Parker 51 vs Parker 61

[goodguy]

Hi Everybody

 

I have a question regarding Parker hooded pens.

 

I own few Parker 51s and Parkers 61s.

 

The nibs on all my 51s need some work on them so they are not smooth writers (I am working on the problem right now).

 

As for my 61s I never inked them because I didnt want to plug up the finiky capilar system.

 

2 weeks ago I won on eBay a british 61 flighter with the converter and not the compicated capilar system.Needless to say right away I tried the pen and I was AMAZED this pen without a doubt is the best and smoothest writer I own even better then my new Omas Paragon and Pelikan M800.

 

So you have to tell me in your opinion who is the better writer between the two ? the 51 or the 61 ?

And if you want tell me in general how is the 61 compared to the 51 ?

Edited September 4, 2006 by goodguy

[JimStrutton]

Everything else being equal, the writing differences between a "51" and 61 are more about the feel of the pen itself, the 61 being a slimmer shape.

 

The nibs will be pretty much identical. I have compared a medium 61 with a medium "51" and the differences are barely noticeable. I think that your reaction may be in some part having an English nib. English Parker nibs are typically more generous than the US nibs in the size of the tipping and the line size, as has been well documented before.

 

On the subject of your "51"s not writing too well, this has been my experience with many "51"s that are bought from eBay. If you had asked me six months ago if I thought that a "51" nib would distort with the owners writing hand I would have said no. But now having seen a few where the tip is bent up and the nib has a defined bend to the left, I now question that belief. In fact I now take the nib out as a matter of course and examine it for bending before attempting any other form of smoothing.

 

So I think my answer to you would be, get a "51" writing as well as the 61 and then you can compare and contrast.

 

The good news is that writing with a smooth 61 won't be an onerous task whilst you get the "51"s sorted.

 

Jim

 

[ps4ever]

The 61 is an amazing writing pen. Parker allegedly had a special electro-polishing system to smooth all roughness from the point. It certainly seems so. Don't be afraid of the capillary system, either. I think it is actually the best filling system ever produced. It really is what Parker said it was- a no-mess system with no moving parts.

[lyonlover]

The 61 is an amazing writing pen. Parker allegedly had a special electro-polishing system to smooth all roughness from the point. It certainly seems so. Don't be afraid of the capillary system, either. I think it is actually the best filling system ever produced. It really is what Parker said it was- a no-mess system with no moving parts.

I'm looking into buying my own Parker 61 flighter. Is it a good pen for long-term usage (like decades)? I read about how the 61 has brittle plastic that can crack over time. Is it that bad? It's a beautiful pen.

[brownargus]

I have a 61 Insignia C/C (bought new in about 1970) with a fine nib, and two 51s, a MkI with a medium nib and a MkIII with a fine nib. The 61 has almost always been a dry writer and needs pushing along the paper - very tiring to use. By comparison, the 51s both glide over the paper. There is also the problem with the 61 of the tendency for the section to distort over time. I had mine replaced some years ago but it didn't improve the flow! They are both attractive models but IMO the 51 wins every time.

[lyonlover]

I have a 61 Insignia C/C (bought new in about 1970) with a fine nib, and two 51s, a MkI with a medium nib and a MkIII with a fine nib. The 61 has almost always been a dry writer and needs pushing along the paper - very tiring to use. By comparison, the 51s both glide over the paper. There is also the problem with the 61 of the tendency for the section to distort over time. I had mine replaced some years ago but it didn't improve the flow! They are both attractive models but IMO the 51 wins every time.

That's quite interesting. I wonder why Parker didn't change the plastic type in the 61 throughout production, especially considering how expensive it was back then. I think I'll pass on the 61 then. I see you have a Waterman Carene in your tag. How does the Carene compare to the Parker 51 in terms of balance/durability/build quality/flow and skipping/etc.?

 

Sorry about your 61

[MancFrank]

As a newbie, I don't have anywhere near as much user experience as most here, but of the nine 61s I have, I've written with two (MK I - accountant nib & MK II - medium nib) and experienced no problems whatsoever. Both write with what, to me at least, seems a very pleasing wet (yet not overly so) nib.

 

Also, I haven't experienced any difficulty in flushing, which seems to be a commonly reported issue for some (none of my pens have cracking / damage, either).

 

Currently, I only have the one 51 (an Insignia - medium nib) and it certainly doesn't write any better than my 61s. Not worse, either - but no better.

 

Maybe I'm lucky, maybe I'm biased - or maybe, I simply don't know any better - but that's my take.

 

Yes, I love my sleek, sexy 61s.

 

Regards,

Frank

[mitto]

Both 51 and 61 are lovely Parkers. But my experience is that the 61 is nowhere near the 51 as far as durability and looks are concerned. Two of my 61s' arrows have disappeared. Lol. That is what happened actually without me knowing where did they go. And one has started developing cracks in the section . Another is missing the barrel end jewel. The nibs on the 61 mk3 are, however, a joy to write with.

Anyhow my vote goes to the 51.

[lyonlover]

Both 51 and 61 are lovely Parkers. But my experience is that the 61 is nowhere near the 51 as far as durability and looks are concerned. Two of my 61s' arrows have disappeared. Lol. That is what happened actually without me knowing where did they go. And one has started developing cracks in the section . Another is missing the barrel end jewel. The nibs on the 61 mk3 are, however, a joy to write with.

Anyhow my vote goes to the 51.

It's a shame the 61 couldn't eclipse the 51 as it should. But then, how would the 51 be so revered today

 

Another member here said that the Argentinian Parker 61s are made of Lucite (polycarbonate) like the 51 and not polystyrene, so it is much more durable than other 61s (no idea if this is true or not). In fact, I did find this Argentinian Parker 61:

Parker 61 Flighter, Argentina

It doesn't have the inlaid arrow (instead it has two dots to fall off) and the plastic is noticeably less shiny in the picture than other 61s. Also, it has an Aerometric filler instead of the capillary system or a C/C filler. Even the hood looks to taper less toward the nib. Can anybody shed some light on this?

Edited March 7, 2016 by lyonlover

[MancFrank]

Can anybody shed some light on this?

 

No. In fact, I'd much rather it never saw daylight again and went back to the darkened cupboard of horrors to assault my vision no more. 'Tis the work of the devil.

 

I really, REALLY don't like the Argentinian 61.

 

I mean, if you had Emma Stone, would you make her wear an ugly mask & 'Billy Bob' teeth??

 

Just no...

 

Regards,

 

Frank

[gordyt]

The 61 is an amazing writing pen. Parker allegedly had a special electro-polishing system to smooth all roughness from the point. It certainly seems so. Don't be afraid of the capillary system, either. I think it is actually the best filling system ever produced. It really is what Parker said it was- a no-mess system with no moving parts.

 

I agree completely. I have a handful of 51's and I do love them. Recently a friend of mine who sells vintage pens talked me into checking out his collection. He is a big 61 fan. I ended up buying a Parker 61 "Jet Flighter" pen and pencil set. Came with the original box and everything. I had to soak the pen in water for an hour or so, then take one of them bulb syringes with enough of the skinny part cut off so that it would fit over the capillary tube and flush the pen with some fresh water. Apparent it had been put away for a long time without being cleaned. But that was it.

 

It now works flawlessly and writes like a dream. I'm extremely satisfied with that purchase.

[richardandtracy]

Well, I used a P61 for 25 years as virtually my only pen, and loved it. The nib was wet and smooth - in fact I think the 'best' P51 nibs are about 'average' on the P61 scale.

 

That pen was a burgundy, and the burgundy seems to be the more fragile of the colours. At the end of the 25 years the hood was showing microcacks and at 29 years, the barrel cracked and the hood microcracks made it porous.

 

If you have a Flighter, I suspect you'll find the hood will be the most fragile bit, and after 30-ish years only pen equivalent usage is when the hood will start cracking. So, if you have 3 pens and rotate them, it should last a complete lifetime. An early warning that the hood is microcracking is the tip cracking off. This happens at about 5 years only-pen-equivalent life left (or possibly 15 years left with a rotation of 3 pens).

 

 

Why didn't Parker use Lucite? It wasn't possible to injection mould it at the time, and I don't think it's possible now. Lucite cures from 2 components, polystyrene is melted and is then forced into the mould under pressure. Lucite melts at a temperature close to its degradation temperature, so melting the cured plastic will degrade the plastic. Also, Lucite (aka 'Acrylic') has a higher melting temperature than PS and it's possible that originally injection moulding machines couldn't get up to that temperature anyway. Even these days acrylic is usually only cast or extruded, and I've never seen it offered as granules for moulding.

 

 

I was interested to see that link to the Argentinian P61. The hood shape is like some of the later P51's I've seen in the UK, and also has a circular opening for the feed on the underside of the hood. This is unlike the regular P61 which has an opening on the bottom that is rectangular to more closely match the shape of the feed. It would indicate that this hood shape could be machined on a lathe, and explain why it was possible to use Lucite. Interesting.

 

Regards,

 

Richard.

[lyonlover]

 

I mean, if you had Emma Stone, would you make her wear an ugly mask & 'Billy Bob' teeth??

I always found women with Billy Bob teeth particularly attractive...

 

In other words, yes.

 

 

But besides that, I did find another photo:

[gordyt]

Richard thank you for that extremely informative post. I will keep an eye out for cracking issues with the hood.

 

-- Gordon

[mitto]

The hood length on the Argrntina made pen is remarkably shorter than USA made one. Besides, it has close resemblance to 51 hood.

[MancFrank]

Very interesting observations, Richard.

 

Jeez, LyonLover - did you really have to post that second pic? My eyes are bleeding now... The short, stumpy section and 'flat fish eyes' are just hideous.

 

You must spend an awful lot of time on here: http://www.billybobproducts.com/

 

Regards,

Frank

Edited March 7, 2016 by MancFrank

[richardandtracy]

Lyonlover's photo is actually very interesting.

 

From the photo, it indicates that the Argentinian P61 is really a Mk3 P51 + barrel jewel + 2 dots in the hood rather than a P61 with differences. The hood shape is pure P51. Got to get one, one day, when I'm feeling rich. So probably never.

 

Regards,

 

Richard.

[alexander_k]

Great thread, with lots of interesting stuff, especially by Richard. I've been a great fan of the 61, keeping a couple permanently inked at my desk at home (after all, you cannot stop inking them). Overall the design has several flaws (including the capillary filler) that stop the 61 from reaching the iconic status of the 51 (another of my favourite pens) but the nibs are indeed superb.

[MancFrank]

A mutant / mongrel indeed, Richard.

 

Yes, the asking prices are crazy - but then, I've only seen them advertised via dealers thus far - in Europe, anyway. There's a UK dealer with an Argentinian Insignia set up for £180 which, I suppose might seem slightly more palatable once exchange rates / Paypal currency conversion / shipping are factored in.

 

Still looks like a slapped @rse, though.

 

Regards,

 

Frank

[mitto]

Remove the misplaced Sheaffer double white dots and the Argentinian made 61 is a 51. Isn't it?