I just bought a 51 Flighter set

It was priced right and not mint. This is important as both pen/pencil will actually be used and not sit in their case as an investment.

One problem I have is that the pen doesn't have a date code. The pencil does, 50. I know it's a relatively early pen as it has the gold band on the cap, but the fact that it has no date code bugs me.

Can anyone help in dating it? Why no date code?

Pics will come later when I get it!

P.S. I'm also worried that I'm cured from the fountain pen itch. Now that I have a 51 Flighter Set and a near mint late 30s Sheaffer Oversized Balance Set.... oh, I forgot about that 180 Flighter I want

Huzzah!!! Congratulations!!

I believe there is some sort of way of dating the pen by whether or not it's got the gold cap-band. As in, pens with the gold cap-band were made from *date* to *date* and some pens without the bands were made from *date* to *date*. I can't remember the years exactly, but if you check www.parker51.com, you may be able to find out. Check on the 'Chronology' page.

Thanks Shangas!

You are right, parker51.com had the answer to some degree, not sure why I didn't check them out first (I'm usually on that site and Richard Binder's site at least once a day).

Here is the "from *date* to *date*" as www.parker51.com states:



So it appears my Flighter pen dates between '52 and '58, but the pencil dates to 1950 as it does have the "50" imprint on it.
I have a mixed set, but it was reflected in the price. I'm actually a bit relieved it's not a special or first year pen as I would think twice about using it on a daily basis.

Just because the dates don't seem to correspond doesn't necessarily mean its a mix match.
Enjoy it for what it is.
I would be careful if you post it because the lustraloy wears and it will probably mark. Also be careful because it tends to ding at the end of the barrel.
I'm still going to get one ;-)

The '51' Flighter is a singularly beautiful fountain pen and I wish you luck in getting one, Skybird.

Regrettably, I won't be able to make it to your meeting on Monday evening, due to previous engagments, otherwise I'd bring along my own '51' Flighter to show you!!

Skybird, I'll enjoy it! I'm not upset or disappointed in any way, in fact I feel privileged to own one as they come up for sale relatively rarely, at least on the web.

I didn't know the Flighters had lustaroy on them, thanks for the tip.

and Shangas, I completely agree with you but will go one step farther, I will say the 51 Flighter is THE most singularly beautiful fountain pen.

Beauty and beholder of course ;-)
I have a 61 Flighter that I picked up from a guy who sold antique stereograpic images of all things in Portobello Road.
Got some nice things from a few of the pensellers there over the years.
But I never prioitised the 51 - eventually, I'll get down to it.
But it is nice and once I have one - it ain't agonna get used again.............

Amen.

Got it Saturday!

Wife said it was in Friday, but when she went to the post office to sign for it, she said she saw the line and left.
I had to keep telling myself it's only a pen, it's only a pen, it's not her fault, it's ok, she doesn't understand, .....

After pacing the house all Friday night, the post office opened and I was first in line.

I LOVE IT! I am a different person now, better, stronger.

It's a wet writer, definitely a medium. I'll have to get used to that.

The pencil is, in a word, coooooool. I didn't think I would use the pencil, but I like it so much that it's going to replace my .5 mm Pentel, which even though it's a $3 pencil, is in my honest opinion one of the best MPs ever made.

I'll have to post pics later, wife is using camera for something other than pens.
it's not her fault, it's ok, she doesn't understand.....

Lustraloy?

I'm no expert, but the Flighters are all stainless. You might mar the surface from posting, but there is no lustraloy to mar.

I'm not sure, but your pen (steel with gold band) is the only parker that can be called a "flighter". The all-steel (no gold band) was sold under another name.

Nevertheless, the name "flighter" is used (me too) by any all-steel parker pen.

Enjoy your pen!!

Juan

right, mine doesn't have lustroy on it, just stainless steel.

Mine also has the gold band, so it's a true Flighter.

Now, in my previous post, I mentioned my wife didn't get it Friday, and as soon as I posted, she strolled next to me and read it.

Well, after I took our dogs outside and came back in, I couldn't find my other Parker 51 (2nd quarter 1945 Black, really choice pen) as I was preparing it to send to Ron Zorn to replace the filler pump.

Upon asking her where it was, she said I could have it back if when I post a "statement of clarification".

Look for another post from me where I grovel for my pen back... i mean my wifes forgiveness.

The lesson: If there is competition in life, your wife is on your team and acting otherwise leads to a less harmonious household. Especially when you're saying things in a public place.

On mixed dates-- I've got a much less praise-worthy set with a 1949 code on the pencil, and a 1950 code on the pen barrel but a 1949 code on the point. I'm pretty sure from the very... consistent... amount of wear on both that they've spent their lives together.

Nope.

regards

david

I have to agree with David. I'm not as well-versed in '51' designs as the Vac Quack, but I agree. The designation of the name 'Flighter' was given to Parker pens which were made of stainless steel, gold-banded or not. This does not mean that ALL pens made by Parker which are steel are flighters, but it does mean that the name is not restricted to steel '51's and not restricted to '51's with gold bands.

I've got a nominally "Flighter" Parker 15-- which is a LOT less cool than having a Flighter 51.

Hence the "I'm not sure"

This is from Richard Binder site:

The original “51” Flighter, in addition to its brushed stainless body, featured gold-filled furniture for aesthetic contrast. Some other brushed stainless-steel pens, even some made by Parker, have chrome-plated furniture. Are these pens really Flighters? For collecting purposes, yes, at least the Parkers are. The distinguishing mark of a Flighter, as the term is recognized by collectors, is its brushed stainless body, not the color of its furniture.

Note the "for collecting purposes"

http://www.richardspens.com/?page=ref_info/flighters.htm

Of course, you're free to call your pens the way you want to. I do; I call my steel 45 "flighters".

Regards, Juan

First, let me say that I call my steel parker "flighters", whether with or without gold bands, 45s etc, but when the 1st flighter was released (the one with the gold band), the all-steel was called "deluxe" (or "de luxe"). I must have a brochure somewhere.

I would be curious to see Parker info regarding an all-steel (non-goldtone-band) flighter released at same time as the release of the first "flighter, the one with the gold band" around 1949.

regards

david

First, I've had the pleasure to correct ol' Richard's webpinions before (usually over scotch and salmon, while scritching Nefrit). Second, I observe that in fact Richard's phrasing indeed does not endeavor to exclude Flighter-dom for any steelw Parker pen. Rather, he... asks a question ("are these really flighters?")... indicating lack of definitive info on his part. I would be loathe to use such a question as any sort of proof for non-flighter-dom of much of anything.




regards

david

I know I have that brochure somewhere (well, a photocopy of a brochure). It's in Spanish, so it might have been printed or directed to Argentina. Dunno, but I remember the non-goldband 51 called "deluxe" or "de luxe"

First, I've had the pleasure to correct ol' Richard's webpinions before (usually over scotch and salmon, while scritching Nefrit). Second, I observe that in fact Richard's phrasing indeed does not endeavor to exclude Flighter-dom for any steelw Parker pen. Rather, he... asks a question ("are these really flighters?")... indicating lack of definitive info on his part. I would be loathe to use such a question as any sort of proof for non-flighter-dom of much of anything.




regards

david
[/quote]

The info about the "deluxe" was also published in Spain in "La Gaceta del Club" some years ago. La Gazeta del Club is a magazine printed by the Sanford group, and obviously, the products they talk about are Parker, Waterman, Rotring.

http://www.guiadeprensa.com/exportacion/productos/index.html

Maybe Ariel Kullok (or any other Argentinian FPNer) could add some info about this.

At least, with Richard you have something to object to; he admits lack of info on his side and leaves the question open. Your answer was a "nope" and a smiley. Hard to share info that way.

Regards, Juan

I forgot: you've corrected Richard in the past...big deal, but So what? I'm correcting you right now and I'm not bragging about that. I've also been corrected more times I can remember... with some information.

And now, do you have any clear info by Parker calling the non-goldband 51 a "flighter"?. I mean a 51, not a 45 or a Frontier.

Correcting someone is as easy as making a baby; the hard thing is to be right in one's correction. So, I'm all ears regarding flighters/deluxes/whateverthey'recalled, and I'll change my mind, make a deep bow, acknowledge your wisdom or even name my next dog after you if you can clear this mystery.

Regards, Juan

I don't understand. I shared my opinion, based on my experience and belief, which indeed is wholly accurat and is based on parker data. Indeed, as a courtesy in subsequent chat, I believe i'm the only person to provide any reference info whatsoever on the topic. "At least"... indeed. And, my opinion appears to be the only one in this thread for which supporting evidence has been provided.

Recognizing the following issue is a bit of tangent from whether Parker called any pen a Flgihter besides the steel 51-- which clearly Parke did-- I again, regarding your prior assertion, request information showing that around 1949, when Parker introduced the Flighter 51- which has a gold tone band on cap- that Parker also illustrated a non-gold-tone-band steel pen that was advertised as something other than a flighter. I so far- recognizing lack of exposure is not proof- have seen no date-stamped non-gold-tone-band all-steel 51. Keep in mind the date codes vanished around 1951 or so.

I do find interesting the note that paperwork is recalled from Spain. Parker did test market pens overseas- in Argentina before introducing the 51 (in the USA in 1941). I have no information that Aerometric models (intro'd 1948) were released earlier in Argentina or in Europe but it is not impossible. Too it is not impossible (which is not to say it happened) that some pens received different descriptions overseas than in the USA. I rely upon the USA standard for nomenclature- at least to degree of which i am aware of it. Seeing information for an earlier-than-i'd-expect non-gold-tone-band 51 at all, never mind described as other than a Flighter, i would find useful

regards

david

What has bragging to do with any of this? Let us not confuse issues of fact with perceptions of emotion. I can tell you based on face-to-face discussion that both Richard and I appreciate new information which modifies and/or clarifies our knowledge of pens. You are welcome to ask him. Perhaps i'll refer him to this thread.

Furthemore, you corrected nothing. Rather, you've made assertions. You've provided no information to back said assertions. I have provided hard data to back my simple claim, which was that Parker produced pens it called Flighter other than the gold-tone-band 51 Flighter. I have asked you to provide information regarding your claim that Parker produced a flighter-ish 51 early on that had no gold-tone band and which was advertised as something other than a Flighter. As i've noted, this is a small side point relative to your claim that only one pen in one trim style was sold as a Flighter, a point i have disproven with image above, but nonetheless is a point of interest to me, as I am offhand unaware of early production (1949-ish) non-gold-tone-band steel 51 or of any advertising info for it. I would be happy to have this clarified.

Let us review your assertions and my assertions in detail to find out, i hope, just to what it is you object.


Juan: I'm not sure, but your pen (steel with gold band) is the only parker that can be called a "flighter". The all-steel (no gold band) was sold under another name.


Note the suggestion that only one pen can be called a "Flighter", a Steel 51 with gold tone band. This is your first key assertion. I disagreed.

Davey: Nope.

Juan: Hence the "I'm not sure" That is appreciated

Juan: his is from Richard Binder site:

The original “51� Flighter, in addition to its brushed stainless body, featured gold-filled furniture for aesthetic contrast. Some other brushed stainless-steel pens, even some made by Parker, have chrome-plated furniture. Are these pens really Flighters? For collecting purposes, yes, at least the Parkers are. The distinguishing mark of a Flighter, as the term is recognized by collectors, is its brushed stainless body, not the color of its furniture.

Note the "for collecting purposes"

http://www.richardspens.com/?page=ref_info/flighters.htm

Of course, you're free to call your pens the way you want to. I do; I call my steel 45 "flighters".

More Juan: First, let me say that I call my steel parker "flighters", whether with or without gold bands, 45s etc, but when the 1st flighter was released (the one with the gold band), the all-steel was called "deluxe" (or "de luxe"). I must have a brochure somewhere..

Note this is your second key assertion, that a steel 51 without cap-band was released at time of the Flighter's release (1949) and that this non-goldtone-band pen was named something other than flighter. Indeed, information to back this assertion still is... pending... or lacking.

Dave: First, I've had the pleasure to correct ol' Richard's webpinions before (usually over scotch and salmon, while scritching Nefrit). Second, I observe that in fact Richard's phrasing indeed does not endeavor to exclude Flighter-dom for any steelw Parker pen. Rather, he... asks a question ("are these really flighters?")... indicating lack of definitive info on his part. I would be loathe to use such a question as any sort of proof for non-flighter-dom of much of anything.
.

Further, I provided a pic showing a Parker 45 steel pen shown with Parker boxing describing the pen as Flighter. This address and corrects i'd believe your initial tentative assertion that "I'm not sure, but your pen (steel 51 with gold band) is the only parker that can be called a "flighter"". I'm a bit surprised to be getting grief for this, rather than a note of thanks, for clarifiying this issue.

You then cite vague recollection of a Spanish pen magazine regarding assertion #2, that a Steel Flighter-like 51 was produced early on, at the time of the release of the first Flighter, but packing a different name. This vague recollection is less strong support than, say, the photo I provided of a 45 Flighter in box and so marked. Indeed, I continue to request presentation for evidence of this early all-steel Non-Flighter, and if presented, would be happy to see it.

Juan:At least, with Richard you have something to object to; he admits lack of info on his side and leaves the question open. Your answer was a "nope" and a smiley. Hard to share info that way.

On the contrary. I have little if anything of Richard's to which to object. Rather, i... objected... to your interpretation of Richard's commentary, even whilst pointing out that secondary sources (including Richard's) are not intrinsically and obligatorily perfect. Richard asks a question- something he does often. You treated his question as a proof rather than as a question.

Richard: Some other brushed stainless-steel pens, even some made by Parker, have chrome-plated furniture. Are these pens really Flighters?

You are welcome to disagree, but my view of this question is that Richard neither rules out nor provides proof for said imagined exclusion, that the other pens were called Flighter.

As per my comments:

David: First, I've had the pleasure to correct ol' Richard's webpinions before (usually over scotch and salmon, while scritching Nefrit). Second, I observe that in fact Richard's phrasing indeed does not endeavor to exclude Flighter-dom for any steelw Parker pen. Rather, he... asks a question ("are these really flighters?")... indicating lack of definitive info on his part. I would be loathe to use such a question as any sort of proof for non-flighter-dom of much of anything.

One of the charms of dealing with a motivated and humble collector such a Richard, is that he too is charmed to have the chance to clarify and even to correct his database.

Juan At least, with Richard you have something to object to; he admits lack of info on his side and leaves the question open. Your answer was a "nope" and a smiley. Hard to share info that way.


No. I have nothing of Richard's to object to. Rather, I objected to your interpretation of Richard's comments.


Juan: Your answer was a "nope" and a smiley. Hard to share info that way.

I provided initially at least as much info as you did... an opinion/assertion. Then, when asked, I provided hard data when needed, regarding my counter assertion (Parker did call pens Fligher besides the gold-tone-band steel 51) to your assertion that Parker did not do this. As per the photo of the 45 Flighter.

Juan: I forgot: you've corrected Richard in the past...big deal, but So what?

So what? Well... so it is important for all pen collectors to realize that no secondary source intrinsically must be correct, in the general case, and that if one is to cite a secondary source (book, website, opinion) it is good to keep this in mind.

Juan: I'm correcting you right now and I'm not bragging about that.

No. You seem merely to be asserting that you are correcting me. We can dismiss this notion readily enough. As follows...

Which piece of information... which assertion have i provided... have you corrected? Indeed, my only assertion about pens in this thread, was that Parker indeed did produce pens it called Flighter other than that first gold-band steel 51. I have proven this with strong evidence- a photo of such a pen in Parker box, described as Flighter. I cited this in response to your stated belief that Parker did not do this. Parker clearly did do this. I remain uncertain how you have 'corrected' me regarding this.

The only other point about pens i addressed in this thread was your claim that Parker produced a non-goldtone-band Steel Flighter-like 51 at the start of the Flighter run (1949) which it did not call Flighter, but rather "Deluxe". And, i did not make any assertion regarding the veracity of your claim, quote now "when the 1st flighter was released (the one with the gold band), the all-steel was called "deluxe" (or "de luxe"). I must have a brochure somewhere." . Rather, lacking any familiarity with said pen's existence or with said name for said pen, i invited the presentation of supportive evidence. That has not been provided. I again fail to see how this situation provides any sort of "correction" that you provide me.

Juan:I've also been corrected more times I can remember... with some information.

As by my posts here. I, for one, would welcome some clarifying information regarding a 1949 non-gold-tone-band Steel 51 called something besides flighter.

Juan: And now, do you have any clear info by Parker calling the non-goldband 51 a "flighter"?. I mean a 51, not a 45 or a Frontier.

This has what to do with your original assertion regarding the pen that started this thread, "I'm not sure, but your pen (steel with gold band) is the only parker that can be called a "flighter". " or with my subsequent request for information regarding your assertion that, "when the 1st flighter was released (the one with the gold band), the all-steel was called "deluxe" (or "de luxe")" ????

I believe your request for clear info by Parker to disprove your assertion is irrelevent and distracting. I have not asserted in this conversation that Parker provided clear info that the non-gold-band 51 Steel pen was called a "Flighter". Rather, it is your assertion that Parker did not call it a Flighter and it is your assertion that Parker produced such a pen at the time the Flighter was introduced (1949).

As this is your claim, not mine (i merely asked for your evidence), it seems inappropriate for you to invite me to solve your lack-of-information problem. I would be perfectly happy to see info to back your claim that Parker called the pen other than a Flighter, and further that even if Parker once called it something other than Flighter that Parker never called it Flighter... or for that matter that Parker even produced such a pen at the time it introduced the gold-tone-band Flighter. On this one the ball is in your court, as you have made claims and I have not.

In fact, i have no original company information on hand regarding the (generally believed to be later issue) all steel 51 without gold-tone cap-band.

But, as this request is a diversion from your original point and as you cite Richard's question as if it were Fact, i will reprise your point, will reprise Richard's point, will remind you that I have provided (disproving your initial assertion) a picture of a Parker 45 that Parker called Flighter and will provide another tidbit of info here.

Juan: I'm not sure, but your pen (steel with gold band) is the only parker that can be called a "flighter". The all-steel (no gold band) was sold under another name. Nevertheless, the name "flighter" is used (me too) by any all-steel parker pen. -- SNIP-- Of course, you're free to call your pens the way you want to. I do; I call my steel 45 "flighters". -- SNIP-- Correcting someone is as easy as making a baby; the hard thing is to be right in one's correction. So, I'm all ears regarding flighters/deluxes/whateverthey'recalled

Richard: Some other brushed stainless-steel pens, even some made by Parker, have chrome-plated furniture. Are these pens really Flighters?

I'm glad then to have been able to back up all my assertions in this thread with hard evidence. I am a bit disappointed that you you have yet to provide any evidence for your claim as to the existence of a non-gold-tone-band 51 from around 1949 that was sold as somthing other than a flighter. I am disappointed that nstead you invited me to disprove this point you asserted, rather than simply providing your own positive evidence.

As to Richard's question about steel non-51's or perhaps as to steel non-51's that lack gold tone trim (at least regarding cap-band, which seems to be one of your concerns)

I offer you one of the pens i'm currently selling on my Vacumania.com website. More Parker "proof"




regards

david

I think Richard's question wasn't about steel instruments that lack gold tone trim, but more narrowly about steel instruments that have chrome-plated trim, so the example pictured here does not bear directly on that question.

--Daniel

I concur with your core point. I was aware of this prior to posting- indeed i'd quoted Richard's words- but given the poster's remarks about non-gold-band pens (vs Richard's non-gold-tone anything pens), i mixed the issues into one melange as per my quote, "As to Richard's question about steel non-51's or perhaps as to steel non-51's that lack gold tone trim (at least regarding cap-band, which seems to be one of your concerns)"

It would have been better to keep the two points separate, even while noting that Richard clearly hedges bets- or at least does not explicitly address Parker's intent- regarding steel non-51's, citing collector usage not Parker usage, as per, "The original Flighter, in addition to its brushed stainless body, featured gold-filled furniture for aesthetic contrast--- SNIP--- The distinguishing mark of a Flighter, as the term is recognized by collectors, is its brushed stainless body, not the color of its furniture. "

And, of course the 61 goes right to the point of whether Parker called only the steel 51 with goldtone band, by the name flighter, which seemed to be one of Juan's key points.

-d

I should also have added that I know that Parker did, in fact, label some matte steel instruments with chrome trim "Flighter" (members of the Classic series, for example). I was only pointing out that the 61 shown was not an example of such. Your points in response are clear.

--Daniel

I don't understand. I shared my opinion, based on my experience and belief, which indeed is wholly accurate.

Since your experience is wholly accurate, what I'll say will be redundant, but here I go.

Parker couldn't have introduced the flighter in Spain, because by that time some imports were banished by Franco's dictatorship. One of the items were Parker pens.

This is some trivia, which I assume you already know: Pens which had been found for smuggling were auctioned, and those pens were labelled with a stamp which made them legal. The buyers of those pens were mostly pen sellers who bought those pens just for the stamps: when they sold a legal 51, they removed the stamp and then put it onto another 51 bought in the black market. This is mentioned in _La Colmena_ by Camilo José Cela (Nobel Prize for literature).

Now, I say "mea culpa"; when I said that the original poster's pen was the only parker that could be called a flighter, I omitted "51", being this s thread about a 51. Nevertheless, it's my fault and mine only. What I meant was that that pen was the only Parker *51* which can be called a flighter. Why did I say this? Because I also have experience, which according to Oscar Wilde is "the name we give to our mistakes", and that experience includes the existence of an all steel Parker 51 sold under the name of "Deluxe".

I've seen and must have that brochure; you don't have it? Well, that's not my fault. Most likely, users and sellers called both pens (with and without gold band and clip) "flighters". I've already said in this thread that I call my steel parker pens "flighters". BUT you still haven't shown any evidence of a Parker *51* without goldband and clip sold *by Parker* under the name of "flighter". We have seen a 45 and a 61; (I have a dozen jotters), but not a 51.

Regards, Juan

Neither does the previous 45. I think Richard's statement is quite clear too. It might a matter of perspective or perception.

Regards, Juan

Two points. I don't think anyone is questioning your belief that you saw a reference to an all-steel "51" called "Deluxe", but as recollections and perceptions can be flawed, and as it is useful to have actual references, it is reasonable to desire that you produce the actual document to which you refer. This also allows others to evaluate the strength of the reference.

Secondly, you have a logical flaw in your reasoning; even assuming arguendo that Parker at one time sold an all-steel "51" under the name of "Deluxe", it does not follow that therefore they did not also (at the same time or at a different time, in the same market or in different markets) call such a model "Flighter".

As a parallel, if you saw a reference to Parker calling an all-gold-filled "51" "Insignia", it does not therefore mean that such a configuration was never called "Signet".


As the claim in question was put forth by you, it is reasonable that the burden to support your claim rests on you, though it is true that evidence to the contrary would be illuminating.

--Daniel

deleted redundant

No, no it's not. We need not get sidetracked with mis-issues. Your opening assertion had nothing to do with trim color in general, and Richard simply admits in his profile that he does not know the answer to that question. Citing him thus as a evidence for an answer is imprudent, and endeavoring to refocus the issue on whether some steel pens (with white trim) are flighters or not, is misdirection. Indeed, Daniel's point served mainly to separate your assertion from Richard's question, as the focus of one line in my wee essay.

I remind you of your assertion that only the Parker 51 steel with gold filled band can be called a Flighter..

As per...

I believe these two images have dispensed with that notion...





Your second assertion (really two assertions) was/were that Parker produced a non-gold-filled-band steel version of the 51 Flighter at the time the Flighter was intro'd (around 1949) and that this pens was not called a Flighter but rather a "Deluxe". Whether or not I am comfortable that such a pen was produced at this early date or was named "Deluxe", i have invited evidence from you regarding these issues and have had none provided so far. Indeed, you challenged me to provide proof against your claims in this regard, which really is quite inappropriate. You asserted; you go prove. I will keep open mind regarding the issue itself.

As we have made clear that no website is a Bible and as we have made clear that Richard is lacking information as to this issue, i am unclear why you repeatedly cite his non-commital quote as evidence of anything. Indeed, that Daniel read my entire screed and so far only wished to clarify the difference between your assertion regarding Flighters and Richard's question as to Flighter's is... telling.

At this time it is clear your first assertion has been disproven. It is clear that so far your second (paired) assertions will go without any supportive evidence on your part. I also note that the Shepherd book (with couple of my photos in it) also- whilst not a Bible though a darn fine resource- offers no suggestion to support yoru second assertion, regarding a 1949 non-gold-filled-band non-flighter-named Flighter-like Steel pen, indeed describing (unsourced) such pens as later production Flighters.

regards

david

And... i perhaps could have added that i strongly suspect this (white trim still = Flighters) , but deemed it better- lacking hard evidence in hand- to stay with what i could prove on hand.

regards

david

I can post link or picture to show this fact if there's a request for same, but it doesn't seem to be central or in question at this point.
--Daniel

I think where we are now is that the following three assertions are subject to examination:

- Parker introduced an all-steel (no gold band) "51" when the gold-banded Flighter was first introduced.

- Parker called the all-steel "51" "Deluxe" at some point.

- Parker never called the all-steel "51" model "Flighter" (this is what Juan originally meant -- as he has explained, he did not intend to refer to models other than the "51").

The first two points are awaiting some documentation. The third is difficult to show (though an accumulation of documentation of the continued use of a different name would be good evidence), though it could be disproven by the production of a counterexample.

--Daniel

Quotes per Juan



I shall endeavor to clarify.




Sharing opinions can be useful and often serves as a conversation starter. However, citing "wholly accurate" experience and belief in the face of overwhelming hard evidence can be less helpful

You cited...



This belief-- that the Steel 51 with gold-filled band is the only Parker that can be called a "flighter"- clearly is not wholly accurate. You have been presented with photos two Steel Pens that are not 51's, which are named Flighter, and which are accompanied by original labelling.



I readily concede this point, because i did not believe any Flighters were introduced in Spain. Rather, given the unlikely nature of your assertion that Parker produced 51's of Steel in 1949 without goldtone bands and called them Deluxe, i tried to find some way to give you an out via the possibility that Parker labelled the pens differently for differnet markets. Your points of trivia regarding smuggling are interesting but not pertinent to the nomenclature issues.



Again, redirection of argument instead of recognition of which arguments have carried the weight of evidence. So be it.

I have found that citations of "experience" when issues at hand are objectibve, tends to serve as a bluff- a distraction when indeed no evidence is at hand. Lacking any real proof, we hear of "experience".

I for one would be happy to learn (not just hear claims of experience) regarding a steel 51 named "Deluxe" that was introduced at same time as the Flighter (1949) as per your prior assertion. You have provided no evidence. Thus we hear what appears to be bluster- claims of "experience". I don't need any experience cited here. A simple snapshot of an advert, catalogue page or the like will serve quite well.



No. That is not how reasoned discussion and debate proceed. That I have no copy of your undocumented evidence (which you also lack) is your problem, not my "fault". Absenting proof, your claim lacks merit. I thus dismiss your claim as will most who consider this point. Remember, in serious discussion, one needs to submit evidence to back a new claim or assertion. You might suggest the world is flat and that you have experience and a brochure to support that notion. And, it would not be my fault- i know- that I lack your experience and brochure regarding that. Now, if someone wants to walk to the edge and fall off... that might be evidence for the flat earth.



What we call them by personal choice or even by general collector convention was never the issue. What Parker called them was that about which you asserted.




I don't have to. It is your assertion that they were called otherwise. That obligates YOU to provide proof. Indeed, i have been exceedingly clear in this particular discussion NOT to assert that these pens were called otherwise. Since you made the active claim, i simply- again- invite you to present your evidence. Your evidence will not be allowed to be "well, David didn't show otherwise so that proves my claim". You made the active claim, now go prove it.

Were i to cite secondary sources for non-gold-band Steel 51's being called Flghter, i might cite the most comprehensive text on the subject, one written by those with access to the Parker Archive- Parker 51, by David and Mark Shepherd. Page 50, "The initial cap featured a gold band similar to the one used on some First Year pens. This band was subsequently removed and much such later models are rarer". But, i hold off citing this text as sources for this statement are not provided in the book. Of course if i am hesitent to accept the statement in a book about the pen written with access to Parker's archives, you will understand whyI take your claims based on "experience" and on an imagined "brochure" with a grain of salt, too.




Right. I've given you absolute evidence disproving your claim that only Parker 51 Steel pen with gold tone band is accurately called Flighter. You have provided no evidence for your assertion that Steel Pens without the band are not Flighters. As the assertion is yours, the need for proof rests with you.

David, I've already admited *my* mistake in my *first* post, and you're still reminding me about that; no surprise we get different ideas after reading the same text.

Ok, crucify me, you win: all steel parker 51s are flighters...although I haven't seen evidence of an all steel *51* with no gold band or clip named as "flighter" by Parker. Neither do you, or at least you haven't posted it, yet you still call them flighters. Ok.

Eppur si muove

Juan

Juan -

Can you post the information that an all-steel "51" named "Deluxe" was introduced around the same time as the gold-banded version first appeared?

Thanks --
--Daniel

Let us please avoid melodrama.

I seek no crucifixions of anyone.

On the casual level, you volunteered an opinion three pages back. I volunteered a smiley face counter point-- " Nope "

You challenged me to provide data. I did provide data.

You asserted a model generally believed not to exist ( a 1949 non-gold-band Steel 51 called Deluxe), a pen not cited on any website or book. I invited you to present evidence. You declined.

The issue of "what i call them" really has no play in this chat. I'm discussing Parker's views of pens. I've provided Parker data for pens about which i have made claims. You've not provided Parker data for pens about which you've made claims. Indeed, I would welcome information about a Parker 51 model of which i was unaware.
regards

david

Let us please avoid melodrama.

I seek no crucifixions of anyone.

On the casual level, you volunteered an opinion three pages back. I volunteered a smiley face counter point-- " Nope "

You challenged me to provide data. I did provide data.

Yes, but not the data that could end this mess. Otherwise we wouldn't have gone that far.

You asserted a model generally believed not to exist ( a 1949 non-gold-band Steel 51 called Deluxe), a pen not cited on any website or book. I invited you to present evidence. You declined.

I didn't decline; I'm unable to find that brochure. There's a difference.

The issue of "what i call them" really has no play in this chat. I'm discussing Parker's views of pens.

No, you're baptising pens made by Parker

I've provided Parker data for pens about which i have made claims. You've not provided Parker data for pens about which you've made claims.

I've provided you with the source I got that information. I've also suggested contacting Ariel Kullok who might be familiar with that brochure since it's written in Spanish, and might have been published in Argentina.

Indeed, I would welcome information about a Parker 51 model of which i was unaware.

One more reason to contact Ariel.

David, I've admitted my mistake... could it be possible that parker had sold pens under different names in different countries? There's life beyond internet...

regards

david

Lewis Edson Waterman... lama sabactani!!

Courtesy of Ernesto Soler and his marvelous site www.Parker51.com, here is a picture of an all-steel Parker "51" set, NOS (new old stock), found in an antique store in the box with cellophane wrappers and tags:



Here is the price tag on the set:



According to Ernesto, "Deluxe" was used by Parker to refer to pens with Lustraloy (steel) caps and plastic bodies later in their run (though they may have also used that term with other models; I believe the solid-gold version was called Presidential De Luxe at one time).

I hope that furthers the discussion.

--Daniel

Thank you Daniel, thank you. Now I know for sure I was wrong. Thanks again.

Best regards, Juan

Quotes per Juan



On the contrary. It is possible to continue objecting ad infinitum in the face of acceptable contrary evidence. I do not know of any proof that one cannot pursue a mess even when provided acceptable evidence.

Indeed, the information i provided completely backed every assertion I made. You provided no information to back your assertions.




In the setting of rational debate, the reason one cannot find evidence to support his new assertion... does not matter. The point is still just a claim until said evidence is provided.



No. I am not. Indeed, I have claimed no names for pens made by Parker, save for those pens for which I provided hard evidence in the form of Parker data. Surely, one cannot object to Parker baptizing pens made by Parker and cannot object to my citing Parker as proof of that?




No. You did not provide the source. You provided a suspicion as to a source. I provided my sources (photos pe pens with Parker labels) regarding all pens about which I made claims. You have provided no information regarding those pens about which you made claims.

To bring out a line you consistently have ignored but which will not be forgotten here: You made claims. You go provide the proof.

It is your obligation to seek random people to get copies of brochures you suspect exist, as you have made claims based on them. It is not my obligation to prove your assertions for you.



I have no idea, though name for model was but half the claim. You also claimed production of a bandless all steel Parker in 1949, which also would surprise me. The upshot is that we have no information to support the pen in question. I would be happy to see some information.

regards

david

Hope we don't need to nitpick regarding gold filled clip

david

Here you have, David:

http://www.todocoleccion.net/juego-parker-...x737262#descrip

Am I providing facts now?

Regards, Juan

No need to do that:

http://www.todocoleccion.net/juego-parker-51-acero~x737262

Now you have one more 51 model to collect.

Regards, Juan

Facts require relevance. It is a fact that the sky is blue (by me) today. That does not help prove existence or names of Parker pens.

Neither so far does the link to Ariel's pen.

Still... I am open to information that sheds light on your question/assertion.

regards

david

David, you said you'll be happy to see the pen in the link... but, but, but ... you don't sound very happy!

I think that by now anyone who has followed this thread has an opinion about the way you see and handle things. I'm not ashamed of my mistakes; we seem to be different.

Oh, and the link I provided is as relevant as David's and much more relevant than the 45 and 61 pics you've posted. Hey, it's 51 we were talking about. I admitted my mistake of omitting "51" in my first post. Now, one letter at a time: first fiiiive, and then ooooone.

EPPUR SI MUOVE

Juan

Oh, I forgot... Now I know the meaning of "mania" in "vacumania"

EPPUR SI MUOVE

Juan