Is There A Definition For "eye-Dropperable" In The Context Of Fountain Pens?

[A Smug Dill]

Just another of my start-of-year musings, as I'm considering what I would write if I was to post some thoughts on (but not a proper, by FPN "standards" or at least guidelines, review of) the Daiso-Hauser fountain pen, which has delighted me so...

 

Sometimes fellow forum members like to ask, "Is the pen 'eye-dropperable'?" or "Have you tried (putting silicon grease and/or installing an O-ring on some part of the pen, for the purpose of) using it as an 'eye-dropper' pen?" when others review, or at least post some of their thoughts on, a particular fountain pen model.

 

As far as my (possibly mistaken or misguided) understanding of what make a fountain pen goes, the defining characteristic is having an ink reservoir as part of the pen when in use, to continually feed the nib by way of capillary action as required.

 

That in itself doesn't imply any question as to whether the material of the barrel (be it acrylic, ebonite, celluloid, aluminium or any other man-made and/or processed substance) can be stained, degraded, corroded or otherwise "damaged"), or components either connecting the barrel to the section or inside the construction of the section, that are then placed into direct contact with the ink, run the risk of being damaged.

 

If anything, staining of or "damage" to purported precious celluloid on a $900 pen need not impair the function of a fountain pen, whereas corrosion of metal components which then start polluting or denaturing the ink in the fountain pen's ink reservoir can be said to have more of an impact in whether a fountain pen will dispense and write with the ink with which it is filled. It's not about money, and it's not about sentiment.

 

The Daiso-Hauser fountain pen has a big hole at the end of the barrel, which is therefore not a sealed container and cannot serve as an ink reservoir. Stupid me, I forgot to check, and actually tried filling the barrel with (Noodler's Blue Ghost invisible) ink with a syringe. I can safely conclude that the pen model is not "eye-dropperable", for whatever reason anyone may want to use it as an "eye-droppered" pen. (In my case, it's because a suitable converter would cost more than the pen itself to buy, if I had to get one by normal retail instead of taking something from my stash.) Whereas if, say, the barrel of a US$800 pen gets stained — and thereby “irreversibly" loses resale value — when used as an "eye-droppered" pen writing with Noodler's Bay State Whatever, it still works as a fountain pen and without corrupting the ink.

 

So, in your opinion (and I'm asking you as individuals, but not necessarily looking for consensus), does the risk of cosmetic damage and/or loss of resale value factor into whether a fountain pen is "eye-dropperable"?

[penzel_washinkton]

In my opinion and I speak for myself here, objectively there are only two requirements for a pen to be categorized as "eye-dropperable"

 

- No seams, holes or any cavities in the barrel for the ink to seep through

- No metal parts in contact with the ink

 

Other factors like one you mentioned are subjective requirements such as fear of reduction of sale value, staining and etc.

 

I only use the eyedropper method only when the pen is particularly designed to do so, such as with the Moonman M2.

[Honeybadgers]

eye-dropperable stuff is just a pen that won't leak or degrade (basically, no metal) if the barrel is filled with ink or removing the filling system (or if it has no filling system)

 

I do tend to avoid demonstrator self fillers in general because of the risk of staining. I think the only kinda exception I'm going to just have to stomach is a conid. I think many demonstrators are just objectively bad value if you plan on using them, but if you plan on keeping it filled with ink, the staining doesn't matter anyways. And some pens just never, ever stain. My wing sung 698 has been inked with everything but BSB in terms of stain-ability for two years straight and it hasn't even changed a single shade. High quality acrylics don't seem to stain much, if at all. And staining can easily be rectified on acrylic with an ammonia flush once every year or two.

 

Theoretically, though, you could convert some of the non-eyedropper pens like the sailor hiace neo to an eyedropper by just plugging the hole with some clear epoxy. Just jam it up into the hole and wipe it clean around, let it cure, and it's now an eyedropper.

 

Celluloid does stain, but it doesn't degrade in ink. Many celluloid pens have direct contact with the ink, such as the vacumatic and the Wahl doric

[timotheap]

For stains to be an issue in a 900$ pen, it would need to be a demonstrator and for the life of me I can't undersand why one would be ready to spend so much on a demonstrator...Even the luxury brands that do some can't make me find it beautiful or not plastic looking.

 

I'd second what penzel_washinkton said and add that the threads have to be thin, close to one another, and I think in a certain number for the seal to be really good.

[A Smug Dill]

- No metal parts in contact with the ink

Just for argument's sake... would a solid 14K or 18K gold barrel corrode if used to store ink directly? (I'm asking because I'm no chemist and I don't know the answer.)

 

I only use the eyedropper method only when the pen is particularly designed to do so, such as with the Moonman M2.

I make an exception (sometimes) for Japanese pens such as the Pilot Penmanship and Platinum Preppy, as a matter of economy, when the compatible converters are more expensive than the pens themselves.

 

For stains to be an issue in a 900$ pen, it would need to be a demonstrator

 

 

I'm not sure about that. For example, the Aurora fountain pens with 'Luna' aurolide bodies are not nearly $900 apiece, and they aren't designed to be eye-droppered, but nevertheless they aren't cheap and, being piston-fillers they hold ink directly inside their barrels. I personally wouldn't want to put something like Noodler's Bay State Whatever in mine; and I suspect Sailor seiboku can stain some materials if left in contact for months or years. (That's not necessarily a matter of pen hygiene; a "workhorse" pen could be expected to always be inked with something, and quite possibly the same ink continually topped up as needed.) Another example would be the Pelikan M605 White-Transparent piston-filled fountain pen.

 

Staining of white resin or celluloid doesn't affect its function as a writing instrument, and in a "workhorse" pen that is always inked with the same colour it probably wouldn't even get noticed as being any different from just being liquid ink inside the barrel, but it will eventually affect the resale value.

 

One of the reasons I'm pondering this topic, however, is exploring (for my own understanding) whether when someone — especially a hobbyist — asks a question about function (i.e. "Is the pen 'eye-dropperable'?" or, in other words, "Is the pen's design and construction fit for the purpose of holding ink directly in the barrel to supply its feed and nib?"), should an assumption be made that someone cares about the pen's cosmetic condition or resale value sufficiently to consider he/she is "unable" to use the pen as an "eye-droppered" pen, even though I wouldn't have a problem with it — especially with old or "vintage" pens, or demonstrators (which I also personally find invariably cheap-looking, and less attractive than pen bodies made of richly coloured and/or patterned resins), and pens that hold no sentimental value for me on the basis of how it came into my possession. As far as I'm concerned, writing instruments that are being actively used ought not be kept in pristine or mint condition; and resale value is a question of trade and not of actual use.

[penzel_washinkton]

Just for argument's sake... would a solid 14K or 18K gold barrel corrode if used to store ink directly? (I'm asking because I'm no chemist and I don't know the answer.)

 

I make an exception (sometimes) for Japanese pens such as the Pilot Penmanship and Platinum Preppy, as a matter of economy, when the compatible converters are more expensive than the pens themselves.

 

 

Now THAT is a really good point. Actually gold is one of the noble metals that can resist oxidization (or corrosion) along with some others like Ruthenium, Palladium and etc. You can find out the others by just searching noble metals but Copper is the exception to the rule of noble metals.

 

However the other thing to watch out for in an ink is acidity. Although I have never seen a grossly acidic ink, gold can be dissolved by specific acids (search aqua regia) which means that it is still susceptible against some acidic substances.

 

I would say that those noble metals (except Copper) is still not recommended for eye-droppering since we do not know most of the ink substance components in the market today. My personal assumption if you are going to use those noble metal trimmed pens as eye-dropper is that they will last quite a long time but It's just that there are very small amount of pen actually uses an actual gold / noble metal trims.

 

As for the Penmanship / Preppy I have no problems of it being converted into an eye-dropper. It is a low risk - high gain situation, it's just that I have never done it before.

[sansenri]

No definition from my side.

One thing I seem to find important for a pen to be an eye dropper is an ebonite feed, otherwise the only advantage is holding more ink.

It's highly debatable, I know, but ink flow seems different to me with an ebonite feed. Instead of the typical screw in nib group + converter, I do prefer a friction fit nib and ebonite feed. In modern pens this is usually possible in eye droppers (think of the various Indian pens).

The only reason why I put up with some idiosincrasies of ED pens is for the ebonite feed and more fluent flow, not so much for the more ink capacity.

[Karmachanic]

No definition from my side.

One thing I seem to find important for a pen to be an eye dropper is an ebonite feed, otherwise the only advantage is holding more ink.

It's highly debatable, I know, but ink flow seems different to me with an ebonite feed. Instead of the typical screw in nib group + converter, I do prefer a friction fit nib and ebonite feed. In modern pens this is usually possible in eye droppers (think of the various Indian pens).

The only reason why I put up with some idiosincrasies of ED pens is for the ebonite feed and more fluent flow, not so much for the more ink capacity.

 

Hmmm. Wondering if an FPR #5 Ebonite feed will fit in the Koloro. Works just fine with the plastic Jowo feed, but it would be interesting to note the difference, as it's fitted with a FPNibs 14k semi-flex.

 

edit; I write FPR and ask.

Edited January 13, 2020 by Karmachanic

[A Smug Dill]

Wondering if an FPR #5 Ebonite feed will fit in the Koloro. Works just fine with the plastic Jowo feed,

 

 

If you have both a Opus 88 Koloro and a FPR #5 (or is that #5.5 according to the manufacturer?) ebonite feed, what's stopping you from trying it and finding out? The Opus 88 Koloro is a perfectly functional fountain pen and fit-for-purpose writing instrument (as it was designed and intended by the manufacturer) out-of-the-box, but I understand that some individual owners/users may want to make it subjectively better for his/her own particular purposes and preferences.

 

Any number of retailers will sell you an Opus 88 Koloro if you don't already have one, and I just confirmed by looking on its web shop application that Fountain Pen Revolution sells its 5.1mm ebonite feeds as products that can be ordered on their own one unit at a time.

[Honeybadgers]

Just for argument's sake... would a solid 14K or 18K gold barrel corrode if used to store ink directly? (I'm asking because I'm no chemist and I don't know the answer.)

 

No. Even 12k gold won't corrode in anything short of nitric acid mixed with hydrochloric acid. Even by themselves, they can't eat 12k or up. 8-10k you can start to see damage.... If you inked the pen with hydrochloric acid.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37Kn-kIsVu8&t=227s

 

first few minutes explains.

 

Also, to answer above, no. You aren't going to get an FPR feed to fit the opus unless you've got a lot of spare time, a micro file set, some calipers, sandpaper, and an hour or two of time.

Edited January 13, 2020 by Honeybadgers

[Arkanabar]

FPRevolution sells ebonite feeds in three sizes, 6.3mm for #6 nibs, and 4.7mm and 5.1mm for #5 and #5.5 nibs.

[RickiD]

No definition from my side.

One thing I seem to find important for a pen to be an eye dropper is an ebonite feed, otherwise the only advantage is holding more ink.

It's highly debatable, I know, but ink flow seems different to me with an ebonite feed. Instead of the typical screw in nib group + converter, I do prefer a friction fit nib and ebonite feed. In modern pens this is usually possible in eye droppers (think of the various Indian pens).

The only reason why I put up with some idiosincrasies of ED pens is for the ebonite feed and more fluent flow, not so much for the more ink capacity.

I was wondering if you could elaborate a little on what the flow differences are that you've noticed. I'm curious because recently acquired a few Indian ED pens that I really like, but am having trouble articulating what seems to be better about them than, say, an eyedropper-converted Preppy. Sure they're prettier, but I also prefer the way they write and am not sure exactly why.

[Karmachanic]

Sure they're prettier, but I also prefer the way they write and am not sure exactly why.

 

Ebonite might be a contributing factor.

[Karmachanic]

Also, to answer above, no. You aren't going to get an FPR feed to fit the opus unless you've got a lot of spare time, a micro file set, some calipers, sandpaper, and an hour or two of time.

Kevin at FPR confirms. And as I have neither the skills, a micro file set, nor calipers, I'll have to remain happy with what I have A sturdy, attractive, comfortable, well made ED pen with a fantastic nib.

[RickiD]

 

Ebonite might be a contributing factor.

I agree, and I'm curious as to why. I'm fairly new to this, and I'm genuinely trying to understand. Is it just that the ebonite allows for better flow for whatever reason? If so, might I also be happy with an ED that is considered a "wet" writer? Or perhaps there is language that I don't know yet that might better describe the difference. Forgive me if this is getting too off-topic; I just thought I'd ask the question.

[Karmachanic]

I'm not qualified to discuss why Ebonite feeds deliver better flow. That they do may contribute to your experience with Indian ED Pens. The barrel and Caps of these pens are also Ebonite, which gives, to some, a pleasant tactile experience; this may also add to that which you are having difficulty articulating.

 

My Indian pens are cartridge converters. I prefer the in hand feel of these Ebonite pens to acrylic, and other plastics, the polymer matte Delrin withstanding, which also, for me, is pleasant in hand.