Jump to content

My 1St Touchdown White Dot Restoration


KBeezie

Recommended Posts

Not the first I've had restored, but the first I restored and polished myself.

 

Once disassembled was pretty clear it needed a new sac (hard as a rock, but least not in pieces), and a new o-ring.

 

http://static.karlblessing.com/pens/touchdown_wd/prework_disassembled.jpg

 

Cleaned and Polished up the pen while I was waiting for sac and ring to come in (didn't need to order sac cement or silicone grease since I already had it from several lever-filler restores).

 

Got it all together.

 

http://static.karlblessing.com/pens/touchdown_wd/tdwd_final_1280.jpg

 

Got it inked up with some Akkerman #6 (Binnehof Blues) and adjusted/aligned and smoothed the nib.

 

http://static.karlblessing.com/pens/touchdown_wd/write_binnehof.jpg

 

:D So not only my first TD restore, but my first White Dot owned.

 

I figure this to be a 1950 because the Statesman (Early TD) was only 49-50, and in '49 they serial numbered the nibs.

Edited by KBeezie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 23
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • KBeezie

    8

  • Happy Harry

    4

  • betweenthelens

    2

  • Namru

    1

Nice tidy work. The last time I re-saced a Touchdown the sac had leaked, petrified and then stuck itself to the inside of the sac protector. Such a messy job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know about the inside job (hidden...) but the outside looks might good Karl :puddle:

 

D.ick

~

KEEP SAFE, WEAR A MASK, KEEP A DISTANCE.

Freedom exists by virtue of self limitation.

~

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice tidy work. The last time I re-saced a Touchdown the sac had leaked, petrified and then stuck itself to the inside of the sac protector. Such a messy job.

Did you use shellac/sac cement evenly around the nipple, and talc' the sac? ( also I used silicone grease around the o-ring the plunger glides on, and also opted to use silicone grease around the barrel/section connection instead of a thread sealant (ie: a little easier to get back open for now if I need to, wanted to make sure it was properly working and sealed before I applied something a little harder to undo to the threads).

Edited by KBeezie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first one I did (that Tuckaway) had the same problem, Namru! That took a fair bit of scraping to get loose, for sure.

 

I use sac cement on the nipple (with a #0 round artist's brush) then install the sac, and add another careful ring right at the joint, just to be sure. The section sealant is easy to get open again, no sweat at all, by the way. It opens up very easily with just a gentle kiss from the heat gun, nowhere NEAR what you need for shellac.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first one I did (that Tuckaway) had the same problem, Namru! That took a fair bit of scraping to get loose, for sure.

 

I use sac cement on the nipple (with a #0 round artist's brush) then install the sac, and add another careful ring right at the joint, just to be sure. The section sealant is easy to get open again, no sweat at all, by the way. It opens up very easily with just a gentle kiss from the heat gun, nowhere NEAR what you need for shellac.

I did the same thing with my sac since I got the sac cement (built in brush) from FountainPenSacs.com. A light coat around the nipples, put the sac on by tweezer then just rotate it around a bit so it's on there straight and the shellac is evenly spread around. Then a small dab around the edge on the outside just to be sure. Nothing to crazy just a small thin coat. Talc up the sac a little, then slip on the sac protector since you don't want it sticking to the edges.

 

While that was drying I Got the o-ring out of the barrel (took a little bit since it was dried and the stuff they used to lubricate it was gulky. Cleaned that up a bit, dabbed a little bit of silicone grease into the grove, then worked in the new o-ring, getting one part of it in, and then just rotating around with the edge of a small watch screw driver til it eventually all moved into the groove. Then applied another small dab of silicone grease around the exposed side of the o-ring. Installed the plunger and endcap, worked the plunger up and down past the o-ring as needed, a couple small dabs of silicone grease on the plunger again and worked it up and down and rotated a bit.

 

Then I just put a little bit of silicone grease on the threads for the section and put the barrel back on. Will probably replace that with a proper thread sealant, but for now the silicone grease (with 10% of it being a silicone-based thickener, gives a little tack so it's not like all runny like oil) will suffice.

Edited by KBeezie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks good Karl. I've noticed something special with fixing up vintage pens for myself. A sense of accomplishment and a pride of ownership that new stuff doesn't equal. Thanks to Clayton (hooker56) I realized all I was missing was a bit of confidence. Keep it up and keep posting your photos, they may be nicer than your pens.

 

Paul

"Nothing is impossible, even the word says 'I'm Possible!'" Audrey Hepburn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great job! It looks fantastic and congrats on your first White Dot Sheaffer.

I do love the "fat" TDs.

 

Looks good Karl. I've noticed something special with fixing up vintage pens for myself. A sense of accomplishment and a pride of ownership that new stuff doesn't equal.

 

That is definitely true.

Parker: Sonnet Flighter, Rialto Red Metallic Laque, IM Chiseled Gunmetal, Latitude Stainless, 45 Black, Duovac Blue Pearl Striped, 51 Standard Black, Vac Jr. Black, 51 Aero Black, 51 Vac Blue Cedar, Duofold Jr. Lapis, 51 Aero Demi Black, 51 Aero Demi Teal, 51 Aero Navy Gray, Duofold Pastel Moire Violet, Vac Major Golden Brown, Vac Deb. Emerald, 51 Vac Dove Gray, Vac Major Azure, Vac Jr. Silver Pearl, 51 Vac Black GF Cap, 51 Forest Green GF cap, Vac Jr. Silver Pearl, Duovac Senior Green & Gold, Duovac Deb. Black, Challenger Black, 51 Aero Midnight, Vac. Emerald Jr., Challenger Gray Pearl, 51 Vac Black, Duofold Int. Black, Duofold Jr. Red.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

well done :thumbup:

Pens are like watches , once you start a collection, you can hardly go back. And pens like all fine luxury items do improve with time

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What size sac did it take?

The #15 as noted by the touchdown repair kit on FountainPenSacs.com

 

http://fountainpensacs.com/sheaffer_repairs.html

 

 

#14 S for Snorkels

#15 S for Slender Touchdowns, including Imperials

#17½ X1 7/8 N for Touchdown Tuckaways, PFM's and first year fat barreled (1949) Touchdowns​​​

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, your pen is a TM TD from '51/'52 . The TM TD ran from last Q '50 to last Q '52 and the TM TD Statesman one of two open nib models in the range, the other the Sovereign of which there where several versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, your pen is a TM TD from '51/'52 . The TM TD ran from last Q '50 to last Q '52 and the TM TD Statesman one of two open nib models in the range, the other the Sovereign of which there where several versions.

I am curious as to the source you're citing.
Originally I was thinking Early TD but it would have to be slightly thicker than my TD Admiral that I have which is a TM model.
But as noted here (near the middle with caption "Sheaffer Statesman TM Touchdown Pen And Sovereign TM Pencil Persian Blue 1950-1952") : http://www.penhero.com/PenGallery/Sheaffer/SheafferTMTouchdown.htm
They did go from 1950 to 1952 (with the Early TD being 1949-1950 as noted here : http://www.penhero.com/PenGallery/Sheaffer/SheafferTouchdownEarly.htm where I originally thought it to be an early TD, unless all early TDs are also 'Fat' TDs).

 

So I'm just curious if TMs were never made in 1950, or if you're guestimating 1951-1952 even though it could be a 1950? Or perhaps a mix up in years depending on the source.

 

Edit: At best I'm thinking 1950 to 1951, because the Snorkel came out in '52, and the Fat TDs were '49 (unless you know of any 50s Fat TDs), not likely to be a '52 either way.

Edited by KBeezie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I am curious as to the source you're citing.
Originally I was thinking Early TD but it would have to be slightly thicker than my TD Admiral that I have which is a TM model.
But as noted here (near the middle with caption "Sheaffer Statesman TM Touchdown Pen And Sovereign TM Pencil Persian Blue 1950-1952") : http://www.penhero.com/PenGallery/Sheaffer/SheafferTMTouchdown.htm
They did go from 1950 to 1952 (with the Early TD being 1949-1950 as noted here : http://www.penhero.com/PenGallery/Sheaffer/SheafferTouchdownEarly.htm where I originally thought it to be an early TD, unless all early TDs are also 'Fat' TDs).

 

So I'm just curious if TMs were never made in 1950, or if you're guestimating 1951-1952 even though it could be a 1950? Or perhaps a mix up in years depending on the source.

 

Edit: At best I'm thinking 1950 to 1951, because the Snorkel came out in '52, and the Fat TDs were '49 (unless you know of any 50s Fat TDs), not likely to be a '52 either way.

 

 

The "fat" TD or first model (fat and early are the same) did indeed run into 1950, made up to the last quarter when the TM was introduced. Likewise the TM TD ran into 1952 until the last quarter (as I said earlier "The TM TD ran from last Q '50 to last Q '52 ") when the Snorkel was introduced although most times the TM TD is quoted as a 1951 model because of the 1951 catalog. Nor are the TD Craftsman or Admiral actually TM models which starts with the TM TD Sovereign as it's base model. It's not possible to tell the exact year. A defining feature of the TM TD line is that all parts are interchangeable, the Craftsman/Admiral from that period are unique. As to source, most is gained from experience. There is a person (Hugh) on FPGeeks/FPB that is very knowledgeable on these that I've picked up a lot from his posts over the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The "fat" TD or first model (fat and early are the same) did indeed run into 1950, made up to the last quarter when the TM was introduced. Likewise the TM TD ran into 1952 until the last quarter (as I said earlier "The TM TD ran from last Q '50 to last Q '52 ") when the Snorkel was introduced although most times the TM TD is quoted as a 1951 model because of the 1951 catalog. Nor are the TD Craftsman or Admiral actually TM models which starts with the TM TD Sovereign as it's base model. It's not possible to tell the exact year. A defining feature of the TM TD line is that all parts are interchangeable, the Craftsman/Admiral from that period are unique. As to source, most is gained from experience. There is a person (Hugh) on FPGeeks/FPB that is very knowledgeable on these that I've picked up a lot from his posts over the years.

 

 

That's one of the main reason I was asking for some kind of source to least figure out some kind of background as of what may add to the history. For example the guy I have that does my pen restorations (mostly the sheaffers) is the one that told me that the fat ones ended in 49, and that the TMs were just 50-51 because they were discontinued when the snorkels came out.

 

My guess is that it's possible that the TM TDs were never '52 but were surplus sold from a 50-51 manufacturing. But as you said there's really no way to know outside of perhaps cataloging dates and first-hand accounts from those who actually sold Sheaffer at those times.

 

I think in future watermarks and mentions of this particular pen, I'll likely just mark down ~50-51 as that is in my opinion the safest bet of manufacturing.

 

Really nice job and beautiful pen. I have a Sentinel Deluxe that I need to repair.

Thanks, they don't seem to be as difficult as I first thought. It's the body work that usually has me iffy if it needs more than just sac/feed/nib adjustment. IF the above wasn't already in somewhat decent shape, I would have just shipped it off to Sean since he's pretty much an artist when it comes to fixing and polishing plastic/celluloid/etc.
Edited by KBeezie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, they don't seem to be as difficult as I first thought. It's the body work that usually has me iffy if it needs more than just sac/feed/nib adjustment. IF the above wasn't already in somewhat decent shape, I would have just shipped it off to Sean since he's pretty much an artist when it comes to fixing and polishing plastic/celluloid/etc.

 

That's good to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Most Contributions

    1. amberleadavis
      amberleadavis
      43844
    2. PAKMAN
      PAKMAN
      33494
    3. Ghost Plane
      Ghost Plane
      28220
    4. inkstainedruth
      inkstainedruth
      26624
    5. jar
      jar
      26101
  • Upcoming Events

  • Blog Comments

    • Shanghai Knife Dude
      I have the Sailor Naginata and some fancy blade nibs coming after 2022 by a number of new workshop from China.  With all my respect, IMHO, they are all (bleep) in doing chinese characters.  Go use a bush, or at least a bush pen. 
    • A Smug Dill
      It is the reason why I'm so keen on the idea of a personal library — of pens, nibs, inks, paper products, etc. — and spent so much money, as well as time and effort, to “build” it for myself (because I can't simply remember everything, especially as I'm getting older fast) and my wife, so that we can “know”; and, instead of just disposing of what displeased us, or even just not good enough to be “given the time of day” against competition from >500 other pens and >500 other inks for our at
    • adamselene
      Agreed.  And I think it’s good to be aware of this early on and think about at the point of buying rather than rationalizing a purchase..
    • A Smug Dill
      Alas, one cannot know “good” without some idea of “bad” against which to contrast; and, as one of my former bosses (back when I was in my twenties) used to say, “on the scale of good to bad…”, it's a spectrum, not a dichotomy. Whereas subjectively acceptable (or tolerable) and unacceptable may well be a dichotomy to someone, and finding whether the threshold or cusp between them lies takes experiencing many degrees of less-than-ideal, especially if the decision is somehow influenced by factors o
    • adamselene
      I got my first real fountain pen on my 60th birthday and many hundreds of pens later I’ve often thought of what I should’ve known in the beginning. I have many pens, the majority of which have some objectionable feature. If they are too delicate, or can’t be posted, or they are too precious to face losing , still they are users, but only in very limited environments..  I have a big disliking for pens that have the cap jump into the air and fly off. I object to Pens that dry out, or leave blobs o
  • Chatbox

    You don't have permission to chat.
    Load More
  • Files






×
×
  • Create New...