispute. Expanding his range he is now offering two models of fountain pens.
The first and lower priced line is a piston filler in a range of plastic colors with a screw cap. It’s a basic design that reminds me of German school pens of the 60s and 70s. The other is an aerometric filler in hard rubber with a slip cap. These pens come in your choice of green mottled and brown mottled. The design has tapered ends somewhat like a vintage Sheaffer Balance. This pen also has a gasket on the section so it can be converted into an eyedropper filler if you wish.
Construction
Both pens are made well enough for their price point. The plastic one has a very simple piston design which is workable and it feels solid in hand. The most noticeable exterior feature are ink view windows which are sized right to be handy. Both models have the same style nibs which are called fine-medium like they have an identity crisis. The price point is “cheap” so don’t expect jewel like details. The trim and fittings are sturdy but nothing more. The plastic on the piston filler shows changes in color where the dye must have changed concentration. The tip which retains the clip on the hard rubber model is very small in diameter giving it a “dunce cap” look. I’m happy to see a silicon sac is used in the aerometric filling system which is nice since you can see the ink level.
The insides of an aerometric Noodler's pen. Notice the two vintage nibs, one tucked up too high.
Where the ink meets the paper you have a steel nib that is functional and smooth enough. The feed is a hard rubber comb variety which is basically the same thing you’d see on a pen from the 1930s and so is reliable and simple.
As I said you get your money’s worth but don’t expect any surprise and delight. While not a piston filler the Pilot 78g is noticeably higher quality if you want a peer comparison. Noodler’s Hard rubber pen, however, seems to have no competitor at its price. Still for about 1/3 more you can get one of Steve Braun’s Varuna fountain pens that are eye-droppers only but heftier, more solid and expensive feeling.
Use
Using either Noodler’s model is simplicity in itself. Turn the knob and the piston filler fills. On the aerometric pen you compress the sac a few times. Both work flawlessly. There is a bit of effort in converting the hard rubber aero pen to eyedropper but it’s not rocket science. You remove the sac cage and the sac and that is It since the previously mentioned seal is already there to make it water tight.
Cost
I’ve been asked a few times what I think of these pens since I got them the other day because the attractive price is a draw. My major remark is they are honest and a bit unusual pens for this price point and certainly will be entertaining.
Modification
One claim to fame for these pens is that the nib and feed can be pulled out since they are friction fit. Why do that you ask? Well, if you have a #2 vintage nib lying about you could stick that into your pen and voila! A whole new writing experience! Technically a stub, italic, or even flex nib could be fitted if you wish a change. In reality there are some problems since not every #2 nib is the same nor even usable in these pens. The major issue is that the steel nibs from the factory are rather thick in cross-section and vintage nibs seem for the most part thinner. This is especially true of nibs that have some flex. What you wind up with often is a lose nib pushed way back into the section to get some purchase. This isn’t acceptable for me. I did find a few nibs that fit better but were more a #3 size so that’s something to keep in mind.
Nibs I tried in the Noodler's pens. The 4th and 5th fit. No, the last one didn't fit, are you crazy?
Quality
So far I’ve seen a few complaints about these pens from new owners. Most seem to be lapses in QC like crooked nibs or sections getting stuck when being screwed. The thin and weak product boxes don’t help since they offer little protection so when shipped caps can fall off and pens can work lose. Crushing is certainly a possibility as well. Time will tell if some of these problems are just teething pains.
Summary (and a meme reference that will be out of date in 5 minutes)
A friend joked that I should have a rating system for pens and we came up with the “double rainbow” system. It goes in half-rainbow increments from 0 (the lowest grade, equivalent to writing with a rusty nail dipped in beet juice) to 2 (the highest rating which is like a sweet flex nib Sheaffer). These pens would be a 1 rainbow from me because while unremarkable do give you value for what little you spend. Still I won’t recommend these and will suggest a Pilot or slightly more expensive modern pen, such as a Lamy, to those seeking entry level fountain pens due to some spotty QC issues. If you must have a piston or hard rubber pen I’d say look for inexpensive NOS or restored pens of this type. My Lamy 27 (piston filler) is far, far superior in construction and feel than the Noodler’s and with some looking not that more expensive.
Please bear with me since I’m going to cover a lot of ground in this post. Really, if I wasn’t so lazy I’d make this into three different standalone posts instead of this omnibus one but I can justify running the subjects together since they do link up.
Think Ink
The seed of this post started as an ink review. I hate doing ink reviews since so many people do them better than I with the same inks and usually far earlier. Certainly I could do samples, test drying times, and talk about saturation but there’s no way I could spin it so it wasn’t repetitious. None-the-less I did get two free J. Herbin inks from the great Quo Vadis Blog St. Patrick’s day giveaway this year and I felt it only right that I make mention of them.
The inks were supposed to be some variant on orange and green (the colors of the Irish flag along with white) and so I had to sit down and decide which to ask for. The only green I don’t have from J. Herbin was the Diabolo Menthe and so that choice made itself. Orange provided a different challenge in that I already had the only one available: Orange Indien. Thinking out of the box I did see another ink that has a bit of orange undertones called Ambre de Birmanie. A few weeks later both inks arrived through the good auspices of Karen Doherty at Exaclair.
Without a real plan about how to review them I did do some writing samples with both inks to check them out. Recently I restored an interesting Conklin pencil and pen set which I decided to fill with one of the inks. Most people think of Wahl when metal fountain pens are mentioned since they advertised their line heavily in the early 1920s. However, other manufacturers made similar pens such as the rolled gold ones seen in the picture below. The checked design and proportions are reminiscent of the Wahls with the most noticeable differences being the domed ends and Conklin patent spring clip.
Conklin metal pen set.
After trying the pen with Ambre de Birmanie I was surprised by how much I liked the results. While not super saturated the pleasant color and nice line shading that was displayed is very pleasing. This test led to me noticing the Conklin’s #3 semi-flex nib showed some disturbing ink starvation. Over time I’ve happened across articles that mention that even the flexible old pens of yore were not meant to flex as wide or as long as a calligraphy pen, for example. Still there are some that can maintain a happy ink flow for a good long time. This pen didn’t do that.
Fussing With Flex
I can live with the Conklin’s ink flow since I think it just might be the way it is but it did make me think of another pen I had that was bedeviling me with similar problems. The history of this one is that a year or so ago I found on an old Sheaffer parts pen a nib that was actually flexible. After some trial and error I put together a pen from old parts to give this nib a new home. I called it “Frankenflex”. From the beginning I noticed there wasn’t enough flow and as the nib flexed the ink dried up. I put the project aside and almost forgot about it till I was looking for a pen to try the Diablo Menthe in and saw it laying there. Taking another crack at the pen and seeing if it really was as bad as I remember seemed like a good idea. As you can see from the second writing sample shown later in this post I did not imagine the flow problems. There are many areas where the line separates into two small tracks which are the two tines distanced from each other with no ink flow to fill the middle.
As for the Diablo Menthe ink I don’t quite like it. It’s very light and thin looking even when it shades darker which isn’t endearing. I’ll keep thinking of a good use for it, though, and maybe one the right color paper it will grow on me.
After filling the Frankenflex I decided to get back at trying to make it write correctly. Ink flow has a few different aspects to it including the amount of ink, the viscosity of the ink, and the way the surface tension is maintained. The mechanics behind those include the distance between feed and nib, the size of the ink/air channels, and the shape of the nib slit. There’s a lot more to it than those factors (some good information about this can be found here) but those I mentioned are ones a simple mind like mine can handle. Deciding that widening the channels on the feed was the way to go I went to work.
If you look at the first picture below you’ll see the parts of the pen that do the heavy lifting. On a Sheaffer of this era the feed (A) has a long half-round extension (B) which slides into a hole at the end (which you can see in the next picture). The ink travels up this feed extension into the middle of the feed proper where is gets to the underside of the nib through a slot cut into the topside. It’s a bit more complex than the usual feed you see in fountain pens of this era but still rather straightforward. My goal was to increase the width and depth of the feed channels and the width of the top feed slot. Hopefully by doing this I would increase the flow and supply the nib enough ink to keep it from drying out when flexed to make a thick line.
I used an X-acto knife and some fine sandpaper to attack the job with. Heeding the saying “easy does it” as a guide I only modified a little each time and then put the pen back together to test how it wrote. The third picture in he set above will show you what the feed looked like after I widened it a bit. A series of writing samples seen below show my progress (and frustrations) as I worked along. Test 2 looked like I was making progress and I was happy. However, it still needed improvement so I went back to make more adjustments. The third sample you see looks worse than the second one for no reason I could figure out. Fickle is the fountain pen and its ink feed mechanism! Confused but not beaten I took it all apart again and did more adjusting and widening. Finally we come to the last test and its satisfactory result. There is a lot of improvement in general and it was a nice point to stop before doing more damage than good. Yes, I’m very good at doing damage if not careful.
You may notice I used a different ink in each test and pose the question did that make a difference in flow? I do find that thin inks don’t seem to work as well in flexible pens as ones that are more syrupy. I’ve not done a controlled scientific-y test to see if this is correct and the fact that denser liquids have less capillary action would seem to contradict my observations so I just wind up confused as usual. The picture below shows the Frankenflex nib with the tines widely separated. Between them is a ribbon of ink that when it breaks stops in the ink from making a solid line. The goal of all this was to keep that ink flowing down the gap.
Frankenflex nib flexing.
Padding This Post
There is one more thing I really need to mention before finishing this all up: For the samples I used the new Rhodia Dot Pad which I recently purchased. It’s quickly become my favorite pad style due to the both the pattern and the paper. Rhodia pads always have great fountain pen friendly paper in them and this pad is no exception. The smooth 80g acid-free, pH neutral paper has purple dots in a grid on it which is both useful and discrete. I’m really sold on it.
You’ll also see a lovely roller blotter in the picture below that was purchased for me (I paid him for it, don’t worry) by Rodney, a grand person from the great state of Hawaii. It’s made of the native Koa wood by David Mozdren who runs The WoodJoint (808-294-3283 is the number but no website and I know nothing more of his work). The wood is beautiful and often used in the construction of musical instruments like Ukuleles.
J. Herbin inks, Frankenflex on left, Conklin on right, and Koa wood blotter.
Musical Finish
So, we come to the end of this rambling post with something I thought I’d never mention: Ukuleles. Maybe in the future I’ll fit Zithers or Theremins in somewhere.
The Wahl Company is still in business today. If you are a man and had a trimmer used on your hair at the barber you most likely experienced one of their products. Sadly, they do not make writing instruments anymore having sold that division to Parker in the 1950s.
A Wahl pen and friends.
Years before they were absorbed Wahl itself absorbed a firm to buttress their market leading Eversharp mechanical pencils. Boston Fountain Pen Company made good quality pens and had a few nifty patents for an inner cap and roller clip. They were always a bit short on capital, however, and Wahl knew a good thing when it saw it. After the purchase in 1917 the old Boston marked stock was used up and eventually Wahl started sticking its name on the barrels and nibs.
Wahl eyedropper pen.
So the Boston pen became the Wahl Tempoint pen. Tempoint rolls off your tongue and has a nice sound but the meaning is pretty nebulous. It’s said that it is supposed to mean “tempered point” to bring to mind flexibility and strength but in my head also conjures up the idea of “temporary point”. Anyway, the catalog of the time says the point is crafted with a special “hand hammering process” and the iridium is “fused” not “annealed” to the point for a longer life. I’m thinking if that’s the case I want to be annealed for my personal longevity.
Until the introduction of the Wahl Metal Pen these warmed over Boston pens were what was peddled. Still, they were on par with the best black hard rubber products of the time. In this post I’m showing off a simple chased BHR Tempoint eyedropper. In the 1919 catalog this model is called the “Ardmore” which may or may not be a model name. I say that since next to all the names in this book are the legend “Telegraph Word” which makes me think that these tags were used for orders via that method. One of the best things about the catalog other than the pregnant advertising prose is an illustration used a few times of a wing-collared businessman holding a pen the size of a baseball bat. It’s just superimposed over his hand and gives a certain surreal mood to the page.
Elephantitus of the pen.
My pen came to me by way of Paris a few years ago. I was lucky that the original box and instruction insert were with it which shows it’s an early model after the change in ownership since on the lid are the words “Heretofore known as the Boston Safety Pen”. Does it get quainter than that? It fills with an eyedropper which is the simplest ink reservoir system for a fountain pen. You unscrew the section and squirt ink directly into the barrel with something similar to, well, an eyedropper. The nib is a small stub which has a nice, sharp feel to it.
A "Tempoint" nib.
The other noteworthy thing about the pen is that it came with a skull clip. The French seemed to keep using aftermarket clips longer than other places and I find this one to be especially interesting. I did a blog post about it a while ago here.
So, this is a rather unremarkable but strangely satisfying pen. An eyedropper is the fountain pen stripped to the core and it’s always good to go back to basics.
Here is another recycled bit of content for my blog. The second graveyard I visited in Savannah was Colonial Park. Indeed, it is park like in a central location with people picnicking, enjoying the green space, and children frolicking in a playground at one end. It’s the oldest intact graveyard in Savannah and was operational from 1750 to 1853. Many revolutionary war era graves are here. Most of the burial vaults are also interestingly made of brick which was a more plentiful material when they were constructed than quarried stone.
"Sacred To the memory of Rosannah Millen/Wife of John Millen/Who departed this Life the 24th of Febry AD. 1810 In the 58th Year of her Age./The nist is blessed./She lived by faith. She slept in Jesus./And shall awake with joy at the resurrection/Of the just to inherit glory./This Stone tells where reposes the remains of John Millen/Who departed this Life 28th Oct. 1811/Aged 54 years/The following lines are expressive of his Sufferings/& Expectations-/Afflictions weight I long had borne/And try’ed the healing art in vain/Till mercy whisper’d cease to mourn And death released me from my pain/Death came by sin, but even death is made/Away from pain through Christ our living head."
