Ink Filling Systems. Do You Prefer Cart/converter Or Built In Reservoire?

[max dog]

Which do you prefer if you had to choose between a cartridge converter or built in piston or vac filler system for a custom pen?

 

I can see the pros and cons of each but my choice would be for a built in ink reservoir for the bigger ink capacity.

Edited August 14, 2016 by max dog

[jar]

Cartridge first. Then just about anything except eye droppers.

[dcwaites]

Perhaps one of those 1 litre bottles of Pelikan ink, with a long thin plastic tube directly attached to the feed nipple siphoning ink from the bottle??

I am inspired here by the Continuous Ink Supply Systems for inkjet printers.

 

More seriously, though, I would think that a Vac filler system, like in the TWSBI 700 would have less 'lost space' in the barrel compared to a Converter or Piston Filler.

[shawndp]

Cartridge first. Then just about anything except eye droppers.

 

My feelings too... I know pistons can hold more ink sometimes, but the flexibility of a C/C is hard to beat and I rather enjoy filling ink.

[wastelanded]

Every filling system has both good and bad points. I use all of them: piston, lever, c/c, and enjoy them all. I have a couple of eyedropper pens, but I'm terrified to use them: I'm not the most coordinated person in the world.

 

If I had to choose one kind of filling system, it would be c/c: easy and cheap to repair/replace, does the job. I love changing inks a lot, and rarely use up a Pelikan-full of ink.

[ac12]

Cartridge/converter. Easiest to clean.

If you top-off the pen at the end of the day, you don't have to worry about running out of ink during the day.

 

If you like to watch the ink slosh around in the pen, then a clear piston pen.

 

But I use many with no problems; c/c, cartridge only, lever fill sac, button fill sac, Parker vacumatic, Parker aerometric, piston, Sheaffer pnumatic (snorkel and touchdown), and probably a few more that I forgot.

Edited August 14, 2016 by ac12

[deepak23]

Anything other than cartridges. I believe that they are wasteful and symptomatic of the use and throw culture that is harming the environment. They are poor value for money too.

 

Other than that am ok with all other filling mechanisms. My current rotation has a button fill, a vac, a couple of aerometrics, a clutch of convertors, a piston fill AND a cartridge (which is refilled using a syringe).

[tinta]

Since I've discovered the C/C filling system a few years ago, I have never looked back. Easy on the maintenance & repairs, this system seems the most practical for my own needs.

I can't say that C/C pens have the best filling system, but they're the best for me. For the most part I use converters, but lately I've come to realize the convenience of cartridges (particularly for travel). They have a place in my writing kit.

Edited August 14, 2016 by tinta

[Jerome Tarshis]

Although I own and use and expect to buy in the future c/c pens, I dislike having the column of ink hang up in a converter. It happens with rigid-sided converters, though not IME with squeeze converters with a rubber sac. It can also happen with self-filling pens: it's happened to me with English Parker Duofold Juniors using a built-in squeeze filler.

 

The narrowness of the column just makes that more likely. Has never happened with my Parker 51s, my 1950s MB piston fillers, my Lamy 81 piston filler, and various other self-fillers.

 

There are fixes, but reading FPN will turn up so many complaints, with or without recommendations for what to do about it, that I believe I'm asking for that trouble if I use a c or c pen with the converter. Refilling a cartridge with a syringe, although I do it, seems too participatory. For me; obviously not for everyone. Why the 51 is my favorite pen.

 

I've read that Japanese converters are less likely to have the problem; I don't know from my own experience, though.

 

It's a matter of what you want to be easy and what you're willing to take trouble with. I don't much care about rigorous cleaning, for example, whereas others do. Am also indifferent to ink windows even when I've got one. Am keen to avoid the laborious. Pistons fail; one of mine did, but on the whole not.

[AndyYNWA]

Converter. I change inks way too often to get the full benefit of the larger capacity of a piston or similar.

[praxim]

I dislike packaged content (see especially: coffee capsules, dishwasher tablets, tea bags) because they usually inhibit variety and quality, so cartridges are not pleasing to me. The C/C is brilliant except I find them somewhat fiddly compared with any of lever, plunger or piston, so I enjoy filling with those latter three more.

 

I can not argue against the C/C though. Several of my pens have them and if it gets worn and leaky, as was the case in my Edson when it arrived, then a new one is a few bucks* and away you go which is less work than one can say for any of the other options.

 

Ink quantity has nothing to do with it for me. I usually only half-fill anyway.

 

* No, I did not spend ten to twenty times as much on a colour-coded one. The pen came unboxed with the wrong colour C/C anyway. Importantly, it writes well.

[NinthSphere]

Well, I actually did go for a c/c when I got my custom. I appreciate the large capacity afforded by a vac or piston, especially for a pen used as an edc, but for flexibility & ease of maintenance, I like c/c. Piston/vac breaks or needs resto, I would need to send out. C/c in the same situation, I can plunder one of several others for a compatible converter.

[Bo Bo Olson]

I prefer piston or lever pens over CC....how ever outside the 400NN 1.97, there are cartridges that hold more than most piston pens. There is a Sheaffer cartridge with 1.60ml the same as a giant awkward 149.

Two short internationals, of 0.74 (1.48ml) each hold more than most piston pens. A 400= @1.27, 600/800=1.37, 1000=1.47 in or about.

 

I remember everyone raving on how much more piston pens held until some one shot that myth down.

 

I'm glad you are rich enough to afford cartridges, they have always been very expensive even back when the Dollar was All Mighty. As a working man's kid I couldn't afford them. I flinch at buying cartridges today...even expensive ink is as cheap as two packs of cartridges by the same company.

 

You could fill a long cartridge with an ink, and have the advantage of the many ink colors of bottles, of course your spare refill might be of a different color, in cartridges are very limited to color.

 

There is a couple of ink refill gadgets one by Visconti that can give you a fill on the go.

Personally, I'm not on the go....but on my things to buy is a 19th century stagecoach proof 'vest pocket' traveling inkwell.

There are some really gorgeous Western vests one could buy, to go with it.

 

Yes cleaning a CC pen is fast if you have a rubber ear syringe.

 

But I like a nib with a bit of life to it, so that means German vintage piston pens, Swan pens with either the straight lever or some convoluted filling apparatus getting out of patent of a major brand. Wyvern is also a great nibbed lever pen.

English and Australian Parker and Sheaffer in they had to compete with Swan, made semi&maxi semi-flex pens. Pre cartridge....Jr. Duofold, Snorkel.

 

CC pens and modern Pelikans outside the 1000 are nails and semi-nails on the whole. From my understanding out side the 200, there are few even 'true' regular flex pens made. I am not up on Japanese pens.

 

Many CC pens for no reason than fashion are Large pens; clunky ill balanced things. I do have a P-45 with a regular flex nib. To my Shock ...I found out my 1970-71 bought P-75 took a cartridge ....having known it had the areomatic filler, never even remember reading the instructions when I threw them and the box out. And will now take a converter too, which is much newer than that era. A great balanced, light for metal Standard sized pen........Sigh some day and soon, it will be only a CC pen, in the rubber has to be getting old. I don't think it has the P-51's different than rubber areomatic gadget. Perhaps a 51's (forever filler) will fit the 75. (Anybody know???)

 

From my reading of converter problems....and great luck that the Converters I have seem to work (Don't use those pens much.)...well if one finds a converter that really works...often with some sort of little ball or a spring inside to break up surface tension one should buy a handful for each pen. You can clean them with a needle syringe, much faster than twisting.

 

I can fully clean a Pelikan with two rubber ear syringes, one cut wide for the screw out nib as fast as I can clean a CC pen, with a converter. Like cleaning a converter by hand, cleaning a piston pen takes time with out the rubber ear syringes.

 

So liking the many colors of inks not available in cartridge, and the vast $xpense of the cartridges, and the better nibs of the vintage pens...for me a Piston or even lever pen makes more sense than Cartridge pens.

If one fills one's piston pen at breakfast.....one is good to go for the day....and if you think you will use more ink than that....carry a second fountain pen....which is much faster than digging in one's pants pocket for a cartridge, unscrewing the pen....loading it....and perhaps having to bend and squeeze the cartridge to get it to feed.

 

IMO the horribly expensive then and now, cartridges were also a reason why fountain pens almost died.

I could get 10 simple ball point refills in the '60's for a dime (a year's worth)....and really the '50's ball points were not great....one had to take one's pocket knife....allowed to carry in grade school then and take it apart and shave the push 'button' often. I can remember doing that twice my self in class to get them to work. Tricks of stretching or cutting off parts of the spring, were needed too.

 

The ball point was a dirty thing, often having an ink 'ring' at the end of the of the ink stick, leaving you with dirty hands that did not wash out as easy as the then fountain pen inks. The opening of the ball point was often smeared with that ink from the 'ink ring'. Dirty shirts...extra steps in washing. And was not a wash out school ink that fountain pens offered.

(I bought a couple of Austrian made FP&BP sets from the '50's....and yep....flashback the ball points had the same problems I could remember.)

 

The Parker cartridge for the Jotter, had the same problem as the cartridge, too expensive for the working class....one of the reason's the BIC won. Still overly expensive....costing more than a bottle of Pelikan ink over here. I do have empty ball points needing that cartridge or the half so expensive Schmidt clones.....but there are enough free ball points around...I don't need to buy that over expensive refill. If and when I do use a ball point. I need the bottle of ink more.

 

The government helped almost kill the fountain pen, but issuing the black Skillcraft pens to all the government workers and military......and we were so happy to buy one if one had too, in it gave jobs to the blind....we did not know how ripped off ill paid they were. that only came out ten-twenty years ago.

[perfaddict]

Cartridge converter. Easier to clean, and i am usually not far from my ink bottles.

[sd10521]

I like all the different types for various reasons. I have three eyedropper pens, one I'm frightened to death of and the others seem to work nicely. If they ever fail I will have a new pair of work pants because I only put them in my jeans pocket. This little guy holds a lot of ink so I can write for a few days or have a massive stain if and when it ever fails.

C/C pens are a snap to clean but I only have a few of those. mostly calligraphy pens with interchangeable nibs. Some cartridges I will fill with bottled ink just to keep things interesting. Nothing like a clumsy ink spill to add spice to your day.

Piston and leveer fillers take a little time and effort for filling and cleaning, but I feel like that is part of the ritual of the writing experience. I do like how much my mid 50's piston filler will hold, the others seem to be needing a filling more often when I do a serious writing session.

[mallymal1]

Eyedropper, then C/C...but I do enjoy all the filler variants.

 

If it comes to cartridges, I recycle.

[Namo]

ED filler for me. If available, with a shut off valve, although I really like pens designed to support all three filling possibilities: cartridges, converter and ED filler (Stipulated T, Delta DVOS among others. Many Indian pens, even if they are generally not purposely designed for this). c/c fillers are annoying because of surface tension related problems. It drives me mad when it happens, even if for years I've used an old Waterman Maestro with long Waterman cartridges without any trouble ever. It seems to me that Japanese did solve this issue, and I still don't understand why Europeans and American makers don't follow the path.

Philosophically, I like the fact that the barrel is also the tank of the pen and not just an envelope to a small piece of plastic, so I really like piston fillers. But I also hate when a piston filler holds only 1ml or 1.3ml, when the size of the barrel could hold about 1.9ml...

[ISW_Kaputnik]

With a C/C pen, I would almost always use the converter rather than a cartridge. As long as there is a good converter available for a pen, one that holds a decent amount and doesn't develop air lock on the slightest provocation, that's fine with me. But although C/C pens are in some ways easier to clean, I've found built in piston pens to be easy enough, and less fiddly in actual use.

 

I have two Pilot pens that are virtually the same except for the filling system, a Custom Heritage 91 with a CON-70 converter and a Custom Heritage 92 with a piston filling system. They have identical nibs, and are close enough in weight, size, and overall profile that I feel no difference between them in my hand. I prefer the 92, which in this case is at least as easy to clean, and easier to fill than the somewhat finicky CON-70.

 

The OP does specify a custom pen. If I were having a pen built, I'd work with the capabilities of the maker. Nib and feed, size, weight, and balance would all be more important than filling system, and I'd have no problem with something that took a good reliable converter, like the Pelikan ones I have in a couple of pens.

 

From the collecting point of view, I like accumulating different types of filling systems just for the technical interest. But that wasn't the question.

[ggrosjean]

If I'm honest with myself a Vac filler is my favourite, however, Piston would be next on the list.

 

Not a fan of ED because they hold too much ink.....I know they are supposed to do that, I get bored and want to change colour.

 

Least of all is CC, I know I'll get flak for it but apart from the usual complaint about being a pain to fiddle around with and yes, they are easy to clean. I look at some of my Conway Stewarts, Delta, Omas, KOP, really any of the more expensive pens and to me it's as if they got to a point and cut a corner.

 

Again maybe it's just my luck but I've had way too many issues with converters, leaks etc that drive me crazy. I get off a plane and check the pen roll, not nibs stepping but for converter pens leaking all over the place internally.

 

Long winded way to vote against CC pens.

[zwack]

Out of my currently filled pens I have...

 

8 cartridge converters, 7 of which are currently using converters and 2 use proprietary cartridges or converters.

 

7 pens are piston fillers

 

4 pens are eyedroppers.

 

All of my previous lever fillers are now owned by my wife because she liked them... (She gets any of my pens that she likes because I love her. I have sufficient pens for my own use)

 

The only filling mechanism I have issues with is eyedropper. They sometimes (rarely) burp with me (almost always for my wife). One of them seems to leak ink into the cap, even when stored nib up.

 

If you include my wife's pens we have a lot of different filling mechanisms... lever filler, crescent filler, vacumatic, piston filler, touchdown, and a push button filler that uses a concertina rubber reservoir rather than a flexing spring...

 

They all work to get ink to the nib and that is the important point to me.