Hi, this is my first post - I'm new to the network.

Reading through the FPN forums, it seems that many people are partial to vintage, or out of production pens. As a new owner of a Parker Sonnet Cisele medium nib, which I love (well made, smooth writer, great looks), I was struck by how many people see it as a poor successor to the Parker 75. Also, debates over vintage vs modern Duofolds, Pelikans etc. seem pretty common. This led me to thinking; is their a real difference in quality between old and new? Is it just perception and nostalgia, or has QC really declined in the modern era? The same argument runs throgh my other great love - that of guitars. There are those who say old guitars made in the 1950's and 60's are far superior to those made today. Others disagree.

I suppose the purpose of this post is to see whether you think 'vintage' pens, or at least old pens, really warrant the praise heaped upon them by some quarters. Is it simply a human condition that we will yearn for the pens (guitars, cars, shoes... insert your hobby here) of yesteryear, or is their really milage in the old adage "they don't make 'em like they used to."

Any thoughts?

I think it is a little of both.

People tend to romanticize past ages, remembering the great things and forgetting the bad. Whether it is pirates, victorian living or the just back in the 40's after WWII, yesteryear is fondly remembered.

At the same time, those pens which are still functional now are part of a self-selected group. The ones with poor QC or design were discarded and forgotten decades ago. Only the nice ones were retained either as users or NOS. People are also more tolerant of failures because the pen is old is and "Some things are bound to wear out".

My attraction to vintage pens is the price. I can usually get them way cheaper with 14kt nibs and character. It requires some work for nib alignment and re-sac-ing, but I think it is worth it.
I recently bought a new pen that required nib alignment for flow, so just because it is new isn't guarantee that it is faultless.
I use my pens. I don't display them.
Andrew

I guess I may not be qualified to compare, as I do not own any modern pens, but I can tell you this: My Parkers write like dreams, and function perfectly. Not bad for 50 to 90 year old writing tools. My primary pleasure is the quality of the pens, and using something that is actually fun to write with. Nostalgia is fine, but comes in second as I use my pens every day.

Why do people yearn for vintage pens...?

I think it's a combination of reasons. Of course, the history is an obvious one. But then of course there's the design element. The Parker Duofold was really not much different from the Parker Jack-knife safety and it was priced at $7 in a time when fifty cents got you a full meal. What made this pen so popular when visually it really wasn't much different from the one that preceded it?

Quality. Now I may or may not be right in saying this, but it is another reason. Some people perceive vintage fountain pens (properly restored, of course) as of being better quality than various modern fountain pens. They base this on the fact that when these pens were new, they were daily, essential and the ONLY writing instrument available, so the quality HAD to be there, as opposed to today, where fountain pens (some might argue) are more "ornaments" or "status symbols" and that since there are...

- rollerballs.
- Gel-tips,
- Ballpoints.
- Pacers (mechanical pencils)
- Highlighters.

etc etc etc etc etc...

...the actual quality of the writing ability of the pen (along with strength etc) isn't as important.

Uniqueness. There's something fun and charming and special about owning what is effectively an "antique" fountain pen. The Jack-Knife Safety and the Duofold (the original one) are now both over 90 & 80 years old. It's something that very few other people would own. It makes you stand out. Some people enjoy vintage fountain pens for that reason. I know that I do.

First, welcome to FPN.

Some people remark that fountain pens are low tech and unworthy, then they sit down to eat using a low tech fork or ancient chop sticks thinking nothing about it. I do not consider FP's low tech. They are, however, different from other modes of current writing instruments and my enthusiasm for FP's lies in that difference.

Vintage FP's frequently write differently than current production ones because the nibs are somewhat different. There is often a degree of flex or springiness that can be more enjoyable than some modern nibs. I enjoy that difference, but I do not use vintage pens to the exclusion of current ones. I like to use a mix.

There are also different filling systems. I cannot say that vintage filling systems are better than current ones. Although I like lever fillers, button fillers, and vac fillers, my favorite was the aerometric filler. It was simply easier for me to use. I find converters to be nearly idiot proof, though they hold less ink than some older filling systems. There are many people who are very sensitive to filling systems. I am not. My focus is the nib and I am adaptable to the filling system.

I am of an age where some of the pens I bought new are now considered vintage. I have become sensitive to the physical size of my pens. There is a current trend to make pens large, and some are huge. I like that trend because my hands now need those larger sizes. Vintage pens tended generally to be smallish. Larger vintage pens now sell for premiums that put them out of my price range. So, for size, I look to current production pens.

Are vintage pens worth while? Yes, I think so. Are they superior to current production pens? No, I do not think one is superior to the other. The vintage pens can be significantly different, and that difference is valued by many.

Frank, you used a term there which made me think. "Low tech". In my mind, a fountain pen is anything BUT low tech. You think of the components of a ballpoint pen.

Now think of the components of a fountain pen.

And then add in the fact that each one of those components must be fitted very precisely.

I don't think fountain pens are low-tech. I think they're the opposite.

I am not a big fan of vintage pens. In general, I find new pens to be made better, and leak less. I had several vintage pens, and they all seemed to leak a little bit, usually at the nib or around the nib. When I used them, I always had ink on my fingers. With my modern pens (Pelikan M800, Omas 360, Namiki VP, Lamy Vista), I don't have this problem at all. I have to shake the pen pretty vigorously to get these pens to leak any ink.

Also, to me the vintage pens seemed fragile. Maybe it was the fact that I knew they were vintage, but I just felt like I needed to be cautious.

I'll take a modern pen over vintage any day. Although, I must admit, I sometimes wonder if I should try out a parker 51...

Okay, I love to eat! Tell me the high tech way to chow down!

Were they correctly restored? I have had maybe one vintage leak on me in 35 years or so of using them.

I may have a slightly different reason for using vintage pens, in that, i love to own and use anything vintage. I have been a collector of antiques and vintage objects to keep and enjoy and also to sell. That is what led me to vintage fountain pens, i love to take out of a pen case a 1930's Parker vac or a 1940's 51 to write with and delight in telling people its age and watching their surprised look I do have quite a few modern pens which i seldom use, simply because i enjoy vintage so much. By the way if your vintage pen is restored correctly there is no reason for it to be any less reliable than a modern one.

So, it really seems that much of the appeal of older pens is the 'uniqueness' of owning something that has been out of production, with intangibles like 'character' and 'vibe' counting for as much as build or quality control. Generally speaking, do you think modern pens match the quality of previous generations with regards to fit and finish, materials, workmanship, feed mechanisms etc? In thirty years time, for example, do you think Parker Frontiers and Sonnets will be as collectable and revered as 51's and 75's are now?

As an aside, do you think famous brands like Parker, Waterman et al, are victims of their own heritage; ie, there will always be those who feel the best years have been and gone, and modern mass production (often overseas) has robbed these brands of their character? Or do you feel the benefits of modern production techniques lend a consistency to these pens? After all, I'm sure there must have been plenty of poorly made pens 50 years ago, it's just that only the good ones have survived to the present - perhaps compounding this sense that older pens are better built. Or am I talking cobblers?

The ONLY reason a vintage pen has ever leaked on me is due to improper treatment. Look after them like any other fountain pen and they work perfectly.

I guess the nostalgia factor is quite big in my case, since I learned to write and have used FPs all my life.
However I admit the newer FPs are very well made as they have benefited from previous experiences.
e.g. I bought a vector last year when I moved to the Netherlands (while my stuff was in transit over the ocean) and found it a really enjoyable piece
writes well, looks nice and it was quite cheap (10 Euros)

I also think the eBay madness of buying used or old stuff at reasonable prices has swept the FP community, specially since most people do not use FPs anymore.

I've decided I like a few filling systems that aren't currently in favor (crescent fillers, for example). It was high tech at the time (thus the patent).

In general, I love geeky gadgety things and pretty things. Some fountain pens are both.

When you get down to it, quality means writing performance and durability. But also consider:

1. Feeds: rubber on vintage pens; plastic on modern.
2. Furniture: Gold or gold fill on vintage; plating on modern.
3. Ink capacity: more for vintage; less for modern (having converters).
4. Cost: generally lower for vintage (unless truly rare); higher for modern.



I have both vintage and modern. Many, many vintage pens. Not one leaks. If it leaks, it needs to be fixed.

Visconti still makes crescent fillers.

Hello jimbo69,
This a great first post! I don't have many fountain pens. The fountain pens I have are mostly vintage. I use them everyday. I like that my pen had a life before me. Maybe my pen will have a life after, me that is nice thought for me.
I like the way a fountain pen writes and feels. ( look of the pen is nice extra ) I would pick old over new most of time if price is no concern. There are great new and old pens. The great new pens of today are future antiques and collectables.
New is likely to be easier to replace. The idea of getting some cheap pens to knock around with and not worry about is great when sharing pens with strangers.

As has Stipula and Conklin. The crescent filler in my avatar is a Stipula.

Well, just some random thoughts ...

What is it that attracts someone to gather "vintage" items? They aren't old enough that they're genuinely antique (few of us blather on and on about our 17th Century dip pens, do we? but I own some books from that period) but they are desired enough that the market for an active exchange of the items determines that they're in a certain price range that is higher, rather than lower, because of their age.

Cars at first deteriorate in price. In 2008, a 1986 station wagon does very poorly, probably no matter how well it is preserved. But let it sit long enough, while keeping the same nice condition, and soon enough the drop in price will become a rise in price. Nowadays a 1958 station wagon probably does very very well. All "past" items undergo a similar trajectory, some gaining or losing sooner or later than others.

As I mentioned, I own some rather old books. And one that is so old it qualifies as "incunabula" (1450 - 1500 a.d.). But it's not worth much money -- probably $200, max., at an open auction. It's cool to keep around, of course, and I use it for lecture demonstrations about early printing. It's much older than a "vintage" era pen, but a really nicely restored working late 1930s or early 1940s blue dot vac filler Parker 51 with a gold cap will probably go for more money than my incunable book. Really the book is much more rare. The market of people, mostly loonies collected together at EBay and FPN and similar places, and not some verifiable external set of quantifiable standards, determines the cost of the pen. Notice as well, more work has been done on the pen than the book to "make" it different from its original status. But this somehow increases rather than reduces its value in certain ways. Hmm.

Our notion of "vintage" is oddly psychologically inaccurate. We North Americans tend to collect items from the late 19th and early 20th centuries -- not just pens, mind you! -- perhaps because prior to that time there really wasn't much stuff to go 'round at all. It's kind of hard to find a European art pottery example from Cincinnati dating from the middle 14th century. I wonder if Europeans have a different point of view about time frames. Maybe there are people who think of "vintage" furniture as anything that pre-dates Henry the Eighth.

I personally don't bother to "collect" modern (still-in-production?) fountain pens for several reasons. First, my price range. I can get a beautiful working pen that is "like new" with a lovely color, an excellent nib, reliable feed and filler, for less than $100 if it's "vintage," but the equivalent in "new" from the counter at Office Depot will either be more expensive, or less worthy as a writer or as an objet d'art. Second, my interest in history. There's not much to say about a new Waterman. "This is the pen Waterman makes. They make really great pens." Yeah yeah. But you can just get totally involved in a story about Mark Twain and his Conklin, and the crescent filler, and when it was invented, and who knocked it off, and what you can do today to get a new one. And then if you buy that new Visconti crescent filler, you do so as it relates to the Vintage era.

I think there's something more to the history thing. It's not taught in school. You can't get it in textbooks. You probably can't even get the "standard" textbooks (about fountain pens) at the local Barnes and Noble. Instead, it was never force-fed to you. The Henry the Eighth stuff? You HAD to learn that. So it's somehow not something you "want" to learn. But digging through internet pages, and not really finding much that is very well organized, and then stumbling suddenly across Richard Binder's reference pages? Woweee! The thrill of research! The "vintage" nature of things serves to make the actual body of knowledge a little bit LESS accessible, because it isn't yet old enough to have been so carefully studied to exhaustion that we're all of us packed full of it. I could imagine a nice little doctoral thesis on early 20th century industrial design as exemplified by the fountain pen manufacturers of the United States. When you write it, please post the text of it as a PDF on the internet? Thanks!

Nostalgia is certainly a factor, and the idea of using a 60, 70, 80 or even 90 year old pen in the Internet age is a fun one.

But the vintage pens are just better. Compare a well-restored "51" vac from the 1940s or an "51" aero from the 1950s to a modern Parker 100. Then ask yourself if the Parker 100 will still be writing in 2058.

The "51" pens of the 1940s and 1950s are still writing strong today. You can't help but marvel at a product so well designed that it is still on the job 50 or 60 years after leaving the factory.

That's why there's a "51" cult and why those pens rarely linger on this board.

Actually, I think modern pens stand a reasonable chance of being in operation half a century hence. I've got some third-tiers (the sort of pens that Esterbrooks kick sand at, frankly) that work just fine-- even a couple of Wearevers, and that's some cheapcheapcheap pens. Someone else on this board pointed out that the vintage pens around today are the ones that made it through the early Darwinian process of some being thrown for distance for working poorly. I have some small concerns about the converter in my Waterman Phileas (not expensive, right?) lasting more than a couple of decades, but the pen itself shows all the necessary robustness to have some goofball in 2079 bring it out and say, "Check it out! It's over eighty years old, but it writes perfectly!"

That being said, I DO prefer the old ones for precisely the reason they've gotten this far-- they work brilliantly. Well, that and the notion of something that far past its date of manufacture being functional in more-or-less its original components. Incunabulae (which were, after all, pure hand-craftsmanship and never expected to be treated as a tool-- even that copy of Beowulf that saw chopping-board duty) are frequently found in more recent bindings, I think, but with pens it's usually just a new sac and go hard. Very keen.

I use vintage pens for two reasons:
1) The way they write.
2) The way they write.

The nostalgia trip is nice, but only if the pen suits my writing style.
I've inherited a pen from my grandmother that's got 1926 hallmarks. I don't use that pen because it doesn't suit my style of writing & I'm terrified of damaging the flexible nib. It has a lot of family history - we've even got my gran's agreement to my grandfather's marriage proposal written with that pen - but I still don't use the pen, nostalgia or no. It's the writing comfort of the pen that's the only thing to me.

Regards

Richard.

I really love new and vintage pens.
No doubt in my mind the Parker 75 if far better then the Sonnet.Why ?
First design,I find the Sonnet's design to be nice but nothing more then that.The PArker 75 is one of very few pens I say that has a classic design (MB 149,Parker 51,Vacumatic,Sheaffer Balance).
I had 2 Sonnets and both had BAD nibs and even though I had some work done on them they still felt weird and never made me happy.Well they did made me happy when I sold them both.
The Parker 75 is a very nice writer and I love using it.

In general I dont say a certain vintage pen is better then other pens just because its vintage and same to new pens.Some vintage pens are better then new pens and some new pens are better then vintage.And in the case of 75 vs Sonnet the 75 wins hands down.

I am pretty new to fountain pens but for me I get the same experience using a 60 year old pen as I do driving a 60 year old car. In holding and using old pens, or any old tool for that matter, I am granted a moment to ponder and sense the lives of the people that lived then.

For me the preference for vintage has to do with "feel", both in writing and that feeling of a connection to history in some way. Strictly speaking about writing and using the pen, almost all modern pens have virtually exactly the same feel as pens glides across paper to me. Parkers, Pelikans, Montblancs, et al, all seem to manufacture nibs with virtually identical results. I'm not saying it's bad, but they feel completely different to say writing with a older Duofold or Vac... Even the 61's have a very different feel than any of the modern pens. Try putting a early Duofold next to a modern one.. the different feel is apparent from the moment the nib touches the paper.

Take a Sheaffer Snorkie PFM and compare it to a modern Legacy Heritage... The pens appear very similar, the nibs appear the same, but the feel is quite different.

"Feel" is a very difficult subjective abstract to address in a post, but it is the main reason I love older pens. They just feel better when writing.

I don't own any vintage pens (my first parker 51 is on it's way) but I honestly think that people remember the good pens of the past as better then they really are.
Today’s nostalgia is not what it used to be

Yes its really nice to have old vintage items. for the sake of ooold And I love and collect these.
But, and its a big but, ther is nothing like using an old Duofold and a Parker 61. They are still as good as it gets for me. As far as filliing systems are concerned, unless you fly with them, the Parker buttons are the greatest for symplicity. IMHO.
I use a Big Red everyday and a senior Newhaven Duofold in my pocket and have a broad 61 on my desk.

Remember that most of us aren't speaking academically-- we're sitting within arms reach of representative pens from various eras (in my case, just about every decade of the 20th century), and are speaking from direct experience. Which, for joy, you will soon share. You'll see....

Oh, and I'd never defend a Wearever Pennant as a good pen. I don't care how old it is.

Parker: They don't make 'em like they used to.

Sheaffer: They don't make 'em like they used to.

Pelikan: They make 'em like they used to.

Mabie Todd: I wish they still made 'em.

Gotta argue about Parker.
I don't write with my new Duofolds - they sit in the cabinet or in their cabinets.
They are stunning to look at and to hold.
The ones that I have written with are excellent.
There is a guy in the office here who writes with his new Mandarin and Black and Pearl. He has an old one similar to my pocket pen (1928 big red) but prefers the newer types.
Yes there is a drawback in the stupid filler that Sanford put in the Parkers and Watermans.
But I do believe that an aerometric converter works well and holds a lot more ink. Got these in my old 61s that I use.

This is the same reason why I use vintage pens. I like to write with them. And I feel more comfortable to write with them than with modern pens so my carry around pens are always vintage. Maybe one new one - mostly Pelikan 400 pre 97 - is among them.

I live with a mixture of new and old furniture. When I was a student I had no money to buy new cabinets. So I bought used furniture. I moved several times and helped others when they moved. After moving several times my furtiture were still functional. New ones were not! Later I bought even older cabinets and chests of drawers. Built from 1840 - 1920. I love to be surrounded by them and if I don't any longer I can sell them any time for a good price.

I got some vintage silverware because I like the shape of it. I always loved my mothers silverware that was reserved for holidays or birthdays. I use mine as my everyday cutlery. I simply like to use it. People visiting me for the first time often don't believe it. Why don't I use some cheap cutlery? I simply don't like the shape and the feel of it.

I like old stuff - or maybe vintage stuff - if it is functional and nice looking at the same time. And if I feel comfortable to use it. Some things where meant to last because people did not have the money to buy bad quality. And these things are still nice to use.

Actually, I would never allow myself to fall into this trap
It is a trap in the same way that if you just listen to classic or rock you miss a lot of wonderful music.

There are moments that I love and I am glad to have a Sonnet inked.
There are moments that a vintage pen surprises me and makes me enjoy writing.

Sonnet has an excellent shape for my hand and wonderful finishes - I love the springy nibs also. My Sonnets have been VERY dependable. A Sonnet with Penman Sapphire is an ultimate enjoyment for me.

On the other hand, an old pen that I buy at a minimum cost and I revive with the minimum effort just rinse and resac, often gives me a sense of continuity with the past and some of them are amazing writers. When it comes to flex - vintage is the way.

Writing with a Sonnet

Writing with a Waterman RRHR 52

I have to confess, that while my favourite pen is the P61, I still feel uncomfortable calling it 'vintage'. I got my first one while they were still in production, and to admit that it's vintage means that I am 'of a certain age' - something I definitely don't want to admit!

Regards

Richard.