I got this bottle recently, complete with the box (which indicates it is a new design as of January 1944*, giving an earliest possible date of manufacture).




And here it is in action:



Edits-- revised image with modern version of the same ink, and *actually READ flap of box with date on it-- it's not 1945 at all.

Thats a really nice blue black - I find the 'new' Wateman blue black a bit too blue......

That is nice- I wish it were still the same. Now I add black to it or I use FPN starry night. Thanks for the post.

What a nice true blue-black color and what a find!. It really looks like the vintage ones, and not like the much more blue ones that are manufactured these days. I wonder if you have tried to soaked it for a while to test water resistance? The looks an the shading are awesome. Thanks for including the pics of the ink bottle/box and for the written review.

It doesn't shift a bit in response to water... well, a miniscule portion of the blue takes flight, but once it's on paper, it stays there. I may see what other known solvents of ink do to it, just through curiosity.

That's why I was asking. I remember the documents my father wrote had the same color and the ink was permanent, while the W. BB I used as a student in the 80's faded and washed away. I suspect the original formula may be an iron-gall based ink.

I agree; in the box of that vintage Waterman ink says something like "writes a blue and leaves a permanent black", which is what happens when I use Montblanc BB.

Juan in Andalucía

So it's probably an iron gall ink. If you touch the inked nib to your tongue, does it taste like rusty nails? That's my "litmus test".

I'm assuming it's iron-gall from the way it acts, and given that it smells like something people thought was "safe chemicals for a happier tomorrow" in the 1940s, I'm not altogether anxious to taste it.

I love that we're sitting on our computers in different parts of the world discussing a pen from '35 writing with ink from '45--anachronisms, indeed! Thanks for sharing this. Do you mind answering how you came across the (still usable) vintage ink?

Yes, all old inks, but very specially the iron-gall based ones, have a funky smell. I miss how my old MB and Waterman inks smelled... Herbin's smells like roses these days, but the "hospital cleaner" scent suited me better . Is really a beautiful ink, Mr. Bitterman.

I thrust my thumb into the distressing pie that is eBay and, for a wonder, pulled out a plum. Funnily enough, I was just doing my regular examination of pens that I'm not going to place a winning bid on, and the ink was presented by the search string I use ("waterman fountain pen").

Thank you very much for this. Perhaps the most interesting review here for .... a long time.

What a great color! What modern day ink looks similar to that?

jdboucher- I haven't actually used this ink, so I can't say, but looking at the photos and compared to my experience with another vintage Blue-Black, I'd say:
* Diamine's Registrar's Ink (iron gall; if you want the permanence)
* Pelikan 4001 Blue Black (non-gall, but decent water resistance)

There are a few ways to test to see if this ink, or another ink, is an iron-gall. I'm working on a testing protocol, though I don't have it finished yet. Testing to see if it tastes like iron is a pretty good one, though a lot of people associate other nasty flavors with metal or iron.

Aaron

I bought a few bottles of vintage Waterman Blue-Black on eBay and have the same result as you. That is great ink! I buy a lot of vintage ink on eBay and have been less successful with Waterman Black. I have yet to get a bottle that doesn't have precipitate in it. Red, green, brown, they are all great, just not the black. I will buy more blue-black when I see it at a reasonable price.

Have you done anything to try and use the Waterman Black?

I hope you didn't toss the ink and fill the bottle with something else. There may be some things we could try- I would be willing to take a sample off your hands, or give you a few ideas.

The first is to just use the ink. Shake it, but then wait a few days for precipitate to settle. There's a decent chance that the precipitate formed as the water evaporated. The ink that's left in the bottle, sans precipitate, might still be close to the way it should be, and still safe to use. Dip it first, though. Also, adding water might help you reconstitute it; I'd decant the clear stuff, pour off some of the precipitate and see if it'll dissolve in some pure distilled water. If it does, it's probably just come out of solution because of the concentration was too high; if it doesn't dissolve, then try the same with 70% ink and 30% DI water.

Aaron

The black ink is usable it just is not dark black. The blue-black is dark.

The black inks were sealed and show no signs of evaporation, only precipitation. A chemical reaction occurred and water-insoluble material formed. This happened with both a quart bottle of older Waterman black, and smaller bottles of probably the same vintage as the blue-black that started this thread.

Len

Looks like new Skrip Blue-Black. (Which also has good water resistance, BTW.)

Viseguy: do you have any problems with Skrip BB and flow? JJBlanche's review said he had problems with flow, but I was thinking of trying out this ink. Still working for you?

Randorider: Could have been chemical, but also could be physical- I've seen some vintage inks with the cardboard seal part being eaten away and at the bottom. I just found an old bottle of Quink BB that it liquid w/ no precipiate... until you add water. Then a you get a very quick precipitate that clings to anything and everything. Total bummer. Probably supersaturated, but I haven't mustered the moxie to bring it to almost boil and to start adding water.

Aaron

I love the pelikan blue-black!

No flow problems here.

I'm pretty sure no vintage inks were iron gall, at least no inks that were made by the Big Five (Parker, Sheaffer's, Waterman's, Carter's, Sanford's) and after about 1900. Iron gall has been reported to eat through paper where it blobbed. Any vintage inks that are still around should not be iron gall. That does not mean they are safe to use (i.e. Superchrome!), but since iron gall clogs fountain pens, I'm pretty sure a major ink company would not make an ink that didn't work in the pens they sold.

I'm glad to hear that you're using and enjoying old inks! As long as there's no mold and no chunks, they should be safe to use. I'm currently doing a long-term usage test on some Skrip from around 1925. So far, no problems! Oh, and by the way, that smell is how almost all vintage inks smell. Isn't it nice?

I wouldn't be surprised if some "permanent" Blue-Blacks contained small bits of ferro-gallic compounds, less than what's in Lamy Blue-Black, for instance. I'm not talking about a Medieval straight-up iron gall ink but something tempered with other dyes. I really wouldn't be surprised if some pre-war permanent inks had a small bit of iron gall content.

Remember kids, Iron Gall != Smoking Pen of Death!

Also, I'd like to give some props to Mr. John Boz- I just ordered some ink from him and I wanted to share the news that I'm quite happy with it! After some bad experiments with vintage ink bought off of eBay, I felt sort of silly stubling across his site. Good prices, great ink, quick shipping, the works. Anyway, usual disclaimer- happy customer, non-affiliated, etc.

Aaron

You're too kind...

Not at all! Just happy to not have purple-black hands from tinkering with thick old inks. Add water? Instant precipitate that couldn't be washed off of Pyrex lab glassware without manual (or, digital) intervention. Water, soap, EtOH, nothing. Weird stuff.