Will a Waterman 12V nib fit in a 52?

[mikej165]

I purchased a Waterman 12V PSF pen and, unfortunately, have found it to be in bad shape. The sac is disintegrated, the body has a crack near the threads, and the lever box appears dubious. But all is not lost. The pen has a lovely nib that flexes from F to BB easily. Will this nib fit in a 52?

 

Because (or thanks to) the crack in the body, the section of this pen just slides right out, feed and nib intact. To remove the nib, can I (softly) punch the feed/nib assembly from behind to remove it from the section?

 

Thanks all!

[significantpass]

I think they both have #2 size nibs.

[mikej165]

I think they both have #2 size nibs.

The 12V has a #2 New York nib. I know the 52s have #2 nibs as well. I just didn't know if all #2 nibs were created equal and if they were interchangeable. This really is a very nice nib and it deserves to live on in a new pen body.

[mikej165]

I found the following on Richard Binder's excellent website;

 

After devising and patenting a way to circumvent Walter Sheaffer’s lever-filler patent (by mounting the lever in a metal box instead of running its pivot pin through the body of the pen), Waterman began producing its own lever-filling pens in 1915.[1] At that time the new lever-filling version of the Ideal Nº 12 received the added identifier PSF, meaning “Pocket (screw cap) Self Filling.” Two years later, when the company regularized its ailing Standard Numbering System, Waterman’s Ideal Nº 12PSF became Waterman’s Ideal Nº 52. In the newly ordered system, the units digit (2) meant that the pen carried a Nº 2 nib (as before), and the tens digit (5) identified a lever filler.

 

 

I infer from this that the 12 and 52 are one and the same, and by extension the 12v and 52v are also the same pen, albeit under different numbering systems. Given that, it would seem the parts would be interchangeable. Of course, my conclusions could be wrong.

[ZeissIkon]

I found the following on Richard Binder's excellent website;

 

After devising and patenting a way to circumvent Walter Sheaffer’s lever-filler patent (by mounting the lever in a metal box instead of running its pivot pin through the body of the pen), Waterman began producing its own lever-filling pens in 1915.[1] At that time the new lever-filling version of the Ideal Nº 12 received the added identifier PSF, meaning “Pocket (screw cap) Self Filling.” Two years later, when the company regularized its ailing Standard Numbering System, Waterman’s Ideal Nº 12PSF became Waterman’s Ideal Nº 52. In the newly ordered system, the units digit (2) meant that the pen carried a Nº 2 nib (as before), and the tens digit (5) identified a lever filler.

 

 

I infer from this that the 12 and 52 are one and the same, and by extension the 12v and 52v are also the same pen, albeit under different numbering systems. Given that, it would seem the parts would be interchangeable. Of course, my conclusions could be wrong.

 

I agree with your conclusion, Mike; at a minimum, though one can't count on different brands of #2 nibs being the same, all Waterman #2 nibs should interchange easily.

[eckiethump]

I found the following on Richard Binder's excellent website;

 

After devising and patenting a way to circumvent Walter Sheaffer's lever-filler patent (by mounting the lever in a metal box instead of running its pivot pin through the body of the pen), Waterman began producing its own lever-filling pens in 1915.[1] At that time the new lever-filling version of the Ideal Nº 12 received the added identifier PSF, meaning "Pocket (screw cap) Self Filling." Two years later, when the company regularized its ailing Standard Numbering System, Waterman's Ideal Nº 12PSF became Waterman's Ideal Nº 52. In the newly ordered system, the units digit (2) meant that the pen carried a Nº 2 nib (as before), and the tens digit (5) identified a lever filler.

 

 

I infer from this that the 12 and 52 are one and the same, and by extension the 12v and 52v are also the same pen, albeit under different numbering systems. Given that, it would seem the parts would be interchangeable. Of course, my conclusions could be wrong.

 

 

What may be bread and butter knowledge to many, these kind of posts come as healthy reminders of some facts often forgotten.

Eric

[framebaer]

When setting a Waterman nib to the feed, the feed edges should just, and I mean just, be visible peeking out from the nib shoulders when looking down from above.

[ZeissIkon]

When setting a Waterman nib to the feed, the feed edges should just, and I mean just, be visible peeking out from the nib shoulders when looking down from above.

 

Now this is useful information -- if I ever get around to fixing my one Waterman (broken nib and clip torn out of the cap, it's much more likely parts than a fixer) I'll be looking for this post...