Big Nibs - Small Nibs

[minddance]

I feel - yes, feelings are not always accurate - tipping materials are not the same but I have no concrete formula or evidence to prove.

 

They rub papers differently, not due to the shaping and finishing, but the material itself.

 

I hope someone more knowledgeable than myself could chip in.

[BaronWulfraed]

While "iridium" itself isn't the primary these days -- I believe osmium is -- there may still be differences in alloys. Especially when one considers how many beads can be obtained from a small block before a company has to order a new block (quite likely from a different melt batch).

 

And, of course, at the very bottom end, one may find nibs with no explicit tipping. Many calligraphy nibs are plain steel, and I have a few Osmiroid nibs that aren't even steel, but copper using folded over material to make a "ball" tip.

[Precise]

Looking forward to input from someone who knows about this. When I've used cheap steel dip nibs, they have seemed hydrophobic. So in additions to how a tip rubs on the paper, there may be a wetability factor too.

[Precise]

Starting this thread caused me to more carefully evaluate my big nib KOP's (2) and my new Pilot Custom Urushi. As I've written, I love big nibs. Thus I wanted them to be great. But at the moment my more objective opinion is that they are good, but not as good as my best ordinary sized nibs, such as the steel #6 on my Bexleys.

 

I've also spent time fine tuning these big nibs. And that has helped a lot.

 

I rate KOP's and Pilot Custom Urushi nibs as very good, but not great. But my big-nib Mountblanc 149 EF is great, but only after a lot of tuning.

 

Let's see comments from other owners of big nib pens. What's your assessment? Are your big nib pens your greatest writers?

 

Best regards,

Alan

[ingolf]

Well, I have to admit that I'm addicted to big nibs. Big nibs are like a solid statement.

 

But I am also aware that a big nib doesn't has to be the best nib.

In the pic you see a small nib of a Lamy 2000, a middle-sized nib of a Montblanc Heritage 1912 and two big nibs of Montblanc Meisterstueck 149 and Pelikan Souveraen M1000.

 

 

Regarding the "best" nib my personal winner is the middle-sized nib of the Heritage (best nib I own). Followed by the fantastic nib of the Pelikan.

The other nibs are good nibs but not as outstanding as the two "winner" nibs.

 

Regards, Ingolf.

[Buzz_130]

I'll tackle this discussion from a different perspective--the ink delivery system. Take the hooded Parker "51." Under that lucite hood is a complex and precise stack of fins designed to deliver the dry (and corrosive) Parker Superchrome Ink (which should never be used in any pen). The feed system matched the pen for flawless ink delivery for the smaller nib. On the other hand, I have my giant, 1920s Parker Big Red with a slab of ebonite under the beautiful nib. With only a few notches, that ebonite delivers a perfect flow of ink down the channel to the nib.

 

In short the feed must match the size of the nib. If ink can be delivered reliably to the paper, form matches function.

 

One complaint for hooded nibs is the slight rotation in the hand and body as the nib travels across the page may go unnoticed. The pen "skips." Not really, but the tines may not be touching the paper equally. On bigger nibs, the flash of gold tends to keep the "shiny side up" and the ink flowing to the paper.

 

There is something to be said about uncapping a fountain pen with the gold nib for all to see. People might want to know what words will be recorded for all time. For others, the joy of selecting the correct ink may require a less ostentatious presentation and a less "showy" pen may do.

 

Buzz

[Precise]

Perhaps someone would contribute comments on big vs small nibs and B vs F nib width. Most of my pens are F or EF and I'm wondering if smaller nibs might be suited to narrow lines --- and conversely are bigger nibs suited to broader lines? The big nib with its accompanying big feed might deliver lots of ink better.

 

What do you think?

[KBeezie]

I prefer open nibs, not necessarily always big/small preference as it depends on the pen for me. Would rather have the nib size be proportionate to the pen size. I can put a 140 nib into my M640, but it would look and feel a tad ridiculous.

For smaller/skinnier pens I actually kind of prefer the small nibs, especially if it is hooded or flush with the section.

 

 

But on the larger pens, definitely open nibs that stand out on their own, proportunate to the pens size (and I like a lot of embellishment on them).





As far as whether they make a difference or not, I suppose the size of the material can have some impact on the way it feels in relations to the way you hold it as well as how big the pen itself is. I don't think it makes a huge impact on the nib's characteristics. Like how I seen some mention of the Pelikan M1000s large nib contributing to how springy it is due to it's size. But yet I have this tiny little Wahl #2 with a tiny little nib that is much more springy and flexible.



But the tiny nib doesn't bother me much because it's suitable for the pen size (posted) that it sits on.

Oh and some more nib porn, Pelikan Specifically :

 

[KBeezie]

Perhaps someone would contribute comments on big vs small nibs and B vs F nib width. Most of my pens are F or EF and I'm wondering if smaller nibs might be suited to narrow lines --- and conversely are bigger nibs suited to broader lines? The big nib with its accompanying big feed might deliver lots of ink better.

 

What do you think?

Might be possible feed wise, but there are some small pens with huge ink collectors (particularly hooded pens) with near direct access to the ink reservoir (and I've seen an OBB on a small/narrow vintage Montblanc before, they wouldn't put that on if the feed couldn't handle it). And if feed wise the same amount of ink can be delivered, then the tipping size is going to be the same between a huge nib and a tiny nib if they're both marked the same size (vintage and geographical differences aside).

 

Also consider how easily ink is provided on a cheap Lamy Safari with their 1.9mm stub.

Edited October 21, 2018 by KBeezie

[Precise]

I started this thread thinking that big nibs were better. As I've also written, I find them very attractive and have spent a lot of dough on big nib pens.

 

But since my opening post, I've taken a more careful look at this question and am now quite certain that big nibs are not better and generally not as reliable as smaller nibs.

 

An exception is my several big nib Montblancs, which are just as good and reliable as any pen I own. But my other big nib pens, Sailor KOP and Pilot Custom Urushi are fussier than my medium and smaller nib pens.

 

A possible explanation is that the big nibs have a longer trip from the reservoir to the tip and that trip is more vulnerable to flow variation and evaporation.

 

What do you think?

 

Alan

Edited November 3, 2018 by Precise

[Noihvo]

 

[austinwft]

While just about any nib next to a Pilot V.P. nib looks huge, like this M800 nib, I have to say that both of my Vanishing Points are "always" great writers regardless of what ink I've put in them!

 

[Bo Bo Olson]

The biggest nib I have owned...was lots bigger than a 149...on a cheap pen; I gave it away....the huge nib drew my eye too much....and an F or EF...such a big nib seemed to get in the way one way or another for such a thin like....but I write medium, medium-large.

 

If one is use to writing only EF I don't see what difference it would make. Fro someone that don't always write EF, even if not the least bit logical, nor true; I could see a narrower /smaller nib appearing to be more balanced with the narrow line. the same with a big nib and a B nib.....illusion of expectations.

 

I do have a couple of # 2 sized nibs (could be I have a #1 also....it too is not used) ...they write good, but they are on pens a bit too small for me....

If I ink the pen it's no problem, but the ones I can come up with in my memory, are my smallest pens....one's so small, it's a vest pocket pen, hides in a vest pocket with space to spare.

 

I like the medium nibs....3,4, 4 1/2,5s....sixes are not bad on what I consider a Larger pen. But I like medium-small that post long, standard and medium-large...over Large or Oversized pens. I post so they balance better.

I have put a small #3? medium-small Pelikan 140's nib and section on standard Pelikan 400....and it looks dorky.....writes the same as on it's home pen that is sized to make a smaller nib look good.

 

The 400's nib is a tad longer, wider didn't look quite dorky. I never tried to really write with it, in I'd bang the tip by putting on the smaller pens' cap.

 

The size of the nib you want to use has all to do with how big you want your pen to be. Medium is a much bigger word than I thought. 3-5 maybe 6 and each company has their own standards on that too...then comes, different eras.

 

 

Got a P-51 that i don't use....not because of it's size, but because it's a nail.

 

Why don't cars all have the same rubber tires? Different pen companies will use different rare earth 'iridium' compounds to match their ink, feed and nib if they make them themselves.

I'm sure the better companies are close enough....but might have a reason to have a slightly different compound than the competitors. That could be as simple as our compound costs $1,00 more than our competitors in we want better. Or buy the cheap compound....no one will notice.

 

The way to tip became perfected in WW2.........is it possible that the tipping compound has been perfected; and no one has noticed it? I don't think so.

 

Somewhere there is a metallurgist, taking a pinch of this rare earth, a pinch of that and a bit of bat wing looking for cheaper and as good.Probably at that company in Germany making much of the worlds 'iridium' in there is more use for such compounds than just fountain pens.

 

Looking for better Yes, Virginia once upon a time.

 

Once when a fountain pen was used 8 hours a day, a tipping was to last 7-10 years....now in this century...a tipping will last 50-70-100 years; the pens are used so little. Even the rolled steel 2xxx Esterbrook that was made to last 1 1/2 years of work, will last most of a life time...due to lack of use.

We are no longer in One Man, One Pen days.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Bo Bo Olson

[Honeybadgers]

A really good example would be my krone celluloid 18k nib. I think it's a custom size but it is humping a #6. And the feed would accommodate a damn vintage #1. It's hysterically tiny. And it barely comes past the breather hole. But that 18k nib is soft and can flex to a good BB and that little honking feed just keeps up. It's kind of impressive and very amusing looking.

 

I can now read Bo Bo's posts in reverse and know it's him within two sentences.

Edited November 4, 2018 by Honeybadgers

[Bo Bo Olson]

Some folks are new...........and or I do have four or five key phrases. Chase the nib, One Man, 1/3 this that and the other.

 

You are the first to mention a Krone pen here in ages....first since Ghost Plane.

Edited November 4, 2018 by Bo Bo Olson

[Honeybadgers]

I am utterly infatuated with my little krone button filler. It's tiny, solid celluloid and sterling silver, amazing 18k nib that is huge on the pen, and cost me all of 150 bucks NOS

[Kaweco]

Looking forward to input from someone who knows about this. When I've used cheap steel dip nibs, they have seemed hydrophobic. So in additions to how a tip rubs on the paper, there may be a wetability factor too.

Hello Alan

Steel nibs are not hydrophobic. It would be good to remove any oils or fats from the nib and especially from the feed.

 

About tipping materials:

About historic nib tip materials you can find articles from Mottishaw/ Montgomery here:

 

Where`s the iridium:

https://www.nibs.com/blog/nibster-writes/wheres-iridium

 

and a short summary at „The PENnant“

https://www.nibs.com/blog/nibster-writes/how-can-we-talk-about-iridium

 

Initially the tipping materials had been made from a natural found alloy of Iridium and Osmium and other metals from the „Platinium Group“. This is a part of the Periodical System of Elements with some similarities. These metals have nothing to do with the group „Rare Earth Metals“.

Natural „Osmiridium“ possibly stemmed from the gigantic „KT- impact“.

The chrystals are edged, unequally and mostly very porous. So the surface looks a little bit like a scratchy spongue which rubs across the paper while writing.

At Heraeus in Hanau/ Germany they melted and refined the natural alloys in vacuum with an electric arc. During the second decade of the last century Dr. Ernst Haagn and his group seperated the metals and made new synthetic compounds. They found an alloy with a high percentage of Osmium had been the best solution for hardness, non- corroding and polish to shine. Pure Osmium had been too brittle so the other additives had been Ruthenium and Platinium. It is not easy to work in vacuum but this is necessary because Osmium burns down to Osmiumtetroxid at this high melting temperature. (This compound is very bio- toxic).

They made pellets with no porousity (!) for the fountainpenindustries which could be welded upon fountain pen nibs. The fountain pen works of the Böhler brothers purchased the patent exculusively in 1920 and took advantage to their competitors. From this time on theit trade mark had been "Osmia" and the nibs were really outstanding until today.

The Heraeus works found in 1923 that the very rare Osmium could be substituted with the cheaper Ruthenium with nearly no loss of nib tip quality.

Until today possibly all nib tip pellets were made by Heraeus. The globes are 0.6 to 1.6 Millimeter in diameter. Many quality controls were made e.g. a microscopic examination to prove the absence of porousity and a stress test, where the pressure of an equivalent of minimum 50 Kilograms on a 1 mm globe does not break or deform the pellet.

An elder list of available pellets from Heraeus (1990) specifies four items:

Alloy E3: Ruthenium alloy, good to weld, grind and polish. Good resistance against ink. For gold- and steelnibs

AlloyA 3: Ruthenium alloy, very hard, good to weld grind and polish. Good ink resistance. For gold- and steelnibs.

Alloy AM: Ruthenium/ Osmium alloy. Very good quality. Very good to weld and polish. Very good ink resistance. For gold- and steelnibs.

Alloy A1C: Heraeus „Flagship- Quality“. Very high percentage in Osmium alloyed with other Platinium metals. Outstanding quality in all cases.

 

Today Osmium became tremendously expensive, about 840 Euros per gram. (gold, about 34.30 E/g and Ruthenium about 7.60 E/g) The available volume of Osmium is not more than about 10 litres per year worldwide. It is possible that the Osmium price hits the bottom of 1000 E/g in the end of the year.

Possibly Osmium in nib tips is substituted by other metals from now on.

 

<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

IMHO:

Big gold nibs have a gorgeous look

Long nibs write more springy

Nibs with a big brick of very good tipping material write smooth

 

Kind Regards

Thomas

[Precise]

 

 

<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

IMHO:

Big gold nibs have a gorgeous look

Long nibs write more springy

Nibs with a big brick of very good tipping material write smooth

 

Kind Regards

Thomas

 

I completely agree with this. But many of my big nib pens have inconsistent flow.

 

Alan

[jmnav]

Hi!

The way products evolve in opposite directions is interesting. Here's a pic I've borrowed from a review by mongrelnomad.



I'm intrigued by the good performance of nibs over this great range of size. I've always viewed the ribbed feed as local ink storage/supply. The small Lamy nib on the right has little local storage, yet performs fine.

Don't be fooled by the look of it. That Lamy 2000 may show just a bit of the nib but, just like an iceberg, 9/10 of it is "underwater". Similar to, say, a Parker 51, most of the feeding system is hidden on the section. In this case, if you take apart a Lamy 2000, you'll see the feed (more a "collector") basically fills in full the metal part of the pen. That's a lot of "ink storage".

So, despite my personal love of big nibs, like on MB 149, I can't see any difference in performance due to nib size.

Basically, because there isn't.

Also, I've lately been measuring the distance from the nib tip to my forefinger's nail and think the shorter distance of small nibs might help my handwriting slightly.

That's a matter of preferences. I tend to favour "biggish" -but not giant, nibs (say, about #6). Too big usually implies too large and I feel them uncomfortable because I usually hold my pens not too far away from the paper. But I can accomodate a fair range of distances. I feel myself more sensible to the thickness of the section, for instance, than to the distance itself (but,again, they usually correlate, as bigger nibs usually imply thicker pens too).

What do you think? Do big (costly) nibs perform better?

 

Were we having this conversation in, say, 1950, I'd say, "definitely yes to your second assertion": costly nibs perform better than cheap nibs. Not only that, I'd say "it is not costly nibs, but costly pens" as they come in a set: you wouldn't find cheap nibs on costly pens or the other way around.

 

Forgetting about "luxury" (i.e.: gold/silver barrels, etc.) up to, say, the eighties, marketing and industry in general, was more "naive" in that they strongly believed that in order to sell a product as a quality item it had to be, indeed, a quality item. So if you take a top-of-line item from a reputable brand chances were that it would be both more expensive and better quality: better fit-for-purpose ingineering, better, quality assurance, better design, and more man-hours involved in producing it.

 

Nowadays, marketing "science" has evolutioned and learned that, in order to position an item, or even a whole brand, as a top-of-line, you don't need to focus on the item itself at all: it's a matter of product placement, desirability, price stepping, etc.so, specially on products that have lost (most of) their utility value, is no wonder to find very little correlation between the product itself and its market positioning.

 

Now, for your question: since the underlying physics work basically the same along the whole range of sizes a nib (usually) has, no, there's no correlation to be expected between size and perfomance, and it's more a matter of "bling" and personal preferences. What makes a pen to work better than another is how well thought out it is and how much care has been put on its production and QA.

[mitto]

I am in love with the tiny medium oblique nib on my MB-24. It writes bettr even than the big nibs on my MB-146s and MB-149s. And then there is the tiny P51 nib that writes a lot better than so many other open big nibs on so many other pens.