Waterman 46 Woodgrain Safety

[Xof72000]

Hi all,

 

I just wanted to share with you my latest vintage find : this Waterman 46 Safety, in woodgrain color.

The pen is huge ! It has a nice 6 New York nib.

A sterling silver ring, with french hallmarks stands in the middle of the body. The ring reads "V - 16 avril 1925" ... wending ? bearth ? professionnal event ? ... who knows what this date is commemorating.

The imprints on the body are not very readable : only the "46" on the bottom of the pen is deep.

I just cleaned the pen for the moment but I will have to change the seal if I want to use it, ... and repair the cap as well, as it has a crack (only flaw of this pen )

 

 

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i404/Xof72000/WATERMAN46Safety_zps54ed8d00.jpg

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i404/Xof72000/WATERMAN46Safety3_zpsd3059aa5.jpg

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i404/Xof72000/WATERMAN46Safety1_zps5ed17b25.jpg

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i404/Xof72000/WATERMAN46Safety2_zpsac684aef.jpg

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i404/Xof72000/WATERMAN46Safety4_zps1fd96efd.jpg

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i404/Xof72000/WATERMAN46Capuchonfendu1_zps935a692a.jpg

 

 

Next to a MB 149, just to compare the sizes ...

 

http://i1092.photobucket.com/albums/i404/Xof72000/WATERMAN46SafetyvsMB149_zpsc09c8632.jpg

[Uncle Red]

Lovely 46, pity about the cap. How flexy is the nib?

[Xof72000]

I'm going to try to glue the cap, even if it's not easy on hard rubber...

 

I didn't use the pen allready but pressing the nib on my nail makes me think it will be a pleasure to write with !

[Pterodactylus]

http://imageshack.us/a/img163/97/ydbb.jpg

 

(Waterman 45 BCHR safety ..... P.W. Akkerman Oranje Boven)

 

I already posted a review of my pen, it might be interesting to some of you:

Waterman 45 BCHR safety pen review

 

I will be glad to read a review of your pen in near future

Edited July 18, 2013 by Pterodactylus

[BIGEASYPENS]

That IS a handsome pen! Thanks for showing it.

[Blackandwhite]

I do have mine ( no deco, simple hard rubber ) at daily use at the moment. One of my favourite pens, along with all of my few pre-WW2 Waterman pens. The quality standard of these pens is just great. The only thing I had to do is to change the seal. And the pen is from October 1916, if the imprint on the downside of the spoon feed is correct. Enjoy this Waterman, and put it to the side of those You won't depart of.

 

[Vintagepens]

The patent date is only a terminus ante quem:

Your pen probably dates to the later 'teens. If the number on the end is 46, it cannot be earlier than 1917.

[kirchh]

The patent date is only a terminus ante quem:

Your pen probably dates to the later 'teens. If the number on the end is 46, it cannot be earlier than 1917.

 

Terminus post quem, no?

 

--Daniel

[FredRydr]

In legal terms, it is terminus ad quem.

 

Fred

[kirchh]

In legal terms, it is terminus ad quem.

 

Fred

 

I don't think so; the patent date would be the earliest date of the item on which it is stamped, not the latest, so the correct term from the pair you're referring to would be terminus a quo, but in this case, we're placing an event at a point in time, not describing the boundaries of a period, so terminus post quem would be appropriate, I think.

 

--Daniel

[FredRydr]

Daniel, PM me if you want to learn legal terms of art. It can be boring.

 

Meanwhile...

 

Fred, Esq.

Edited May 15, 2015 by FredRydr

[kirchh]

Daniel,

 

Whether or not you feel it's appropriate Latin, that is the phrase used as a legal term of art.

 

Fred

 

Nope. Terminus ad quem refers to an end point, not a start point. Terminus a quo is the correct term for a start point. Narrowly, Terminus ad quem is the end point of a private way, whereas Terminus a quo is the starting point of a private way.

 

Those terms can also be used to refer to bounding points of a period of time, such as the period of manufacture of a particular model of pen. Therefore, we could say that a pen with a patent date of 1916 has 1916 as a Terminus a quo for that configuration's period of manufacture. However, when referring to bounds for the occurrence of a event (as opposed to the bounds of a period), such as the date of manufacture of a specific example of a particular pen, it is correct to use terminus post quem (no earlier than) and terminus ante quem (no later than). So for the specific example of a pen with a patent date of 1916, we can say that 1916 is a terminus post quem for that example's date of manufacture.

 

--Daniel

[FredRydr]

.

Edited May 16, 2015 by FredRydr

[Blackandwhite]

Writing a lot with my old Waterman's 46 right these days, I came back to this discussion. On the Body of my pen, the Patent imprint says Aug.4 1903.

The 1916 imprint is simply a date imprint on the downside of the feed of the the pen. So I do believe the patent of this pen dates back to 1903, and Safeties of this kind most certainly were produced at least until the 1920s by Waterman's, I believe. Yet I am also pretty sure my particular pen dates back to 1916.

The 1916 is nothing but a date imprint on the downside of the feed, not a patent dating as I said. But whatever: this pen remains one of my absolute favourite fountain pens.

Edited July 21, 2015 by Blackandwhite

[kirchh]

Writing a lot with my old Waterman's 46 right these days, I came back to this discussion. On the Body of my pen, the Patent imprint says Aug.4 1903.

The 1916 imprint is simply a date imprint on the downside of the feed of the the pen. So I do believe the patent of this pen dates back to 1903, and Safeties of this kind most certainly were produced at least until the 1920s by Waterman's, I believe. Yet I am also pretty sure my particular pen dates back to 1916.

The 1916 is nothing but a date imprint on the downside of the feed, not a patent dating as I said. But whatever: this pen remains one of my absolute favourite fountain pens.

 

Can you post a photo of the date imprint on the feed?

 

--Daniel