Why doesn't Parker revive the "P51"?

[Blade Runner]

The P51 is legendary, sold more than any pen of its time, still has a huge

following and can still keep pace with modern pens. So why doesn't Parker

revive the genuine aerometric P51?

It seems to me that the 51 mine is not yet spent.

The Hero Co. evidently concurs.

Btw, I don't consider the LE pseudo 51 a true revival.

[LapsangS]

Yes, the revival of Parker 51 would be nice, but what would the retail price be like? 300, 400 or 500 dollars? At least we have Hero 100 for less than 30 bucks

[Blade Runner]

Yes, the revival of Parker 51 would be nice, but what would the retail price be like? 300, 400 or 500 dollars? At least we have Hero 100 for less than 30 bucks

No! Something affordable and commensurate with the cost of production.

They might want fancy caps as an option, but I would hope for cheaper,

user type caps.

Does anyone know how much a Parker 51 in 1960 would cost in today's

dollars?

[LapsangS]

There are all kinds of statistics and price/wage indexes that can be used to calculate how much inflation has raised the prices of different products in the last 100 years but it is difficult because one has to keep in mind so many factors which contribute in it.

[Vintage Pens Fan]

If a P "51" cost $ 20.00 in 1960 it would be $135.2 in today's dollar.

 

http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflati...nCalculator.asp

 

Still very affordable, & I consider it a deal.

 

David

[HesNot]

There was a discussion along these lines in the Parker forum a month or two ago - I do believe that Richard made some compelling arguments (when does he not?) that in order to create a real "51" as it was back in the day would require significant hand finishing, no injection molding, an aerometric filler, etc... which would mean fairly high production costs and assuming a LOT of sales an MSRP around $200.

 

Basically, a lot of the engineering that has made the "51" so durable and reliable is not easily replicated with modern manufacturing techniques.

 

Still - it makes you wonder how many people would pay $200 for a real "51" instead of a (bleep) 51SE...

[RLTodd]

Why? Simply because they could not recoup the cost of retooling and production.

 

You will notice that all the protective patents have lapsed yet no one here is going to put up their capital to start making them.

 

 

Hero, being in communist China is not a rational comparison with the rest of the world. Further, AIR was previously discussed, even the Hero 100 takes many cost saving production techniques into its make up.

[Blade Runner]

Something between $135 and $200 would seem reasonable to me.

How many modern pens at that price range compete favorably to

the 51?

[Blade Runner]

Perhaps reviving the 51 in its original form would be too embarrasing an admission by Parker

that they were wrong to discontinue it.

[Samovar]

Perhaps reviving the 51 in its original form would be too embarrasing an admission by Parker

that they were wrong to discontinue it.

I don't if it's not worse having an anniversary model out that not a single serious shop owner would recommend....

 

I was looking at one lately and an owner told me to find a vintage one.

I think Parker should seriously consider making a new 51. I'd be the first one to buy it.

[meanwhile]

The articles I've read on the 51s design said/implied that

 

1. The manufacturing process was very labour intensive

 

2. The machinery used was non-standard

 

Given that labour is now the biggest manufacturing cost for such items, and that demand for fps is enormously reduced (making the cost of that non-standard machinery hard to amortize) it's hard to see Parker making 51s in their own plants.

 

Otoh, they could do a deal with Hero, who have cheap labour and the right plant. Hero could provide the internals, preferably in a variety of nib widths at last, and Parker provide the sort of high quality external components seen on the Parker 100 and market the pen.

 

But why bother? 99% of the pen buying market accepted the 51SE as a real 51 - which is all that counts from Parker's point of view.

[RonB]

Frankly, I think the fact that you can often buy a perfectly working Parker "51" on ebay for $40 or so means that the supply (tens of millions made) exceeds the demand at the higher price point that would be necessary to re-create this pen. I don't frankly think there is a need for a new "51" when you can buy 25 a week on ebay if you so desire.

 

Just my opinion of course.

 

Ron

[Danosaurus]

The thing that strikes me about this discussion is that given 50 years of progression in manufacturing technology, it is actually MORE difficult to produce a product of the same quality and craftsmanship of the time. Does this make any sense? You would think that advances in technology would allow manufacturers to produce the same products better and cheaper. Sad really.

 

I love my P51s though I'm not sure I would buy a modern version anyway. Part of my attraction to them is the fact that they are 50+ years old and still perform so well. The other day Fox Movie Channel was airing a movie made in 1948 (can't remember the title) and the first thing that popped into my head was "wow, that's the year my cedar blue 51 was made!" Things sure were different back then...

[meanwhile]

The thing that strikes me about this discussion is that given 50 years of progression in manufacturing technology, it is actually MORE difficult to produce a product of the same quality and craftsmanship of the time. Does this make any sense? You would think that advances in technology would allow manufacturers to produce the same products better and cheaper. Sad really.

Things aren't quite that depressing.

 

Firstly, the 51 was an item made by factory workers to be used by the middle class. So a rise in the living standards of the working class relative to the middle class will make the product more expensive.

 

Secondly, the market size is comparatively tiny now, so amortzing plant and research costs (if only for changes in manufacturing process) is more expensive.

 

Thirdly, the 51 was designed to take advantage of the production techniques and relative costs of its time. A product truly designed in the spirit of the 51 today would be a different pen. It's impressive, for instance, that the VP with its retracting mechanism, interchangeable nibs, and arguably a stronger body, sells for almost exactly the inflation adjusted price of a 51, despite using more gold, being produced in a time of higher labour costs, and in much smaller numbers.

[RLTodd]

The thing that strikes me about this discussion is that given 50 years of progression in manufacturing technology, it is actually MORE difficult to produce a product of the same quality and craftsmanship of the time. Does this make any sense?

I don't buy that statement either.

 

What I meant was the CAPITAL investment in the necessary tools and dies in addition to the hand crafts and quality control requirements would make it prohibitively expensive. PLUS the demand would be so low, in today's market, that there would be too small a volume to reasonably distribute the startup and tooling costs.

 

With today's technology I am betting you could deliver a better "51" but I am guessing it would have to retail for over a grand. Even at $1,000 a unit it would probably be a money looser in todays market.

 

Anyone is free to try to start building "51" copies, they just won't be able to stamp the word "Parker" on them, unless they can cut a deal with Newell-Rubermaid.

[Blade Runner]

Why would it cost any more for capital investment for a revived 51 than

say building the 100 from scratch?

[kissing]

I have a feeling that Sanford doesn't fully understand the full potential manufacturing a real Parker "51" would be.

 

Also, the engineering technology incorporated on the Parker "51" is much more elaborate than any other fountain pen that is being produced today. Back then, the Parker "51" was the pen that could not be 'mass produced'.

[yoyology]

Why would it cost any more for capital investment for a revived 51 than

say building the 100 from scratch?

Interestingly, I found part of your answer in this post linked from a current "Parker 51 v. Hero 100" thread.

Hero Pen Factory was established after the nationalization of Parker Shanghai factory. So, at least initially, they used the old Parker equipment to make pens there. The "real thing" Parker "51" has been discontinued several decades ago, but the Shanghai Hero factory has been continuing to produce their version of "Hero 100" until today.

So, there was little capital investment required, since the initial tooling and construction of machinery had already been done.

[Blade Runner]

Thanks Yoyology, but I was referring to the Parker 100, not Hero 100.

So why would it cost more for capital investment for a revived 51 than

building a whole new pen like the Parker 100 from scratch?

For one thing, Parker already has the design of the 51. They could skip

the entire R&D phase.

[FLZapped]

Thanks Yoyology, but I was referring to the Parker 100, not Hero 100.

So why would it cost more for capital investment for a revived 51 than

building a whole new pen like the Parker 100 from scratch?

For one thing, Parker already has the design of the 51. They could skip

the entire R&D phase.

Not really. they would have to make changes to go along with the differences in manufacturing techniques - which is what the 100 represents.

 

-Bruce