P45 With Unusual Opening/hole In Cap.

[PaulS]

from a charity shop this morning, and regret I've no idea of the purpose of the small and very obviously deliberate hole behind the arrowhead.

Made in the U.K. and with a date code which reads IIIE - this looks to be third quarter 1988. I've twenty other 45s in most of the usual livery and materials, but none has this hole in the cap, so am mystified, and grateful if someone able to enlighten me. tia.

[Beechwood]

Hmm... the recent version of the P45 has the large vent hole under the clip.

The large breather hole was introduced in Parker 45s made in Europe (UK) after the European Union (remember what that was?) passed a recommendation of safety measures aimed at reducing choking hazard in children.

 

Pens with a larger width did not have a breather hole requirement.

[mitto]

+1

[mitto]

For further reading on the subject:

 

https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/307052-hole-in-parker-45-cap/

[PaulS]

many thanks to both of you. It does seem that the appearance of this hole is unpredictable during the period in which it became a recommended safety standard/directive - there are comments in related posts that suggest 1993 was the date of the directive, after which the hole might be expected to be seen. I've pens with date codes for 1993, 1995 and 2003 which lack any hole, so maybe provided the packaging drew the purchasers attention to the potential chocking hazard then that was seen as adequate warning. If swallowed by a child, would this hole be sufficient to allow continued breathing and prevent death by choking ? - don't think I'd like to put it to the test, and since it wouldn't obviously be based on practice then maybe it was simply a gesture which paid lip service to EU recommendations, to show some willing on the part of industry.

 

I've corrected my comment above regarding the date code for the pen in question - IIIE is first quarter 1988 .............. and whilst on the subject of date codes, there seems to be an anomaly in the list.

II looks as though it can be read as fourth quarter 1984 AND third quarter 1994 - or am I misinterpreting - thanks for any help.

[mitto]

You don't look to be needing any help.

[Beechwood]

Sorry to ask a question within a question, is your second photograph taken through a loupe, looks exceptionally clear.

 

Could you describe how to do it if that is correct please?

[mitto]

@ Maximan. No, it doesn't seem, to me at least, to be taken with a loupe. It is taken just from the right side and angle.

 

@ PaulS. The 'QUALITY PEN' datecoding pattern (with roman numbers for quarters) was introduced in 1988. Prior to that a diferent pattern of datecoding, as far as denoting the quarters, existed. The datecodes for 1984 would be:

 

IE IC IL II (for Q.1 - Q.4)

Edited June 27, 2017 by mitto

[Beechwood]

@ Maximan. No, it doesn't seem, to me at least, to be taken with a loupe. It is taken just from the right side and angle.

 

 

 

 

It was the circular nature of the image that made me ask, let us see what Paul advises.

Edited June 26, 2017 by Maximan

[Mike 59]

Hi, I have a Jotter F.P. with the same shaped vent in the cap.

It's from 2011 and made in France.

[PaulS]

Hi - thanks for the replies.

 

Firstly yes, the picture of the cap/hole was taken through a loupe/lens, which accounts for the circular border, and not sure of the magnification, but probably something like X4 or possibly X5 - a very useful method of getting just that bit more enlargement than the camera permits.

The loupe isn't a standard lens - from memory it came from some piece of industrial photographic kit some years back, and is marked CANNON ZOOM LENS C-8 ....... 10 - 30 mm ..... 1:1.8 MACRO. It has a diameter of about 30mm, and is probably of some compound structure, but don't ask me what sort - I just use the thing.

The camera is a fairly ordinary Panasonic, but with a Leica lens, and remains on 'Simple' setting when using the loupe, which is hand held during the process, firmly against the camera lens, something like 40 mm - 100 mm from the subject, depending on size of object.

I also edit for contrast, colour and size with Picasa and IrfanView - which make even my dodgy shots looks good

 

Sorry to seem thick Khan, but the Roman II (for want of a better term) seems to occur in 1974 (Q4) - 1984 (Q4) - 1994 (Q3) ............. do I have that wrong?

[Beechwood]

Hi - thanks for the replies.

 

Firstly yes, the picture of the cap/hole was taken through a loupe/lens, which accounts for the circular border, and not sure of the magnification, but probably something like X4 or possibly X5 - a very useful method of getting just that bit more enlargement than the camera permits.

The loupe isn't a standard lens - from memory it came from some piece of industrial photographic kit some years back, and is marked CANNON ZOOM LENS C-8 ....... 10 - 30 mm ..... 1:1.8 MACRO. It has a diameter of about 30mm, and is probably of some compound structure, but don't ask me what sort - I just use the thing.

The camera is a fairly ordinary Panasonic, but with a Leica lens, and remains on 'Simple' setting when using the loupe, which is hand held during the process, firmly against the camera lens, something like 40 mm - 100 mm from the subject, depending on size of object.

I also edit for contrast, colour and size with Picasa and IrfanView - which make even my dodgy shots looks good

 

Sorry to seem thick Khan, but the Roman II (for want of a better term) seems to occur in 1974 (Q4) - 1984 (Q4) - 1994 (Q3) ............. do I have that wrong?

 

 

Thank you, the results through the loupe plus your technique are impressive.

[PaulS]

rather late in the day, but just spotted that my four P15s - one flighter and three plastic bodied pens, and all made in the U.K. - all have this hole. It's true this model is a fairly slim one, which would seem to fit in with the comments of the directive.

[Sasha Royale]

I cannot imagine swallowing a Parker 45 cap, and breathing through the tiny hole, while it is lodged in ones throat. The throat would close around the obstruction. The esophagus would spasm, and the victim would strangle. Although, I have witnessed enough teeth marks on vintage pens, where people have put the pen into their mouths, that wish some WOULD choke.

More likely, the following: Pulling off the cap quickly creates a lower air pressure inside the cap. The higher pressure inside the ink reservoir pushes ink out the nib, into the cap, making an inky mess. The "breather" vent hole prevents the creation of the a vacuum inside the cap, during removal. Leakage of ink into the cap is averted.

[Beechwood]

I think that the legislation arose out of the BIC cap which heretofore had no hole in the end, and there were stories of toddlers swallowing the cap, pointed end first.

 

As with much legislation it was applied with a broad brush and all pen caps of a certain size had to have some form of hole for air to pass if swallowed.

[mitto]

 

Sorry to seem thick Khan, but the Roman II (for want of a better term) seems to occur in 1974 (Q4) - 1984 (Q4) - 1994 (Q3) ............. do I have that wrong?

 

 

No evidence is found that Parker pens were datecoded in the 1970s except for the last two quarters of the year 1979 (NL and NI) and that too in the US only. From 1980 upto 1987 the QUALITY PEN datecoding system was used but in a manner that differed from the one introduced in 1988. The letter from this phrase meant the year of production as below:

 

Q=1980

U=1981

A=1982

L=1983

I=1984

T=1985

Y=1986

P=1987

 

However, the quarters, in this period, were also determined by four letters that were:

 

E=Q.1

C=Q.2

L=Q.3

I=Q.4

 

In 1988 the system for denoting the quarter was, however, changed to numbers instead of letters in the following manner. (The year was still determined by the letter from the phrase QUALITY PEN).

 

III =Q.1

II =Q.2

I =Q.3

None=Q.4

 

For determination of the decade the order of letters and numbers were changed after each ten years (that is either letters first numbers second or numbers first and letters second as in Q.III and IIIQ).

 

 

So the datecoding system introduced in 1988 should not be mixed with the one that existed in the period before 1988.

 

Hope this helps.

 

PS:

The datecode for fourth quarter, 1984 (II) consits of double 'i' in capital and not roman numbers. The first 'i' is from the phrase QUALITY PEN denoting the year 1984 and the second 'i' is for Q.4 (from the letters E C L I used in this period for quarters as explaind above). On the other hand, the first I in the datecode II for 1994 is the letter 'i' in capital (from the phrase Quality PEN) denoting the year (1994) while the second I is roman number denoting third quarter.

 

Hope you would be able to comprehend ( ) the difference in the datecodes (II) for both 1984 (Q.4) and 1994 (Q.3).

Edited June 27, 2017 by mitto

[PaulS]

thanks very much Khan for taking the time to write all of the above so clearly for me - much appreciated.