Hi guys!
I have a black "51" vacumatic on the way from the PENguin, and I was wondering what inks you Parker enthusiasts use in your 51s or vacs. I'm devoted to my Noodler's Manhattan Black, but I've read that it might not be the best for a vintage pen. I know Richard Binder recommends low-impact inks like Diamine and Waterman's, but I was wondering what you FPN members thought about the issue. Any advice would be much appreciated!

Previously I have used Noodlers Aircorp, Noodlers Blue-Black, PR Midnight Blue, Diamine Royal Blue and currently Caran D'Ache Blue Nuit. With regular flushing and writing, I wouldn't be too worried about any ink being sold today.

John

I posted this recently in another forum:


I wonder how many of Noodlers or Private Reserve ink users are recent users of fountain pens.

I mean, for decades, since the invention of fountain pen ink, ink was not waterproof nor checkproof, and we all learned to live with that. Nowadays, many people want a fountain pen ink which doesn't look like fountain pen ink; either too saturated, design colors or waterproof.

I'm happy with Pelikan black; one of the oldest fountain pen inks, and it's great in my moleskines.

Now, some food for thought:

www.provide.net/~cfh/fenderc.html

scroll down 2/3 and you'll see a chart of the custom colors used in Fender guitars during the 50s and 60s. Now go and check the names of some of the fountain pen inks made by Private Reserve. Coincidence? Serendipity perhaps.

Now, those colors were made by Dupont to be used in car paints. Fender used them to dye the nitrocellulose finish in his instruments. Most of those colors faded, mutated, muted or affected the finish (read the full article).

It took years to discover that. Iit's your pens, your rules, but I'd stay on the safe side if I were to fill a celluloid or resin or any expensive/cherished fountain pen with anything that's not time tested.

There's nothing new under the sun; Parker made Superchrome ink to be used in the 51; years later the ink was discontinued because it was too acidic and destroyed thousands of pens (non51, that is). Parker also made the Penman line in the late 80s-early 90s, and it was also discontinued because it was so concentrated that it clogged or corroded many pens. Right now I have a Duofold Orange International in Parker service which has the gold ring in the section corroded by Penman saphire.

I've met some fountain pen users who have told me that they like brown/sepia ink because it looks like ancient ink. I've told them that that ancient ink was surely either blue or black, and that the brown color is the result of oxidation of the iron in the ink. What is funny is that they want a waterproof ink to be used in acidfree paper and which looks like ancient ink. Go figure.

Now it's up to you. I prefer to be safe than sorry. Remember that new inks- like any other new product, is a process of trial and error. The question is that with inks the trial may take years and the error, if it happens, may have Biblical proportions

I don't mean to open a can of worms; it's simply my opinion, based on some information which -of course- may be wrong.

Wow! What a dire warning! I feel like the ghost of dyes and surfactants past just hovered over my bed draped with chains! Maybe I will stick with Waterman's lest my pen suffer a terrible curse.

Personally, I like the Noodler's ink because it offers the best writing experience, which is what I came to fountain pens for. With Noodler's (and with some other, less suspicious inks) the pen really glides across the page, the ink flows perfectly (not too wet, not too dry) and writing is fun. The nice dark color and the fraud proofing are bonuses, but not the main show. But I understand your point about using modern inks that haven't stood the test of time.


On that note, has anyone on this board actually experienced a 51 clogging with Noodler's bulletproof inks?

The most "appropriate" ink would be vintage Quink, since it was made at the same time as the pen.

I use plain ol' Waterman black in most of my pens, including my Parker Vac & my Parker 51 Aero. I have a 51 Vac on the way to me, and that'll most likely use Waterman black, too. (I'm a simple kind of man!)

I tend to use a lot of blue-black inks, as I find it both professional and a little more "zippy" than just plain black...

I almost exclusively use vintage pens (Vacumatics and P51 vacs, though Shaeffers see some use as well). In my Vacumatics, I tend to rotate between Waterman and Parker inks. For the 51s, my favorite is by far the Sheaffer Skrip Blue-Black. It flows well, dries quickly, and I like the color most of all. I'll even occasionally fill a Vacumatic with it...

I also occasionally use some Private Reserve for a change of pace.

If I'm going for a more exotic color (for writing in a journal or a personal letter), like red or green (I use Waterman or Shaeffer inks for these colors), I tend to go for an aerometric pen.

Finally, just a note on one particular color I like quite a bit... Waterman's (Havana Ink) brown. It looks GREAT coming out of a Cordovan 51!

-------------------------------------
edited to correct spelling

That's good to hear - I have a fresh bottle of Skrip blue-black sitting on my desk. For such an inexpensive ink it certainly writes nicely, and I really enjoy the color variation.

It wasn't meant to be a warning. It's just that when reading some inks reviews it sounds like some people want their fountain pens to write like like gel pens, and that doesn't make much sense to me.

As for time tested inks, isn't it what we come to this forum for? Learning from others' experience? Through the years I've learned that some inks are safe, whereas others may stain or ruin a pen. Bear in mind that I haven't discarded using other inks, it's just that I'll wait for a couple of decades. I'm that patient (and optimistic).

Oscar Wilde said that "experience" is the way we name our own mistakes. The words "mistake" plus "fountain pen" ususally means wasted money.

I have used Noodlers, Diamine, Visconti and Watermans in my Vacumatics... I have quite a few at last count.
Now that being said... there are a few of my 51s that just don't like Noodlers... it depends on the color...
But all the others I have no problems with at all

Back in the day when there were no computers, PDA's , etc and ballpoints hadn't been invented, fountain pens were the tool. and they were thought of as tools.

I doubt many people collected them.

So they were filled and used. Many were probably left full when they stopped being used. I have encountered countless vintage pens showing signs of never having been properly emptied before being set aside. That old corrosive ink just sat around in those pens for decades before the pens were rescued by collectors. Ink sacs dried , hardened, out-gassed and did damage.

I doubt todays Fountain pens that are filled and used encounter such treatment.

Using a fountain pen in todays computerised, ballpoint, gel world is such an alternative optional act that I suspect that although there is use -there is probably little, if any, abuse!

My personal habit for many years has been to use J. Herbin inks in my vintage pens and piston fillers. Herbin inks are pH neutral and are made with vegetable dyes. I have never experienced clogging or any other problems with Herbin inks. That said, I have Waterman Havana Brown in my p-51 for this month's rotation.

I use Noodler's Legal Lapis in one of my 51s with no problems. It has never clogged or failed to write.
Like Tom though, I have several other 51s, and a couple of them do not seem to like Legal Lapis. They do not clog, or fail to write, but write very dry. Those particular pens love Diamine Imperial Blue.

I've been using Rohrer & Klingner's Scabiosa in my 51 Vacumatic since I restored it about three months ago. So far I've had nothing but good results. In fact, I chose the pen (my first 51) for use with this ink. I figured anything that could handle Superchrome ink with not trouble could handle iron galls.

Both the pen and the ink have fast become my favorite.

Kris

I tend to stick with old faithful inks in my vintages. The modern stuff runs in my moderns

I use a mix of Noodler's Blue with a bit of PR Tanzanite in a P51 aero and it writes like a dream. The sacs are succeptable to staining (which happened to me with PR Tanzanite ink), but I really don't care because you can't see the sac unless you take the barrel off, and it doesn't affect writing quality at all.

EDIT: On second thought, you won't be able to see the sac since you have a vac .

I normally use either Noodlers or PR in my "51" vacs or my one aero with no problems. Interestingly, the only ink I've ever had trouble with in a "51" is some vintage Sheaffer Royal Blue Skrip from the 1950s. I bought two big bottles and supplied some friends with it too and they also had trouble. Unexpected to say the least....

Steve

Materials science has progressed so far in the last fifty years I have trouble imagining that any modern fountain-pen formulated ink (with a couple of exceptions) could be worse for any pen than the stuff they used to use in fountain pens.

I'd trust a modern ink in a vintage pen over vintage ink anywhere. One caveat: the pens of yesteryear were made to work with ink of higher viscosity than today's inks. You could run into vintage pens that don't like modern inks. However, your '51' should not fall into this category.

Splicer, I totally agree. I was thinking about the horribly corrosive Superchrome inks designed specifically for the vacumatic 51s - I'm worrying about using PH-balanced, thoroughly modern inks in a pen whose "appropriate" ink is famous for eating holes through lead sheets? I think I'm just going to relax and enjoy.

Then, why is it that a few weeks ago I saw a Duofold mosaic with a free bottle of Penman in the box? Is Parker reintroducing the Penman line? Have they reformulated it?

I'll trust an ink made by a company which makes fountain pens. Nowadays Parker is no longer in that category; they make luxury items.

An exception to the above could be Herbin, although there are others.

My favorite ink to run through my '51' is Parker Quink (Black). My next favorite is Pelikan 4001 (Black). Most everything else is 'okay', just my preference is to these two inks.

I'm not following. I have no idea why you saw a Duofold mosaic with a free bottle of Penman in the box, and I don't know what you're suggesting that means.



Parker isn't a company any more at all. It's a brand. And I'd go a step farther. I don't care if a company manufactures fountain pens. That provides no guarantee that they can make a good ink. I care if they research, develop, and design fountain pens. Then they still may make lousy ink, but they can't blame it on not being intimately familiar with the workings of pens.

But certainly not all of the Parker-branded Sanford products are luxury items, except in the line of thinking that says that any pen that costs more than a dollar is a luxury. Parker sells a lot of Jotters and Profiles, purportedly bringing back the Vector. In fact, most of the Parker line is decidedly mid-range.

Once upon a time, Parker spent a lot of money and other resources trying to come up with newer, better formulations of ink. (They advertised that the first bottle of Quink cost $68,000 and took three years and 1021 tries) Does any pen manufacturer do the same today? No, but there are a few ink companies that pursue the science of making ink. Especially in this day and age, I don't think manufacturing a pen qualifies anyone to make ink.

I have seen a similar ad, but I can't find it again. It included a bottle of ink that was the Penman shape, but didn't explicitly say it was Penman ink.
However, this webpage does explicitly say Parker Penman ink is included with the pen.

I think that all this controversy it's because of the different ideas one has when decides to start using a fountain pen.

I'm 37 years old, so I didn't live what some call "the golden days of fountain pens". That said, I grew up with my parents, relatives and teachers using fountain pens. I got my first fp when I was 6 or 7 years old. Ballpens were waaaay more popular, but fps were not rare.

Why all this background info? Well, that made you understand what using a fountain pen is: you shouldn't drop it, don't use india ink, use the right writing angle and so on.

We learnt to leave with ink colors that faded with time, just like we learnt to live with inky fingers.

Some of the new inks mentioned and reviewed in this forum are said to clog some pens. What conclusion can we infer from that? Well, if an ink clogs a pen it's because it leaves some residue. Maybe you have a pen with a wide enough air passage or feeder which will take longer to clog. That ink use may outlive any of us, but that doesn't mean that that ink is leaving some residue. The same could be said about old time staining inks (specially violets and turquoises).

Now there's the question of new users of fountain pens:these people have been using ballpens, gel pens, pencils or whatever, and it seems -as can be inferred from the posts in this forum- that they want a fountain pen that writes like a gel pen, which just doesn't make sense to me. Can you imagine someone asking for a diesel Ferrari?

Pens have limitations, and I just try to live with them. My VOX AC30 and Marshall Bluesbreaker amp don't have master volume nor gain knob. So be it.

It would be interesting to make a poll: people will enter the time they've been using fountain pens, and then the inks they're currently using.

I'll start: 30 years using fountain pens (with the ocasional bp); inks I use: Quink, Waterman, Pelikan, Skrip (blues, blacks and blueblacks)

Juan in Andalucía

I typically use Noodlers, Skrip. or Waterman and have no issues with any of my "51"s, Vac or Aero.

This thread has started a rather interesting debate! I have a response to Juan's questions about age and what people want out of a fountain pen. I grew up writing with rollerballs - I remember my dad had a Mont Blanc fountain pen which he let me write with a few times. I remember it as being scratchy and basically impossible to write with (I don't think my father used it much either).

I started writing with fountain pens about two years ago, using a Visconti with Visconti ink. I really liked the feeling of the pen gliding over the paper. This felt, to me, much smoother than any of the rollerball or gel pens I had ever used. I tried a number of different inks and found most of them much better than the Visconti - they provided a richer, darker line, and an even smoother writing experience. Some of these inks were Noodler's.

I just got back from the Philadelphia pen show, where I wrote with Waterman's ink for the first time at Richard Binder's extremely busy table (I know it may seem incredible that I've never tried Waterman's before). To my surprise and delight I found the Waterman's MUCH better than any of the specially lubricated Noodler's inks I had used - this little $8 bottle of ink provided an incomparably smooth writing experience. So I found that I really love this one time-tested, well behaved ink, and I plan to use it in my arriving 51.

That said, I'm not sure that I understand Juan's objections to people looking for different experiences in fountain pens. If people want a fountain pen that writes like a gel pen and are willing to pay for it, why not? If you can afford a diesel Ferrari and it makes you happy, more power to you! Dedicated Ferrari enthusiasts may think of it as sacrilege, but you're not hurting anyone else's fun.

I'm 38 years old, have been using fountain pens for 22 years, although I can only say I've been happily using them for 20 years, since I bought my first Parker Vector. Prior to that I was putting up with inky fingers thanks to the Shaeffer No Nonsense pens I used. I didn't know there was any other kind of fountain pen. Lately I've been using mostly Noodler's and Private Reserve inks, but my all-time favorite is still Aurora Black.

When my vacumatic '51' returns from Tom Zorn's capable hands, it will probably get filled either with Omas Sepia or Visconti Brown. Haven't decided yet.

In my "51" Vaccumatic I use Noodlers Tahitian Pearl. It remains in my rotation so I haven't ever cleaned it out. I fill it regularly. So far, no problem.

Andy

It's just a matter of experimenting, and finding the right pen/ink combo. I have a 51 that is a regular user, and it has Legal Lapis in in constantly with no problems. I tried LL in a Vacumatic, and the nib creep was messy. In that pen, I now use Noodler's Ellis Island and it is extremely well behaved. For obvious reasons, nib creep is not a factor in a 51.
I also use Diamine Imperial Blue, and I like it. Again, it behaves better in my dry writers as it seems thinner than the Noodlers. In my wet writers, it's a bit too wet for me.
I also like Quink Blue Black. It seems to work in everything. Don't care for Quink black though. In my Waterman 52, it seems very wet, and takes way too long to dry.

A few points of clarification:

- The Parker 51 was made to use the Parker 51 ink, not the other way around. As with modern inks, particular properties (intense color and drying time) were the reason the Parker 51/ Superchrome ink was formulated the way it was. Many pens were undoubtedly damaged from using an ink in a pen it was specifically not for use in. The packaging for Parker 51 and Superchrome inks is packed with instructions not to use it in other pens.
- Pens with metal rings near the nib will generally deteriorate from prolonged use with any ink.
- It is not coincidence that PR inks have Fender names- the PR folks have previously declared this inspiration of naming.

Regards, greg

Those names are not Fender's are Dupont's. I don't know whether they're copyrighted though.

Manufacturers do not seem to help in this issue. A few years ago Waterman offered a free ink set when you buy a Preface, I think. That ink set had the whole range of waterman inks, a mixing bowl, eyedropper... so that you could mix your own colors. Now, do you remember waterman bottles from the 80s? The box warned against mixing different inks; something like "ne pas melanger deux encres diferents". Go figure.

The issue of the safety of modern ink in "51"s has raised a lot of questions in people's minds. But let's look at the question from the inside of the pen. (This came to me today as I was working on 6+ Parker "51"s in various stages of restoration, including scraping 50-60 year old green ink out of a vac barrel.)

Ink in a Parker "51" vac will only contact: 1) the rubber diaphram; 2) plastic barrel and hood, filler tube, and collector; 3) the hard rubber feed; and 4) the gold nib. Now I have no proof, but I do doubt if a modern ink will melt the rubber diaphram and it surely shouldn't hurt the plastic or hard rubber. They should all be formulated work with these components without melting anything.

If the higher dye density of modern ink is going to cause problems, it will do two things: 1) stain the plastic parts which is seen mostly on the lighter colored collectors. This just doesn't seem to be a big problem unless you have a mustard or buckskin DJ with hairline cracks that will get stained. Though they are probably already stained that way if they were used originally. I can guarantee if you buy a "51" vac that had superchrome in it 60 years ago, it's already well stained inside! Indeed, that superchrome coats the inside of barrels like a thin layer of paint that's impervious to cleaning without scraping it off with dental tools. 2) Eventaully a high pigment ink *could* clog the fill tube, the collector's "fins", and build up between the tines of the nib though I imagine this would take a long time and if you rinse your pen out with water every 3-4 fills, this build-up should not really be a problem. (And we should always rinse all of our pens before putting storing them for any length of time anyway.)

With a little care, your vac should work until the diaphram fails (no one knows exactly when). As a precaution, let's say that you should send your vac to your favorite restorer every 5 years or so for a new diaphram and complete cleaning. It's like changing your oil and filter in the car. If you do this, the nib will probably wear out before any problems arise from ink. After all, most of these terrific pens that write perfectly are already older than most of us anyway! (I was born in '54.)

Now for the pic. On the right you see what happens when *vintage* inks were left in unattended pens and ate out the diaphram and got to the aluminum filler collets and corroded the heck out of them. On the left are a filler in good shape and a filler with the diaphram loaded so you can see how only the rubber diaphram is exposed to the ink.

Just my $0.02,

Steve

You can also look at modern inks like restomodding an old car. Sure, it can do its job stock, but wouldn't it be nice if it could do it BETTER? Sure, old bias-ply tires are nostalgic, but the don't give you as much control as modern tires.

It's not an objection, just a sort of epiphany. Nowadays people look for fraud free inks by using waterproof ink. Decades ago fraud free ink was anything that was not black! ñ_ñ

I think that one of the reasons of the revival of FPs is the possibility of using many different inks and colors, but that wasn't what FPs were invented for, so I notice a difference between old and new users. It seems like old users have learned to live with the limitations and bad habits of old ink. Yes, you shouldn't drop water onto a page written with waterman ink, but then FPs are ot for the careless!!

You say you started using fountain pens 2 years ago, and obviously you filled tem with what is the mainstream inks available, which is natural. I just tried to look at things under a different light. Ain't waterman ink great? If you want a nice flowing black ink, try Pelikan (or Cross, which is the same ink)

I've noticed that some regular posters include in their posts a list of the pens they have and the date of purchase. I've also noticed that most of the ones who have been using fps for 5 years or less use mostly noodler's, PR or other new inks.

I learned the hard way to be cautious with new inks. The Duofold I had sent to service because Penman saphire corroded the gold in the section is back. I'll go to the shop sometime this week. I will *never* use penman in any of my expensive pens. Oh, and I diluted penman ink with water!! I shivered when I saw that brand new Duofold with a bottle of penman in a huge and nice display box. Now, it's up to you to use penman ink or not. I use this site (and others) to learn from other people's experience.

Juan in Andalucía

Well gentlemen, I got my (first ever) 51 in the mail today and filled it with Waterman black ink. Why haven't you fountain pen people informed me that the vacumatic filler is actually fun to use? Anyway, the pen writes like a dream with the Waterman, and now I finally understand what all the Parker 51 fuss is about!

This is exactly what I do, too.
The better I like a pen, the safer the ink I use:

I have some Noodlers and Privat Reserve inks in new Pelikans or Lamys, but vintage pens (Pelikan 400, Lamy 27, various Parkers and MBs) are inked with Lamy, Waterman, Visconti or Diamine. And Rohrer & Klingner for some vintage Pels.
And I try to stick with blue or blueblack inks. Only one pen is inked with Quink black.
So far this worked out fine.

Playing devil's advocate here a little, but I don't buy the idea that there is a such thing as "the good old days when things were done right." Before fountain pens, all ink (at least all ink in common use) was waterproof. So maybe those of us that want waterproof inks aren't foolish modern types. I'll see your "decades ago" and raise you "centuries ago" when ink on paper wasn't expected to wash off with a little water. Or disappear when left in the sun for a few days.

It's unfair and probably inaccurate to characterize a desire for durability as a newbie fetish or a funny modern idea. To me, the funny modern idea is that it's OK for inks not to be durable. I have artwork from twenty years ago that has faded dramatically. If I'd stuck to what my teachers had told me and used india ink with steel pens, that artwork would look as good as new today. I don't want the artwork I do today to suffer the same fate, so I have a choice: either don't use one of these newfangled fountain pens or use a durable ink in a fountain pen.

I don't believe for a second that when fountain pen inks were developed that they were intentionally designed for impermanence or a watered-down look. Both aspects are compromises made to adapt to the new technology of the fountain pen.

Again, I'm playing devil's advocate to some extent. I appreciate your caution and cringe to hear of the damage Penman did to your Duofold. But I don't blame that damage on your desire for a saturated color; I blame it on poor formulation and an irresponsible lack of testing on Parker's and Documentel's part.

What can I say I haven't said before? We have different views...or maybe not, seeing you've filled that 51 with waterman black.

"eppur si muove"

Juan in Andalucía

You may have me confused with someone else. I'm pretty sure I've never filled my '51' with Waterman Black. I'm not at all a fan of it. Waterman doesn't make a black; they make a medium gray. I have a bottle here but frankly the only time I use Waterman Black is if I'm stuck without a bottle, have my emergency cartridges with me and the pen that's run out takes international cartridges.

I have loaded the '51' with Waterman Havana, but given its tendency to oxidize I probably won't do that again. Here again, I'm sure that the modern oversaturated inks will be safer than the 'old fashioned' formula. I'll reserve my Waterman ink for modern pens. The '51' (when it comes back from Tom Zorn who will be cleaning out the green residue from Waterman Havana that got past the diaphragm) is probably getting Visconti Brown, though I have to admit that I'm tempted to put FPN Galileo Manuscript (Noodlers) into it.

After rereading your post I'm a bit confussed:

Your art teachers gave you some advice about what stuff to use; you followed your own way, and it didn't work as you wanted... Who's to blame? Do you see any similarities with the discussion in this thread? Bear in mind that there's nothing new under the sun in what I've said throughout the thread. This info comes from people who have been selling or repairing pens for 40 or 50 years (some of them are 3 generations family owned shops in Seville and Madrid, Spain).

Before the advent of fountain pens, some inks were waterproof, but here you're mixing things: dip pens are dip pens and fountain pens are fountain pens. Fountain pen ink wasn't made so that it shaded, faded, and could be washed out. FP ink was made so that it could be used in a fountain pen. Fading and lack of permanence was not an end, it was a side effect.

I think we've been discussing it in too broad terms. I mean, there are inks which have been made for decades and which I wouldn't use in some pens, like most violets and turquoises. I wouldn't put them in a pen with transparent bodies because of staining. To me, a stain is a residue.

I use my own method to test tenacious inks by measuring how long does it take to flush a pen until water comes out clean. Do you know that cocktail "sex on a beach"? so when an ink acts like that (***ing close to water), then it qualifies as a safe ink. Not scientific, but it works for me.

In the same way, generalizing modern inks can be wrong. I'm sure there are some new inks which are as safe as sheaffer skrip. As I said in a previous post, I'll let them pass the test of time before using them.

Juan in Andalucía

I'm the guy who ended up using Waterman black, but it was only because I absolutely love the flow and lubrication of the ink, not because of any kind of philosophy. I'm beginning to think that life is too short and too uniformly tragic to worry about inks.

Who is to blame? Me, of course. How could I blame my choice of materials on someone else? I assumed that ink is forever and obviously I had a lot to learn. Show me an eighteen-year-old who doesn't have a lot to learn. I'm thirty-eight now and I'm still a barely functioning moron.

The point I was illustrating is that like many advancements in technology, the fountain pen (which is the direct descendent of the dip pen) forced steps backward in some areas. I believe I wrote that I do NOT believe impermanence or less-than-rich color to have been the intention. It is the result of a technological compromise. As you correctly put it, a side effect. We don't have to dip our pens every few lines and the price we pay is that what we write won't be around in a couple centuries and may be gone in a few decades.

This was in response to your statement: "Nowadays people look for fraud free inks by using waterproof ink. Decades ago fraud free ink was anything that was not black!"

But durable inks are not a new idea. The new idea is non-durable inks. Inks like Noodler's are allowing fountain pens to catch up with the quills used in the 12th century. That doesn't speak to whether a particular ink is safe, but it's unfair to say that users of durable inks do so because we are inexperienced. We simply take advantage of an opportunity not to put up with what has been a significant shortcoming of the fountain pen.

I'm not arguing that you shouldn't err on the side of caution when choosing inks, especially in pens that may be more susceptible than others. We all strike a balance between costs and benefits. What I resent is the characterization as clueless newbies the people who strike that balance somewhere other than where you find the balance. "...the ones who have been using fps for 5 years or less use mostly noodler's, PR or other new inks" is how it was put.

I've been led to the understanding that Nathan Tardiff takes great pains to formulate inks that are safe for fountain pens. There are a couple of other sources for durable fountain pen inks, but for the most part, fountain pen ink makers don't actually do research and development any more. I'm more inclined to trust the guy who actually seems to be paying attention. I'm not advocating blind trust, just explaining where my prejudices lie.

(I'm not unmindful that there are particles in suspension in Noodler's inks. Pens with Noodler's ink should be flushed and cleaned regularly. But pens with other inks should be flushed and cleaned regularly, too.)

I'm sorry if I sounded rude when doing some generalization; it wasn't my intention.

Now I'll try to explain better: Let's take montblanc blueblack. MB is honest when they warn about the iron gall in the ink, but despite that, go and check in the different groups in internet all the different opinions and results of using that ink.

Now take that issue to a brand which makes inks with special lubrication for piston fillers, some permanent, some almost permanent, some lightfast..... Can you imagine the size of the iceberg?

I'm not saying that Nathan is not being honest, but I won't take any manufacturer word. As I said before, Waterman used to warn against mixing different inks and a few years later they sold a mixing ink set.

The original poster was interested in ink for a vintage 51. God only knows what's that pen exposed to, which inks have been used, how that residue will react to newish ink... My opinion was to stay on the safe side; that pen has survived half a century probably using plain old fountain pen ink.

I wouldn't mind using noodler's in one of my lamys (easily removable nibs and cheap parts) or pelikans (screw nibs and easy cleaning), but Parker 51s are not the easiest to clean pens.

Regards, Juan

But actually you can worry about inks to escape the uniform tragedy and shortness of life