Enough Interest In Mabie Todd, Swan Or Otherwise?

[Cepasaccus]

The groove in the Waterman's shaft would have been the most problematic spot until you mentioned the shaft length. Mine is about 2mm shorter, which means that the spiral is 2mm longer than the Waterman's.

 

Cepasaccus

[Cob]

The spiral (I have it in front of me) measures 30.5mm; the groove is about 10mm long and about 1.25mm deep. Looking at your picture I would say that you could file down the shaft - across the groove - and have sufficient material left for your application.

 

Cob

[Cepasaccus]

I remeasured the length. It is totally 2mm shorter and this 2mm is missing from the shaft. So length seem to be ok. The thickness of the flattened shaft is 3.4mm, so 0.9mm is missing. This means the groove would still be visible.

 

Cepasaccus

[Cepasaccus]

I put in some O-rings and assembled it. I doubt anything will move to where it shouldn't move. The end piece sits rather tight and to be sure I added some tiny droplets of shellack.

[Cob]

I put in some O-rings and assembled it. I doubt anything will move to where it shouldn't move. The end piece sits rather tight and to be sure I added some tiny droplets of shellack.

Well I hope it works for you.

 

Were I to need the Waterman's spiral for your application - and I was concerned about the groove, I would fill it with Devcon mixed with lamp black and smooth it.

 

All the best.

 

Cob

[Ispriluc]

I know a few of you who post here regularly, having exchanged emails with you or having benefited from your suggestions or valuable advice over the last few months during which I`ve been hunting for a very old fountain pen to add to my other possessions (I can`t say that I have a collection).

Recently I bought two such pens, both over 100 years old as far as I know.

Here`s one of them, please allow me to add a modest submission to this thread:

 

http://i.imgur.com/leNrV15.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/rctwRGl.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/0GW05GF.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/LtGKdyq.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/1beOjAb.jpg

 

The seller took some photos with the section disassembled and I believe he didn`t put them back together the right way, so when the pen arrived, the feed and wire were rattling inside the barrel. I tried to put them back together and only succeeded with the help I received from some of you guys.

It writes now and it doesn`t leak on the paper, but the flow is not perfect and has a tendency to skip when I use it with inks other than Waterman Florida Blue. Even with this one still skips sometimes, but not as bad.

Even so, I`m very happy and proud to be the the owner of such a great writing instrument. And boy, what a feeling to actually use it!

It even has a box that also carries the Bard imprint, what more could I want?

Well, maybe a Chatelaine, a SF1, SF2, a Blackbird, an Eternal and so on.

All the best!

 

[Cob]

I know a few of you who post here regularly, having exchanged emails with you or having benefited from your suggestions or valuable advice over the last few months during which I`ve been hunting for a very old fountain pen to add to my other possessions (I can`t say that I have a collection).

Recently I bought two such pens, both over 100 years old as far as I know.

Here`s one of them, please allow me to add a modest submission to this thread:

 

http://i.imgur.com/leNrV15.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/rctwRGl.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/0GW05GF.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/LtGKdyq.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/1beOjAb.jpg

 

The seller took some photos with the section disassembled and I believe he didn`t put them back together the right way, so when the pen arrived, the feed and wire were rattling inside the barrel. I tried to put them back together and only succeeded with the help I received from some of you guys.

It writes now and it doesn`t leak on the paper, but the flow is not perfect and has a tendency to skip when I use it with inks other than Waterman Florida Blue. Even with this one still skips sometimes, but not as bad.

Even so, I`m very happy and proud to be the the owner of such a great writing instrument. And boy, what a feeling to actually use it!

It even has a box that also carries the Bard imprint, what more could I want?

Well, maybe a Chatelaine, a SF1, SF2, a Blackbird, an Eternal and so on.

All the best!

 

That's a lovely one I must say; I have a plain version, 3013. And like yours it has stayed a nice dark colour - very nearly black!

 

As for your skipping problems, well this could be due to misaligned tines or a "baby's bottom" at the tips. Alternatively - or perhaps as well, I found with a 1500 I had, that considerable differences in performance could be obtained by adjusting he position of the feed relative to the nib.

 

Best of luck with it.

 

Cob

[mallymal1]

I know a few of you who post here regularly, having exchanged emails with you or having benefited from your suggestions or valuable advice over the last few months during which I`ve been hunting for a very old fountain pen to add to my other possessions (I can`t say that I have a collection).

Recently I bought two such pens, both over 100 years old as far as I know.

Here`s one of them, please allow me to add a modest submission to this thread:

 

http://i.imgur.com/leNrV15.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/rctwRGl.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/0GW05GF.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/LtGKdyq.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/1beOjAb.jpg

 

The seller took some photos with the section disassembled and I believe he didn`t put them back together the right way, so when the pen arrived, the feed and wire were rattling inside the barrel. I tried to put them back together and only succeeded with the help I received from some of you guys.

It writes now and it doesn`t leak on the paper, but the flow is not perfect and has a tendency to skip when I use it with inks other than Waterman Florida Blue. Even with this one still skips sometimes, but not as bad.

Even so, I`m very happy and proud to be the the owner of such a great writing instrument. And boy, what a feeling to actually use it!

It even has a box that also carries the Bard imprint, what more could I want?

Well, maybe a Chatelaine, a SF1, SF2, a Blackbird, an Eternal and so on.

All the best!

 

 

No wonder you're happy. What a marvelous pen.

[Goudy]

From the writing sample, it looks like the feed is going alternately wet and dry. That might be caused by a constriction in the feed, perhaps dried ink which could be flushed with water or diluted pen cleaner (but don't soak as that might affect the lovely black ebonite exterior of the body). As Cob suggested, pulling the feed back slightly might also open up the ink flow a bit more. When an overfeed pen is adjusted properly, I'm normally able to see some ink held between the overfeed and the top of the nib when the pen is held in the writing position.

 

The ink itself can make a big difference with finnicky vintage pens, as you've noted. My favourite "magic ink" for pens like this, particularly overfeeds, is Take-sumi from Pilot Iroshizuku.

 

It's a handsome pen, which has clearly been well cared for over its long life.

[Ispriluc]

I pulled the feed a little bit to the back but with no effect. There is no dried ink inside, I`m sure of it as I inspected the feed, wire and the inside of the section before reassembling it; also, I do see the ink between the feed and the nib, as Goudy mentioned.

The over feed seems however to stay a little too far from the nib, leaving too much space between them. I used a small rubber to press it against the nib and it seemed to help, but right now I don`t want to try to bend the feed permanently, to touch the nib, as I`m afraid I`ll break it. Maybe I`ll find a feed like this somewhere and try it on my pen.

I will also try the Take-sumi when I get the chance.

To be honest, this doesn`t bother me that much. I just enjoy looking at this pen and holding it in my hand; I find it fascinating to be able to own and use an object that could very well be a part of a museum.

[Cepasaccus]

Space between upper feed and nib is no unusual. How does the tip of the nib look?

[Ispriluc]

This morning I tried again. I was planning to mix some water with the Waterman ink, to make it even more free flowing, but I didn`t get to that.

Instead, I tried to see whether I could find the sweet spot of the nib, as narrow as it would be but one that could allow me to write with no issues. And I found it, I just have to tilt the nib to the left a little and keep it like that, just like the nib was a left foot oblique (even though I looked, Cepasaccus, and the profile is straight, with good iridium, tines aligned).

Until now, I was trying to keep it straight. The minute I tilted it, worked fine.

Thank you guys!

[Ispriluc]

Now that this problem is solved, let`s keep the discussion alive.

I have another issue. I read with lots of interest the discussion between Cob And Cepasaccus regarding the age of one of Cob`s pens, a Mabie similar to mine and bearing the same `88 patent date. Both had good arguments and maybe we`ll never know for sure if a Mabie eyedropper with an `88 patent date was really made before `95.

But my question is this: if Cepasaccus is right and 88 pens were made around 1900, why would the pens in that period carry either the 88 or the 95 patent date? I mean why would they not all carry the most recent one, the 95?

[Goudy]

But my question is this: if Cepasaccus is right and 88 pens were made around 1900, why would the pens in that period carry either the 88 or the 95 patent date? I mean why would they not all carry the most recent one, the 95?

 

A similar question arose in relation to Paul Wirt's patent imprints in another thread. Wirt was involved in various patent lawsuits, and would imprint the date of the earliest relevant patent that he owned in order to claim precedence over his imitators.

[Cob]

Now that this problem is solved, let`s keep the discussion alive.

I have another issue. I read with lots of interest the discussion between Cob And Cepasaccus regarding the age of one of Cob`s pens, a Mabie similar to mine and bearing the same `88 patent date. Both had good arguments and maybe we`ll never know for sure if a Mabie eyedropper with an `88 patent date was really made before `95.

But my question is this: if Cepasaccus is right and 88 pens were made around 1900, why would the pens in that period carry either the 88 or the 95 patent date? I mean why would they not all carry the most recent one, the 95?

I'll have to look up the patent again; it's possible, I suppose, that the 1895 patent referred to a feature that did not appear on the pen - perhaps for example the plug feed?

 

Cob

[UK forester]

All this outcry here for a separate site for Mabie Todd, don't waste your time here head over to the Fountain Pen Board they have and will cater for your needs

[birchtine]

I almost forgot about the FPB I registered and activated the account about six months ago and still am not allowed to post.

[Cob]

Yes, I'm a member there, but there is only seldom anything of direct interest to me. Mostly American pens, very often exotic too.

 

Cob

[Greenie]

I have tried to become a member at Fountain Pen Board, and no one ever approved me to be able to post. Just like birchtine.

 

I can't very well go where I have been made to feel unwelcome by the administrator despite repeated attempts to register......

[missuslovett]

All this outcry here for a separate site for Mabie Todd, don't waste your time here head over to the Fountain Pen Board they have and will cater for your needs

 

 

I like wasting my time here