Bexley Nib Units

[s_t_e_v_e]

I recently acquired a Bexley Poseidon Magnum II with a broad nib. The pen is piston filled. I was contemplating on getting a medium nib for it and was looking at my options. I was under the impression that standard Jowo #6 nibs would fit this pen but found that the nib units for Bexley's piston and converter pens are different. Is this true?

 

Indy-pen-dance sells Bexley nib units with an additional $10 for the piston nib unit.

 

Could someone clarify the differences between the two nib units?

 

Thanks!

[Ron Z]

Feeds for the piston filled pens are modified.

[s_t_e_v_e]

Thanks for the response Ron.

 

How different are the feeds? do you have images comparing the two?

Also what is the the change in performance if a converter nib unit is fitted into a piston pen? Would it even fit?

[gregamckinney]

Is there more to the modification than removing the convertor/ cartridge nipple? I've looked at a bunch of these, and that's the only change I can see. In fact, some of these seem to be done extremely coarsely. (That is, the nipple was pretty much just twisted off to make room for the piston head to have full clearance.)

 

Thanks, greg

[dcpritch]

Here's a pic of two Bexley nib units. The one on the left is from a Bexley Corona piston filler and the one on the right is from a Bexley Poseidon Magnum, c/c filler. You can see they are virtually identical other than the nipple that holds the cartridge/converter. Hope this adds a little info.

 

[s_t_e_v_e]

Thanks dcpritch, that makes it much clearer!

 

So I guess if I can cleanly cut the c/c nipple from any #6 Jowo nib unit, it should work on my piston filled Bexleys.

[SteveE]

Thanks dcpritch, that makes it much clearer!

 

So I guess if I can cleanly cut the c/c nipple from any #6 Jowo nib unit, it should work on my piston filled Bexleys.

 

I think so, but be aware that there are two parts to be cut -- the feed and the collar into which the feed is inserted. I don't know whether it would be better to cut them separately or together.

 

In dcpritch's photo, it looks like the nipple was cut from the collar and the resulting hole was beveled and smoothed to foster good ink flow. They may have cut off the nipple, then drilled out the rough hole to smooth it.

 

I wonder if Howard Levy would share the secret.

[Ron Z]

Bexley uses the Jowo nib but Bock feed, and collar with threads to match. They are different. This allows them to use the Bock gold nibs but retain the interchangeability with steel nibs in the same pen.

[Indy_Pen_Dance]

FWIW, The photo above is of the old Bexley housings. They are different now. Same thread and size, but there is a difference on the bottom.

[dcpritch]

FWIW, The photo above is of the old Bexley housings. They are different now. Same thread and size, but there is a difference on the bottom.

Oops, I guess I'm behind the times. :/

[mhosea]

I haven't looked that closely, but it seemed to me that Howard is just making a larger hole where the piercing tube used to be than Richard did, or maybe than Howard did in the past.

 

I've converted several of these, as I have a lot of Bexley pens, some C/C, some piston-filled, and I bought many extra nib units over time. Often I like to leave the "tail" on the feed (even though the piercing tube has been drilled out). It's open, so there's no reason to cut it off except to avoid breaking it off accidentally later. Leaving it on makes it easy for me to move nibs with the feeds back to C/C pens just by swapping out the collar. That way, if I've had to adjust the feed slightly to optimize the gap (e.g. in cases where I've swapped out a steel nib for an 18K one), I can always leave the feed with the nib as a matched pair. Seems kind of esoteric, but I have a small number of 18K nibs and a rather larger number of steel nibs and pens. I'm always changing my mind about which ones I want to have the 18K nibs.

Edited June 15, 2015 by mhosea

[SteveE]

Mike - About the only caution I would offer in leaving on the "tail" on the feed is that some of the piston-filler mechanisms may just hit the tail of the feed when the piston is fully extended toward the section. I haven't tested this, but somewhere along the line I was under the impression that this was the primary reason not to just leave the c/c feed and collar as they were.

[mhosea]

Mike - About the only caution I would offer in leaving on the "tail" on the feed is that some of the piston-filler mechanisms may just hit the tail of the feed when the piston is fully extended toward the section. I haven't tested this, but somewhere along the line I was under the impression that this was the primary reason not to just leave the c/c feed and collar as they were.

 

Yes, that's a valid consideration, and something I recall checking in each case. It doesn't happen with the (Gate City) Belmont, Corona, or Poseidon Magnum II. Possibly there is a bit of variation from pen to pen. I happen to have a PM2 in my pocket today, though no digital calipers and no unmodified nib units or tail-endowed feeds at hand Using a clean coffee stirrer as a probe, I measure around 6mm of clearance (i.e., about 1mm more than the distance between two dots on a Rhodia dot pad--I'm being so precise here ) between the tip of the piston in its most forward position and where the back of the feed cup would fall. That is to say, there is about 6mm of space to accommodate the tail of the feed. I want to say it's not even this close with either the Belmont or the Corona, but let's not go by my memory in the matter. I'll break out the digital calipers and perform some better measurements when I get home tonight...if I can remember to.

[mhosea]

 

Yes, that's a valid consideration, and something I recall checking in each case. It doesn't happen with the (Gate City) Belmont, Corona, or Poseidon Magnum II. Possibly there is a bit of variation from pen to pen. I happen to have a PM2 in my pocket today, though no digital calipers and no unmodified nib units or tail-endowed feeds at hand Using a clean coffee stirrer as a probe, I measure around 6mm of clearance (i.e., about 1mm more than the distance between two dots on a Rhodia dot pad--I'm being so precise here ) between the tip of the piston in its most forward position and where the back of the feed cup would fall. That is to say, there is about 6mm of space to accommodate the tail of the feed. I want to say it's not even this close with either the Belmont or the Corona, but let's not go by my memory in the matter. I'll break out the digital calipers and perform some better measurements when I get home tonight...if I can remember to.

 

Looks like the tail would be very close to the piston on a Belmont (though it does not touch), around 2.5mm away from the piston on a Poseidon Magnum II, and about 4.2mm away from it on a Corona.

[SteveE]

So, it sounds like there is really little risk in leaving the "tail" on the feed with these models. I guess one should check carefully before making the swap, though. Good to know. . .

[arcadeflow]

People claim that Bexley uses Bock nib housing, but I'm having trouble finding Bock nib units that match this design.

 

Is this custom made by Bock for Bexley?

[watch_art]

Bock makes lots of different housings.

[arcadeflow]

Bock makes lots of different housings.

 

I checked Bock's site and didn't find the housing used by Bexley, that's why I am wondering. I want to locate alternative nib units I can buy for Bexley pens.

[mhosea]

I don't know where to buy current-production units that are not Bexley-branded that fit Bexley pens, but just as a PSA for Bexley owners, I noticed that Peyton Street Pens still has some NOS 14K broad two-tone nibs in the housings that fit in Bexley pens. They are labeled "Only One Creations", no doubt purchased from the late Scott Meyer's heirs or estate.

[watch_art]

Vanness in Little Rock has quite a few gold Bexley nibs. #5 and 6.