Mabie Todd Novice: A Small Swan Pen: Identification And Repair

[Seele]

Hi All,

 

Mabie Todd pens can be found now and then here in Sydney, Australia, I took the plunge and acquired this one today with the intention of bringing it back to operating condition.

 

This is a small Leverless pen in black celluloid (I think) with ebonite cap tassie with simple Swan logo and fill knob at the end of the barrel, the cap shows no indication of a missing clip, so it could well be a clipless model with the option of fitting a suitable accommodation clip. The length of the pen from barrel end to front of section (viz. not counting the nib/feed) measures 3 1/2", capped 4 7/16". The barrel carries markings in the usual layout: "Trademark" under a Swan on the left, the on the right it says "Swan, Leverless Pen, Patent No. 390585/32, Mabie, Todd & Co. Ltd., Made in England". The nib is marked ""Swan, 1, 14ct, Mabie, Todd & Co Ltd, Made in England" so it is a small No.1 nib. The feeds says on its underside "Swan, S.F.1" so it's the same as that on the S.F.1.

 

A brief round of heating was enough to free the section from the barrel, although there's an indication that the barrel has shrunk somewhat, and I will do something about it before it progresses further. The old sac that had turned into little hard shards was easy to remove, and the fill mechanism appears to be functioning correctly.

 

It is my understanding that the pen's filling mechanism requires a sac that is big enough to be grabbed by the arm inside, smaller sizes would reduce fill efficiency dramatically. As this is the first Swan Leverless that I am working on, I do not know what constitutes a sac that is "big enough": a No.20 can fit but gives some resistance, a No.18 can of course slide in with minimal resistance. The former would not fit around the nipple at the back of the section for being too loose, but I think a No.18 can just fit. There are of course "necked sacs" required by larger Swans, but I am not sure if it's obligatory for this model though.

 

I would appreciate any help from my fellow correspondents, and I can furnish further pictures of the disassembled pen tomorrow, if that be helpful. Thank you.

[Cob]

Hullo.

 

A nice find; No 1 Leverlesses are relatively uncommon. If there were a number on the pen it would be L112/60.

 

As for fitting a new sac, a 20 is probably a little big though fine if you can use it. Check with an 18: if the paddle pinches the sac tight and thus holds it then it should be fine.

 

The normal procedure with oversize sacs is to tie the sac tightly onto the nipple whilst the shellac sets. The section wuth sac is then inserted - without the nib and a blunt probe is used to ensure that the sac is fully extended inside the barrel. The nib may then be fitted.

 

Best of luck

 

Cob

[Seele]

Cob,

Thank you so much for your speedy, and informative reply; it's nice to know the name of the pen after all.

Regarding sac replacement, I have just tested a No.18 again, and the knob which could turn relatively freely feels like it hits something of a stop when a sac is placed in the barrel, that stop seems to get the sac compressed as far as it can go, so the No.18 could well be the sweet spot. When the sac is inserted into the barrel there is still a bit of resistance, which I think is the sac rubbing against the bar, which compresses the side of the sac by a whisker when the knob is screwed home, I hope this is normal.

As for the nipple where the sac fits around: it has a bit of a "flare" at the tip, a No.18 sac stretches a little when around this bit but a tiny bit loose beyond that when the diameter reduces slightly. The method you described could well be the best idea to ensure good adhesion: I can think of using a length of thin twine, as used on envelopes where it is wound over two bosses for closing, I suppose that would do the trick. I have seen pictures shown by repairers, showing disassembled pens with the twine still in place, I am not sure if it's a good idea for me to leave the twine there; I would certainly take it off after the shellac has set.

Another thing I can think of is the length of the sac: with lever fillers I often trim the sac a little shorter so its end does not hit the back of the J-bar, as having the maximum length permissible does not really help with a greater fill, as the end would not be compressed. I wonder if I can make the sac shorter so as not to let the end hit the very back of the barrel; normally I make the sac about 3mm short for lever fillers.

Thank you again for your advice!

[Cob]

Hullo again.

 

I thought an 18 would be about right!

 

Here's how I measure sac length. Inserts the sac into the barre las far as it will go. Mark (I use a 6B pencil) the sac where it aligns with the end of the barrel. Next align your mark with the shoulder of the section and then make a second mark for where the sac has to fit at the bottom of the nipple. I usually cut just a few millimetres extra to be sure of internal clearance.

 

To tie the sac onto the nipple whilst the shellac is setting, I use sewing thread - and remove it afterwards.

 

Good luck

 

Cob

[Seele]

Cob,

 

Thanks again; I use the same method - or something very similar - for measuring the required sac length.

 

Tomorrow, under good light, I will take more pictures of the pen, both in component form and perhaps during the rebuilding process; it's also good for my own reference anyway.

[Seele]

Cob,

 

I have tried to attach the sac using a thread to tie around the attachment point twice, but it does not seem to be too successful as the sac kept falling off; on the second time a test fit shows that the filling mechanism pulled in a fair bit of ink (good), but on removing the section the sac stayed in the barrel (not good). Now I am thinking of leaving the thread in situ; do you have any thought on that?

 

I also heard from a repairer that a Visofil V was found to have thread wrapping around the attachment point when it was opened up for repairs. The previous repairer could have done the same thing too.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Seele

[eachan]

I have often left thread in place. I can think of no reason why not, and it seems to have been a not uncommon practice in the past. I've had a few Leverlesses with old thread on the section. It isn't hard to remove.

[Seele]

Eachan,

 

Thanks for the gen; I will proceed accordingly. One thing I am curious about though: I tied a reef knot with the thread (right-over-left, then left-over-right), but should I saturate the thread with shellac to prevent it from unravelling? I used a pure cotton thread, by the way.

[Greenie]

To avoid the issue with the knot - (which can prevent the section from fitting, or if it barely fits, puts stress on the barrel threads....)

I wind the thread around a few times before tying. After tying, I paint it all the way around with shellac. Once the shellac dries, I cut off the knot. It is no longer needed once you have dried shellac all the way around.

 

Once I tried winding the thread a few turns and rigging a way to hold it tight with a hemostat (to avoid a knot) while the shellac dried. But I could only shellac about 75% of the turn. That was enough to hold it after removing the clamp though. Then I trimmed the thread and used shellac on the naked part to get the ends of the thread flush to the sac. It just seemed to be more work for no gain.

[Seele]

Greenie,

Sound advice indeed. I used a thin sewing cotton and wound it around the sac at the attachment point a dozen times or so, to give an even inward pressure around the perimeter, so all is well.

An interesting aspect is the flared tip of the section nipple to which the sac is attached, it could have been meant for a necked sac, but in this case, it also means there is a fair bit of space available for the thread, and the reef knot is very small. The air-tightness of the section/sac assembly has been tested good, and a test fit to the barrel also shows the presence of the thread and knot posed no problem with the fit at all. I will saturate the thread with shellac anyway; thank you for your thoughts!

[Seele]

By the way, I have not been successful finding out the period in which the model was in production; I'd be grateful if my fellow correspondents can point me at the right direction; thank you!

[Cob]

By the way, I have not been successful finding out the period in which the model was in production; I'd be grateful if my fellow correspondents can point me at the right direction; thank you!

According to Steve Hull's "bible" the No 1 type 3 Leverless - the Ladies Model was introduced in 1937. It probably continued until around 1940.

 

 

 

Cob

[Seele]

Cob,

Thanks for the information! Three or four years of production seems to be quite short, but I do not know Mabie Todd's product cycles to put that into context; different companies tend to have different lengths, the same model might stay in production for decades.

[Cob]

Cob,

Thanks for the information! Three or four years of production seems to be quite short, but I do not know Mabie Todd's product cycles to put that into context; different companies tend to have different lengths, the same model might stay in production for decades.

Well you know there was the small matter of the Second World War going on and Mabie Todd's elegant head office and also its factory were destroyed in the bombing in 1940!

.

C.