A Wality Frankenpen, Part 2

February 28, 2008

There are a few of us here who like to play with cheap modern eyedroppers, especially the Wality 69. The combination of that huge, visible ink supply, ebonite feed and some creative alterations results in some interesting possibilities. Mainly the change involves the nib - Antonios has a Wality with a Waterman #7 Pink nib in it, and I have one where I put a big 2-tone Sheaffer 14K nib (from a badly mangled late 40s white-dot lever filler - I believe this is a Lifetime nib after they dropped the lifetime designation).

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a150/laridae/Wality-Frakenpen.jpg

Part of the attraction of the Wality is that it is one of the few modern pens that still uses an ebonite feed, like a vintage pen. The result is very vintage-like performance.

However, this is also one of the downfalls, as the ebonite feed is notched slightly, like pens from the 30s, but does not use a heavily finned feed such as better, later pens use (ie 1940s and later). The result is that there is little to absorb the irregularities of flow typical of an eyedropper filler - as heat from your hand warms the barrel, it causes air inside the barrel to expand and can cause excess flow, especially when the ink level is low and there is lots of air to expand.

Compare the feed of a Wality (top) with the feed of a typical Sheaffer no-nonsense pen (bottom). As you can see, the no-nonsense is deeply finned with lots of area to hold excess ink and spread it out for even writing flow. No so with the Wality.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a150/laridae/Wality-Sheaffer-feeds.jpg

So why not upgrade the feed? I have been thinking about it for a while, and finally decided to give it a shot this week. I pulled the feed from a spare non-nonsense feed unit, and swapped it out with the Wality feed. It fit, though the combination of the Sheaffer nib and No-nonsense feed is not as tight as I would like it to be.

Here is a photo of the pen with new feed installed.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a150/laridae/Wality-feedinstalled.jpg

So far performance has been good. The pen now writes a little on the wet side, but not excessively. The ink capacity is well below half-filled, and I have not experienced any flooding in the limited writing I have done. I want to give it a few days, and run it completely out, to see if I get any almost-out blobbing, but so far I feel that it has been gushing less than it used to at this ink level. I still am concerned that the feed is a little loose and may try to narrow the section opening with a little shellac (applied inside the feed and allowed to thoroughly dry before resetting the nib and feed).

My next project is to replace a Wality feed with a late 1940s vintage Sheaffer feed (from the parts pen where the nib came from, actually). In this case, the Wality section is too small and will need to be bored out slightly to fit the feed. I am still working on this one, but will report back when done.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a150/laridae/Wality-Sheaffer-feeds2.jpg

Finally, some might ask, if I am using a Sheaffer no-nonsense feed, why not just skip the whole project and convert a no-nonsense pen to an eyedropper, possibly swapping out the nib for a 14K? Well, I have a few of those, and No-nonsense pens make great ED pens. The transparent Sheaffer school pens are also great ED pens and have the same transparent ink supply. However, the barrel of the Wality is much, much thicker and more robust than that of the Sheaffer no-nonsense or school pens. The flat-bottom school pens in particular seem to have a very thin spot at the bottom of the barrel, which makes me a little nervous. For a pen to take on an extended trip, I would feel a little safer with the Wality. Plus, it's fun.

John

February 29, 2008

Interesting project. I'm a fan of my Walitys, although actually one of the things I like about them is the very distinctive nib. I could wish them drier writers, but they are nice to writer with nonetheless.

Cheers,

Eric

February 29, 2008

I put a Waterman #5 nib in mine, which works quite nicely.

Of course, I agree with you on the feed issues and would prefer a finned feed like the 40's Sheaffers. My main concern about boring is this: I've heard of several QC issues on Wality's. I bought 2 piston-fill 69L pens a couple years ago and had to return one of them because it leaked through the threads. So I wonder how the pen will tolerate boring out the feed opening. Of course, my solid colour piston-fill is a bit different construction than your clear ED.

What is the actual size difference between the Sheaffer feed and the Wality? I wonder if any pens out there have a feed that is better sized for the Wality.

Let us know how it goes!

My next project is to replace a Wality feed with a late 1940s vintage Sheaffer feed (from the parts pen where the nib came from, actually). In this case, the Wality section is too small and will need to be bored out slightly to fit the feed. I am still working on this one, but will report back when done.

John

February 29, 2008

Nice job, John...and an interesting read, too! Thanks for posting this

I don't have a Wality, but I do have a Recife Crystal and it holds a ton of ink....

Now, does the Sheaffer nib in the top photo have some italic qualities....or has your handwriting changed recently?

February 29, 2008

Interesting project. I'm a fan of my Walitys, although actually one of the things I like about them is the very distinctive nib. I could wish them drier writers, but they are nice to writer with nonetheless.

Cheers,
Eric

I think that all depends. The original nib on the one I am playing with was painfully dry, and so thick and stiff that I wasn't able to expand the slit at all.

What is the actual size difference between the Sheaffer feed and the Wality? I wonder if any pens out there have a feed that is better sized for the Wality.

I will take a caliper to it and see how measurable the difference is. My boring technique at the moment is to use sand paper and a dowel to gradually open it up a little - the Sheaffer feed is only a little bit bigger than the Wality opening.

Now, does the Sheaffer nib in the top photo have some italic qualities....or has your handwriting changed recently?

Yes, the nib is also a stub grinding experiment. I don't think it is quite perfect yet, but not bad. But my handwriting has been in a little flux . . . and never that consistant. . . .

John

March 5, 2008

Update - I am down to the last drop of ink in the barrel. It hasn't run completely dry yet, but I expect that at any minute. No weeping, no blobbing while I was writing. I did try a "big fist" test, where I grabbed the barrel in my fist, holding it pretty tightly with my hand covering the entire ink-holding part of the barrel and the nib down - to basically expose the pen to the most extreme heat that could be transferred from a human hand. It did drip when I did that (as I think most eyedropper pens would), but so far I have had no problems while actually writing.

I still want to get the section a little tighter with some shellac.

John

March 6, 2008

Now, does the Sheaffer nib in the top photo have some italic qualities....or has your handwriting changed recently?

Yes, the nib is also a stub grinding experiment. I don't think it is quite perfect yet, but not bad. But my handwriting has been in a little flux . . . and never that consistant. . . .

John

Looks like you're getting some nice line variation, though---kudos!

Glad to hear that the Wality Frankenpen is still working well for you---I appreciate the update!

March 13, 2008

Hi John,

Could you give an update? Are you currently using the 40's Sheaffer feed, the modern No Nonsense feed, or another? If using the 40's feed, which model is it from? How is it working? If you were sanding down the inside of the section to get it to fit, did you sand farther than you intended? (You said you still want to get the section tighter with some shellac.)

I tried a Sheaffer Balance feed from the late 90's, which looks similar to your No Nonsense feed. It fit, but did not grip the nib well enough (either was too loose, or too much smooth plastic, or maybe a problem of shape). Also, I am using a piston-fill Wality, so the tube on the feed interfered with the plunger. Not sure if I can shorten the tube and maintain its performance.

Update - I am down to the last drop of ink in the barrel. It hasn't run completely dry yet, but I expect that at any minute. No weeping, no blobbing .... but so far I have had no problems while actually writing.

I still want to get the section a little tighter with some shellac.

John

March 13, 2008

The one I was speaking about above was using the no-nonsense feed. I have not gotten back to finishing up the one I was putting a 1940s Sheaffer feed in. Set that aside while working on some other projects, but I will get back to it.

I did not shellac the section yet. Also put on hold.

As I recall, the late 90s balance used a feed and section nearly identical to the no-nonsense pens. I believe you could even swap out nib sections - so it should be the same feed.

I think you can shorten the tube on the back of the feed. The main function of that in a CC filler is to get the ink from the cartridge to feed into the pen - not a problem if it is an ED. Might be worth picking up a cheap NN pen to try first with, however.

Good luck - I will update results of my projects when I have them.

John

March 14, 2008

Would it not be possible to modify the wality feed to improve it's characteristics? I'm thinking that carefully cutting extra grooves into the feed using a dremel or similar could have the same effect as using a replacement feed.

Or am I missing something?

... G

March 14, 2008

Would it not be possible to modify the wality feed to improve it's characteristics? I'm thinking that carefully cutting extra grooves into the feed using a dremel or similar could have the same effect as using a replacement feed.

Or am I missing something?

... G

Unlike John, my feed and nibs have been wet enough writers. The stock nib with stock feed was maybe one tick to the wet side of neutral, and the stock feed with a Waterman semi-flex is a little wetter than that. So I don't want more ink -- I want better regulation of flow and better handling of changes in pressure (from temperature variations, running with pen in pocket, altitude, etc.). I want fins which will take up the extra ink rather than making me afraid that moving the pen too quickly and thoughtlessly will loose a drop from the feed sideways onto the paper (which has happened). Since I carry this pen with me for use around town, I don't want to treat it as gingerly as my pens from the 30's.

March 14, 2008

Would it not be possible to modify the wality feed to improve it's characteristics? I'm thinking that carefully cutting extra grooves into the feed using a dremel or similar could have the same effect as using a replacement feed.

Or am I missing something?

... G

The goal is to have a deeply finned feed - look at the picture of the two in comparison with each other. This helps regulate ink flow, by holding onto the occasional excess flow (from all the sources that Bruce mentions above.

If you mean - could you convert the Wality feed into a deeply finned feed by making extra cuts? Possibly, but that would seem to be an awful lot of work - Ebonite is hard to cut (brittle) and to get the level of precision needed to match the comb-structure of a no-nonsense feed would require skills and tools I don't have. On the other hand, No-nonsense feeds are out there and cheap (especially from all the calligraphy pens), so why not?

But if you did want to make a deeply finned feed by hand I would be filled with great respect. I suppose it could be done with the right lathe setup.

Also (just to clarify a comment Bruce made) this was a fine, wet writer with the Wality feed and the Sheaffer nib. The Wality nib needed some help, but the feed was great.

John