Parker 61 - underrated?

[Col]

Everyone loves the 51, but is its successor so much less worthy that it deserves its relatively low status in the Parker canon? Perhaps it's because my first 'proper' pen after leaving school was a 61, but I'm very fond of them.

 

Did the (ultimately overwhelming) shortcomings and drawbacks of the much-vaunted capillary filling system damage its reputation irrevocably? If so, I'm inclined to think it unfair, since later press-bar or cartridge/converter fillers are - wait for it - every bit as good as a 51!

 

 

(runs for cover)

 

---

Col

[fibreglass_works]

You have to accept it, It was never design as good as the P51. Nevertheless it still a nice design pen. I kept as much as the P51.

[Richard]

The 61 has a couple of drawbacks. The filler is high maintenance, although if you take care of it you'll find that it's very reliable. The plastics tend to crack. The arrow can easily become dislodged and fall off.

 

It's really too bad, because a 61 that's in good condition is a really sweet pen. I have several, and they're good writers that look good and handle well.

[JimStrutton]

I like the 61, in fact I use a Flighter 61 CC frequently as a backup to a Sonnet when I travel. Carrying a pack of cartridges is easier than bottled ink.

 

I have one of the capilliary fillers too, again a good pen, but the filler does need more care than others and it is not as robust as a "51"

 

From a writing standpoint, a well adjusted 61 will write as well as a "51", so if you don't like how a "51" writes you will never enjoy a 61. I have four 61's but don't plan on getting more unless something unusual comes my way by chance.

 

Jim

[Ruaidhri]

I love my 61s.

 

They are all capillary fillers and I have never had the slightest problem with filling after a post purchase soak & clean out.

I don't like the idea of a non-capillary fill 61 - sort of defeats the whole idea

 

On one occasion the arrow fell off my gf, but He was in a good mood that day & I found it in my armchair Easy enough to refix - tiny smidge of epoxy applied with a cocktail stick and it has never budged again.

 

There's something about a dj "51" though...

 

Regards,

Ruaidhrí

BTW - I've never used anything other than Watermans in them FWIW

[FLZapped]

The 61 has a couple of drawbacks. The filler is high maintenance, although if you take care of it you'll find that it's very reliable. The plastics tend to crack. The arrow can easily become dislodged and fall off.

 

It's really too bad, because a 61 that's in good condition is a really sweet pen. I have several, and they're good writers that look good and handle well.

I don't really see that the 61 requires any more maintenance than my other pens. Still, even with all its apparent shortcomings, I think the pen is highly underrated.

 

-Bruce

Edited January 14, 2007 by FLZapped

[david i]

My NM-stickered flighter with aero-filler/cartridge is sweet.

 

But, i fershure will have to post later today the 61 i picked up at ohio. Might be a bit trickier than 51, but without doubt has its own special charm.

 

david

[hatherton_wood]

I bought the cartridge/converter version of the 61 flighter in 1973 and it has been a great pen over the years. Because of the removable converter I prefer it to the 51's personally. The arrow gives it a bit more of an attractive style too.

[Col]

Because of the removable converter I prefer it to the 51's personally..

That is a definite point in its favour.

 

The arrow gives it a bit more of an attractive style too.

I love the arrow, despite its reported predilection for falling out. It also acts as a pointer to the nib, which can be useful when it's hooded.

 

---

Col

[Dillo]

Hi,

 

A very nice 61 First Edition is my only non-Italian and non-calendaring pen that survived my collection cleanup. I couldn't part with it since it wrote really well and filled very nicely too. It holds plenty of ink and it has a wet nib which is not very common for 61s. I never had problems with the capillary filler, and I only needed to flush it to clean it out. I do find it easier to clean out than a C/C pen especially with a rubber bulb flushing tool.

 

Dillon

[psfred]

Given the prices 61's go for on eBay, I hardly think they are underappreciated.

 

Parker 21 Supers, on the other hand, write as well as a 51 and are definitely underappreciated. The other 21s are very nice as well, if not quite so nice as the Super.

 

All of the above suffer from cracked hoods, alas. If you don't care about looks, they are easy to fix, but can then be rather rough. They write fine with the cracks glued, though.

 

Peter

[Bradley]

I've yet to really enjoy my "61", and that's because the barrel cracked the second week I had it, and I am still waiting for a replacement.

 

First impressions, though? Fragile, unnecessarily so, it seems to me -- and for all of the reasons mentioned previously. I shouldn't be required to worry about my pen when I'm using it. The defects of this pen should not be dismissed simply as a matter of course -- not for the price originally, and certainly not for the price they get now! I concur, psfred. I shouldn't have to make do with a shabby-looking pen, because different parts fell off or cracked, and I shouldn't be required to perform these kinds of repairs, etc.

 

Forgive me, ladies and gentlemen of the Parker community, but this pen reminds me not to forget Sheaffer, whose pens -- in addition to being wonderful writers -- possess a durability which I've found second to none. They are indeed low maintenance, if any maintenance is required at all.

 

I love Parker pens, and I've posted on this board more than any other (not that I've posted very much), but I do find that Parkers are a little less "independent" than my other pens.

 

Underrated? No.

[RSVP]

I love my Parker 61s. To me the streamlined finish with the double jewelling as standard adds so much to the look. When this is combined with the cool finishes available one cannot lose.

 

Having said this I do not care for the capillary fill 61s. The C/Cs are a cut above pretty much any other pen of their type , the 65s also.

 

If Parker ere to reintroduce a design I think the 61 would do better now than then . A reintroduction of the 61 now would probably do better than the 51 in non-pendom.

[goodguy]

I love the Parker 61s.Actualy I like them better than Parker 51.

I am not concentrating my buying effort right now on the 61 but it is defenetly on my list.

[MYU]

I have just one Parker 61 and find that it has a very smooth fine-medium nib. The capillary filler seems to hold a lot of ink. On the other hand, cleaning it out... well, I don't have a centrifuge, so I've just stuck to one ink color.

 

The barrel and cap seem to be of slightly less quality than the 51. The lines on the gold filled barrel have faded quite a bit from use over the years (by some previous owner). But it's a beautiful looking pen, that's for certain. I like the integrated bottom jewel without the tassie--very sleek.

[HesNot]

If properly maintained the 61 is a very reliable pen and mine is a great writer. You do have to keep them well lubed, however. And you will never find an easier pen to fill than a capillary 61 that isn't a cartridge, and that includes a snorkel. For the average user who might let a pen dry out, however, cleaning a 61 requires some effort - but if you use a bulb I'm not sure it is any worse than the series of vacs I recently flushed for maintenance's sake - at least with the 61 and a bulb you can get some real flow of water through the thing.

 

I like the design as well. However, I own 4 "51"s and only 1 61 and am not likely to get another 61 unless it is a c/c pen for travel. I've mentioned this before but I'm fairly certain both the "51" and the 61 were made with what were cutting edge materials at the time. With the benefit of hindsight, the wheel of fortune hit with the acrylic in the "51" as being a remarkably robust material that has very much stood the test of time. Sadly, in the case of the 61, the material has not been nearly as robust. The 21 was a decided effort to produce at a lower cost so the materials issue there, if not likely intentional, can certainly be attributed to the use of a known less costly material.

 

It does make you wonder at times how much of a brilliant design that has stood the test of time was engineering (a good deal with the "51" but you could say the same of the 61 - it is ingenious and has very few parts to wear out) and good luck (as with the material choice in both pens).

 

I do think the 61 flies a bit under the radar with a lot of Parker fans in the shadow of the "51", Duofold and 75, all of which have broad and loyal followings, but as mentioned given the prices I'm not sure they're completely underrated.

[randyholhut]

I only have one capillary fill 61, but in the year or so I've owned it, I've kept it in my regular rotation and haven't had problems. I top off the filler if I go too long between uses and stick to blue-black ink since cleaning this pen looks to be a seriously complex task.

 

For style and ease of use, the 61 holds its own with anything Parker has made. For durability, nothing beats a "51."

[fibreglass_works]

For style and ease of use, the 61 holds its own with anything Parker has made. For durability, nothing beats a "51."

Good saying

[Fafnir]

Last week I discovered my husband's Parker 61, in rolled gold, in a box at the back of the cupboard . However, the gold arrow must have fallen off long ago . Does anyone know whether its possible to get replacements?

[FLZapped]

Last week I discovered my husband's Parker 61, in rolled gold, in a box at the back of the cupboard . However, the gold arrow must have fallen off long ago . Does anyone know whether its possible to get replacements?

Yes, there are places that do that sort of thing. I don't have hte link here at work, but I found one place...but they want something in the order of $35 US.

 

-Bruce