Lamy 27M

[meanwhile]

Myu has already written the definitive review of the 27, so I will be keeping this review relatively short. As the 27 was a rival to the 51 and Snorkel I'm going to concentate on comparing it to these pens. However this isn't a true comparative review as I won't be discussing those pens in detail - I think each is well enough known that I don't have to, and I'm lazy (and flu-ish.)

 

The 27 was Lamy's rival to the Parker 51 and Snorkel. It placed a conical semi-hooded hood in an elipsoid body with a piston filler - an obviously promising combination - and added a "Tintomatic" feed designed to provide an unusually constant ink flow. Unlike the 51's famous collector design (which is not used in the 51 Special Edition or Parker 100) the Tintomatic is still used today - it's the heart of the very successful Lamy 2000, which shares many of its characteristics with the 27.

 

The standard 27 was slimmer than the 51; the M variation reviewed here was the same size.

 

So. how does the 27M look compared to the 51 and the Snorkel?

 

 

Nib and Writing ability

Lamy 4, Parker 4, Snorkel 5

My 27 has an F nib. It's stiff (as you'd expect of a conical design) opening up to average wetness as I wear it in, and the Tintomatic feed seems to work well - the nib is never short of ink no matter how fast I write, but even PR Chocolat dries quickly, because the 27 never puts out too much ink. Unlike the 51 but like the Snorkel, the 27 feels very "directional" - you have a strong sense of nib orientation. This is a pen that would make a wonderful cursive italic. It would also suit those who write Pthalo-ishly small, due to the exceptional feeling of control. Although the nib is an F rather an XF or even XXF I had no problems writing my in my "small hand" style, where lower case letters are only 2mm high. While similar to a Triumph nib, I don't think it feels quite as good - but then I'm one of those people who feel that the Triumph Snorkels were THE highpoint of fountain pen design.

 

 

Filler

Lamy 4, Parker 4, Snorkel 5

The Lamy has an excellent piston filler and viewing windows. I haven't measured the capacity, but the pen seems to write about as long as a 51 or Snorkel from a single fill. It's a better than average filler, so I give it a 4, the average filler (a reasonable CC) getting a 3 on my system of scoring.

 

 

Appearence

Lamy 4, Parker 3, Snorkel 4

The marroon resin on this NOS pen has a deep shine, the join between the end cap and pen body is indectable. While the same size as the 51, the 27M has a more graceful shape and the exposed nib gives if a focus the 51 lacks. If the cap had the same over-engineered panache as the Snorkel then the 27 would have been 5, but it's more on the level of the 51's cap. (Btw, it's a push fit with a 51-ish retaining ring, not a screw cap.)

 

 

Physical Construction and Reliability

Lamy 4, Parker 5, Snorkel 5

My sense is that the body of the 27 isn't as sturdy as those of the other two pens, so it's marked down here. The machining is excellent though - you'd be very glad to get this quality of workmanship on a modern pen - and it doesn't feel unusually fragile.

 

 

Overall

Lamy 4, Parker 5, Snorkel 5

To me, the 51 and Snorkel seem to add up to more than the sum of their parts. Although possibly superior to each of its rivals in some areas the 27 doesn't quite manage to achieve this. Perhaps the problem is that it feels too much like it's caught between the other two pens - with a 51-ish body, but a Triumph-ish nib, thus reducing the impact of its own character. It's still an excellent pen in its own right, but it won't be displacing the 51 or Snork from my list of just 3-4 regular users.

Edited July 2, 2007 by meanwhile

[Dan Carmell]

Nice review, Jonathan! I'd like to see some photos to supplement it, but you give a good sense of performance and the fit and finish angle.

 

Dan

[meanwhile]

Nice review, Jonathan! I'd like to see some photos to supplement it, but you give a good sense of performance and the fit and finish angle.

 

Dan

 

Some photos will be coming along. When I'm a little less flu struck!

[Keng]

Thank you Jonathan, an interesting comparison between these pens. In my quest for the pen, I do wish that it is easier to find the Lamy 27 as compared to the Snorkel or P51.

[meanwhile]

Thank you Jonathan, an interesting comparison between these pens. In my quest for the pen, I do wish that it is easier to find the Lamy 27 as compared to the Snorkel or P51.

 

Keng -

 

The slim 27's are easy-ish to find at www.martiniauctions.com/. They also come up on european ebay occasionally.

 

The 51 sized 27M's are much, much harder to find. (And the rolled gold pen that Myu has may be a one off item!) I may be selling my 27M, if you're interested - I like the pen, but like I say I'm cutting down to only a 3-4 users and it hasn't displaced the 51/Snork/Deby Kinney custom Go. Someone already has first dibs at deal though. I could update you in a week or so.

[Keng]

Keng -

 

The slim 27's are easy-ish to find at www.martiniauctions.com/. They also come up on european ebay occasionally.

 

The 51 sized 27M's are much, much harder to find. (And the rolled gold pen that Myu has may be a one off item!) I may be selling my 27M, if you're interested - I like the pen, but like I say I'm cutting down to only a 3-4 users and it hasn't displaced the 51/Snork/Deby Kinney custom Go. Someone already has first dibs at deal though. I could update you in a week or so.

 

Jonathan,

Keep me posted. Will be keen if price is right

 

[MYU]

Nice review, Jonathan. I think you made some very interesting comparisons.

 

However, I have a few remarks:

 

1) Ink window - The Parker 51 and Sheaffer Snorkel lack this. I would think that most people like having an ink window. You do make a very brief mention of it, but I think it should be emphasized as an advantageous feature.

2) Piston filler - The 51 has it for simplicity with the aerometric, but the 27 holds noticeably more. The Snorkel is a very advanced mechanism, but very complicated (and expensive) to service--by design, the 27 is more reliable. The only trouble with the 27 is that if your fingers are wet, it's hard to get a grip on the end cap.

3) Nib - You focused on the writing characteristics of the nib installed--a fine nib. The 51 and Snorkel is mostly found in fine and medium sizes, with the broad being less common. Anything else, like stubs or obliques are VERY hard to find. The nice thing about the 27 is that oblique nibs are readily found. And I think you'd be pleased with the wet lines they can deliver. I find them on average to be very smooth writers, and I'd say they get a 5.

 

The material used on the 51 and Snorkel feels a touch more solid and scratch resistant than the 27, but I would say it is a subtle difference and not a deal breaker. In the final analysis, I think it all comes down to personal preference because each of these 3 pens have very strong offerings in their own right. And that is the beauty of the fountain pen community--diversity. I had noticed a completely lack of awareness about the 27 and thought it deserved to be recognized. I'm glad to see that some people on FPN have come to appreciate it.

 

All criticism should be tempered by price point. I consider the Lamy 2000 a better pen than the 27, but it's a very distinctly different style of pen. You're also going to pay more for a 2000.

 

As for finding Lamy pens, yes--the best thing is to search through German auctions (you'd be surprised how many list in their German worded categories on eBay.de, yet will accept PayPal and ship to the USA). Martini Auctions does have them frequently, though in rather significant degrees of condition. As for 27m vs. 27n, I'd say that people satisfied with the 51 size should go with the 27m, and those preferring just a little smaller should go for the 27n.

Edited July 1, 2007 by MYU

[meanwhile]

Nice review, Jonathan. I think you made some very interesting comparisons.

 

However, I have a few remarks:

 

1) Ink window - The Parker 51 and Sheaffer Snorkel lack this. I would think that most people like having an ink window. You do make a very brief mention of it, but I think it should be emphasized as an advantageous feature.

 

An ink window is a plus. I was happy mentioning that it was there and leaving it to other people to work out how important it would be to them. If I was going to write more about it, I'd actually minimize it's usefulness. It isn't clear enough - as say the Level's translucent barrel is - that you simply notice when ink is low. Instead you have to fiddle around with the pen, holding it up to the light, waiting to see if it goes clear. It's useful if you check it quite regularly, otherwise not. If the usability of the window had been such that you could see while glancing at the pen while writing, then I'd have given it a 5.

 

2) Piston filler - The 51 has it for simplicity with the aerometric, but the 27 holds noticeably more. The Snorkel is a very advanced mechanism, but very complicated (and expensive) to service--by design, the 27 is more reliable. The only trouble with the 27 is that if your fingers are wet, it's hard to get a grip on the end cap.

 

My understanding is that Snorks need servicing about every 15 years. I don't see this as a big problem! In return the Snork lets you stash an ink vial in a corner of your pocket or briefcase, and you never have to worry about running out of ink again.

 

3) Nib - You focused on the writing characteristics of the nib installed--a fine nib. The 51 and Snorkel is mostly found in fine and medium sizes, with the broad being less common. Anything else, like stubs or obliques are VERY hard to find. The nice thing about the 27 is that oblique nibs are readily found. And I think you'd be pleased with the wet lines they can deliver. I find them on average to be very smooth writers, and I'd say they get a 5.

 

I like the fine I have a lot. But I'm a tough scorer on nibs. Re. obliques, I rely on your excellent review.

 

The material used on the 51 and Snorkel feels a touch more solid and scratch resistant than the 27, but I would say it is a subtle difference and not a deal breaker.

 

I did give the 27 a 4! The 51 and Snork are two of the toughest pens known - I'd only expect Targas, L2K's, and Rotring 600's to out-tough them. And maybe Go's and Levels, based on attempting to get my Go back from my cat, who one evening gave a splendid demonstration of how soccer, free running, and baton twirling could be combined into a single sport.

 

The 27 is above average in construction. I value toughness highly in pens for the same reason I wear a G-Shock watch that will survive shocks that would kill me: I'm somewhat clumsy and adventure-prone, plus there's that cat....

 

My guess is that a 27 is just tough as an Estie - it has distinctly above average construction, but it is not 51/Snork tough.

 

In the final analysis, I think it all comes down to personal preference because each of these 3 pens have very strong offerings in their own right. And that is the beauty of the fountain pen community--diversity. I had noticed a completely lack of awareness about the 27 and thought it deserved to be recognized. I'm glad to see that some people on FPN have come to appreciate it.

 

It's a very good pen! The combination of a semi hooded nib, piston fill, and one of the best shaped pen bodies I know are excellent. But as you know I'm a tough scorer - notice the 4 I gave to the 51 for writing ability and the 3 for looks. One of my 4's for Overall is equivalent to a lot of people's 5's. On my current rating system an MB 149 or a Pel M200 would be a 3; a Targa, an original Balance or an Estie is a 4! I use 4 to mean "DAMN good pen" and 5 to mean "an UNMISSABLE classic". If I was reviewing rock music, there would probably entire years when I wouldn't hand out a 5. Add subjectivity on top of that...

 

Yes, I might well have made the 27 a 5 with a nib like the obliques you describe. I'd consider buying a slim 27 to swap nibs, if I could work out how. And if it helps, the 27 is more a 4.5 than a 3.9...

Edited July 6, 2007 by meanwhile

[georges zaslavsky]

That 27 must not be so common but I am pretty sure it is a great writer.

[meanwhile]

That 27 must not be so common but I am pretty sure it is a great writer.

 

It writes very like an Esterbrook 9550 nib - stiff and fine, precise. The combination of the high capacity piston fill, fine nib, and a semi-hooded design to reduce evaporation makes it an almost endless writer.

 

[piembi]

The Lamy 27 can be found on ebay.de frequently.

I have some 27s, mainly with very smooth OB nibs and they are wonderful and reliable writers.

 

I do not have a Snorkel so I can compare only to the Parker 51 and there is one thing that I really love with the Lamy 27: the section unscrews and everything (nib, feed etc.) can be easily disassebled and cleaned. Reassembling is very easy and self-explanatory.

 

I am using the 51 more often than the Lamy 27 because I feel more comfortable with the size of the 51 than the size of the 27n (have only one 27m but this one has some BB nib that is not suitable for everyday writing). Thus said I prefer the 27s nib. All of mine are smooth, definitely smoother than my 51s and with good, consistend ink flow.

[MYU]

The Lamy 27 can be found on ebay.de frequently.

I have some 27s, mainly with very smooth OB nibs and they are wonderful and reliable writers.

 

I do not have a Snorkel so I can compare only to the Parker 51 and there is one thing that I really love with the Lamy 27: the section unscrews and everything (nib, feed etc.) can be easily disassebled and cleaned. Reassembling is very easy and self-explanatory.

 

I am using the 51 more often than the Lamy 27 because I feel more comfortable with the size of the 51 than the size of the 27n (have only one 27m but this one has some BB nib that is not suitable for everyday writing). Thus said I prefer the 27s nib. All of mine are smooth, definitely smoother than my 51s and with good, consistend ink flow.

If you find the 51 to be "just right" for your hand, definitely try a Lamy 27m. I measured both and they're pretty much identical in size. I use a Lamy 27m with F nib in my daily rotation--I love it.

[RevAaron]

I totally agree! I recently bought a lot of Lamy pens which included a 27m. Awesome pen! I have one that's an M or a B, possibly something oblique. I've never had an oblique pen, there isn't much of a visual slant, but no matter how I try to 'fix' the tines they'll end up going back to a configuration that needs to be written a bit at an an angle; there's also quite a bit of variation between the downstroke and the sidestroke *and* a fair bit of flex to boot! Seems to flex way more than any other 27 I've used, though the others are all pretty inflexible and sharp EF/F.

 

So, I pretty much scored hit the jackpot with it! Gotta fix those tines (or my handwriting)- when they go to this out-of-alignment place, they like to scratch at some angles. Drives me nuts.

 

I definitely recommend keeping an eye open at MartiniAuctions.com - compared to eBay, the only con to using MartiniAuctions is the shipping time from Germany. Considering the inflated S/H many pen folks charge on eBay, the $8-10 international shipping for the auctions I've looked at there is pretty reasonable.

 

Compared to a 51, I'd say I tend toward the Lamy 27, largely because I'm a sucker for semi-hooded nibs- helps me keep the pen oriented. That said, I've been having a much better time with a real 51 in that regard vs one of the Hero clones. Not sure if it's the plastic, nib sharpness or what. Caps are exchangable between my 27m and my 51 Vac. Though, I kind of like the firmness and roundness of nib that the Snorkels have- idiot proof when I'm out of the house.

 

I've a few Lamy 27s now and I plan on selling one or two. A couple of the specimens have cracks in the cap which could be repaired quite easily, even if they aren't the most attractive afterwards.

 

edit: I forgot to note the most important properties, at least in my eyes, that the 27 has- it is by far the smoothest EEF/EF pen I've used. Also, they're incredibly tolerant pens- a lot of pens I've used don't do well with Lamy Blue-Black or other iron gall inks- squeaky nibs or otherwise very unsmooth writing. The 27 does a great job with every ink I've thrown at it.

 

MYU- I keep meaning to make a reply to your PM. Possibly to see if you have any spare parts to buy or trade.

 

Aaron

Edited August 5, 2008 by RevAaron

[overwriter]

I first saw this review 7 or 8 years ago and thought I would add my thoughts today. All this time I have had both 27's. A Fine, a Broad(that is very stubbish) and a Broad Oblique and two 51 Aerometrics. Both Mediums.

 

I have to say that they are all great pens and the 27's have travelled a lot and have held up every bit as well as the 51's for me.

 

Zero issues with sturdiness and reliability and like the 51's very good for long writing sessions but maybe even more so since as piston fillers they hold more ink.

[Namo]

Great review.The 27m is indeed a great pen. The piston has a huge capacity, comparable to the Pelikan 400nn. My only complaint was the ring that makes the cap hold to the pen. Comes in my way, and the little ears of the 2K are IMHO a big progress on the design. The nib (I used to have a stubbish B ) is probably one of the best I've written with, missing maybe a bit of magic.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Namo

[LUWAN]

Great review.The 27m is indeed a great pen. The piston has a huge capacity, comparable to the Pelikan 400nn. My only complaint was the ring that makes the cap hold to the pen. Comes in my way, and the little ears of the 2K are IMHO a big progress on the design. The nib (I used to have a stubbish B ) is probably one of the best I've written with, missing maybe a bit of magic.

i wish L2K's little ears are as good as those on PFM