Favorite Filling Mechanism?

[JerseyGirl0807]

Piston filler is number one. Vacuum filler is second while piston converter is number three. I sometimes use a syringe for number three but have no idea if I can use it for the other two.

[surprise123]

Sac pens are reliable, cheap to maintain, cheap to fix, holds enough ink for me to get through AP NSL notes, and are a joy to use simply because it's so simple and primitive compared to other filling styles.

 

 

 

In other words, the Parker 51 Aerometric.

Edited September 19, 2018 by surprise123

[Driften]

Piston is my favorite. A captured converter pretending to be a piston filler is my least favorite.

[bass1193]

I answered "converter" because my ADD makes me want a new ink every second. Honestly, even a converter is too much and I have a range of pens filled up at any given moment, and I cycle through them faster than they empty. I have a lot of pens, but far more inks!

[Precise]

I already knew, before voting and seeing results to-date, that piston fillers are favored. I voted for converter. I have plenty of quality piston pens, but I like the easy repair of a popping in a new converter vs the costly repair of a piston (which is needed too often). I've also repaired my own pistons and rarely manage it in less than an hour.

 

I also like the ease of checking ink level of a converter, though some piston pens have a window.

 

It troubles me to often read in FPN statements like, "I'd buy it in a heartbeat if it had a piston". It reminds me of a similar bias among watch aficionados for mechanical watches over quartz. Yet quartz is a truly better and less expensive timepiece.

 

There's also a strong bias here for gold nibs over steel. But I prefer steel.

 

It comes down to our perceiving price as synonymous with quality. But price is often truly synonymous with unreliability. I started this thread here about high end pens being less reliable:

 

https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/329288-hi-end-pens-are-a-lot-of-trouble/

 

Alan

Edited September 20, 2018 by Precise

[pajaro]

Parker 51 aerometric. Sac filler. The easiest pen to resac, because I have never had to resac any.

I use few inks. If I used a lot of inks, I would use a better grade cartridge pen. When changing inks I would use a bulb syringe to flush the pen, get a new cartridge, flush it with a needle syringe and fill the cartridge with the new ink. Plug in the cartridge and go on. Tape over the replaced cartridge should preserve the ink until next use. Label the tape with a waterproof Sharpie. I have done this to test ink. I like a Sheaffer Dolphin cartridge pen, gold nib, or a Montblanc 144 for this. YMMV.

Edited September 20, 2018 by pajaro

[calvin_0]

look like Piston Filler is the most popular... kinda surprising, cause goulet pen kinda make me think that a lot of people like eyedropper...

[WJM]

As much as I enjoy piston fillers, in the end the standard c/c is the most practical filling system there is. It's easy to clean, maintain, and if something breaks you can easily just replace the converter.

[chromantic]

I loves me my piston Pelikans but I also like cartridges for their convenience.

[minddance]

I really love piston fillers, Pelikans or not.

[inkstainedruth]

Ironically, while my favorite pens are Parker 51 Aeros and and Vacumatics, my actual favorite fill system would be piston fillers.

Although I'm cool with most systems (they all have plusses and minuses). I guess the "other" category in the voting would be for things like blow fillers (saw a modified Indian-made eyedropper that a guy is turning into blow fillers, which was kinda neat, at the Commonwealth Pen Show last weekend) and things like button-fillers (I have a few vintage Parkers -- a Challenger and a couple of Laidtone Duofolds -- which are that fill system).

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[Driften]

look like Piston Filler is the most popular... kinda surprising, cause goulet pen kinda make me think that a lot of people like eyedropper...

 

 

I think eyedropper conversion is a small group of users that just love to modify everything. I bet if you can survey everybody using a fountain pen C/C would be number 1. With piston filler being more the people liking more expensive pens. In the larger audience I expect eyedropper would be 1-2%. It might also change by region. I would think in Japan C/C would also lead, but they have a long history of eyedropper pens with shutoff valves and they might be also higher on that metric. Maybe in Germany it would be piston fillers on top.

 

If piston fillers were actually the most in demand more companies would make them, even though C/C should be cheeper and easier to make. Pilot only makes one piston filler. Even their high end brand pens use converters. The pricy Japanese pens use eyedropper with shut off valves, not piston.

 

I bet on reddit eyedropper conversions would be more popular then here.

[ajoe]

I like piston fillers but only if they are made by Canid. For all others, I want converters.

[rluka]

It comes down to our perceiving price as synonymous with quality. But price is often truly synonymous with unreliability. I started this thread here about high end pens being less reliable:

 

For piston it's not about price, but seems to be a perception that converters are like plastic products, "cheap", "mass product", "not hand-made", "have no-soul"

It doesn't have a place to attach the perception such as: this is a work of art that consume effort and thus I want to pay for it; or in the opposite converter side, this is just cheap and easy to make system so I feel the maker is ripping me off.

 

(also vote for cartridge/converter. for reasons WJM said)

Edited September 22, 2018 by rluka

[Z-Tab]

The Soennecken "Click" piston is my favorite. They've got a whole lot of parts, but they sure are satisfying to use.

[ajcoleman]

I voted for eyedropper, though I would have to consider the Parker 51 Aero to be a very close second. Although I really like them in theory, the only fill mechanism I have really had trouble with is cartridge/converter. Often they seem to be narrow enough that the surface tension causes the ink to get "hung up" in the converter and not flow down past the air bubble. They don't hold much ink, and almost never fill all the way. My eyedropper pens hold a ton of ink and just always work. The filling mechanism in my 51's have never given me trouble either.

[kestrel]

Crescent filler. Simple, reliable, holds a lot of ink. Also its derivatives like hump fillers. Plus, as Mark Twain noted, the filling mechanism helps prevent the pen from rolling off your desk.

 

Second choice, button fillers like the duofolds. Simple, reliable and one-handed operation.

 

I don't mind replacing the occasional sac and I really enjoy the vintage pen history and nibs.

 

I am waiting for some genius to figure out a way to hook up an IV drip filled with ink to the end of a pen to provide enough ink without stopping to refill to satisfy anyone.

[DanceOfLight]

Vacuum plungers IMHO have the distinct advantage of being one of the few filling mechanism that can whoosh water / cleaning agent through the nib during cleaning in addition to having relatively large ink capacity. The BEST implementation IMHO is from CONID. The Vacs are next only to CC. CCs have their own little issues WRT ink capacity and ink getting stuck in the upper part of the cc thus starving the feed (yes I know the soap / detergent trick, but I'd rather write than working up a lather and blowing bubbles in a cc, thank you). the one I dislike the most is a captured converter in pens that can't be easily disassembled to get at the said captured converter... Grrr. A happy compromise is a cc with a agitator whose sole purpose in life is to keep breaking the surface tension.

[SoulSamurai]

Vacuum plungers IMHO have the distinct advantage of being one of the few filling mechanism that can whoosh water / cleaning agent through the nib during cleaning in addition to having relatively large ink capacity. The BEST implementation IMHO is from CONID.

 

 

I thought Conid's Bulkfiller system was not a vac filler, but rather an improved piston?

[trdsf]

I do love an eyedropper demonstrator. Miles and miles of ink!