Parker 51 v Sheaffer PFM

[kavanagh]

This head to head was a long time coming.

 

To the Parker and Sheaffer acolytes........this is where the Parker 51 and Sheaffer PFM enter the same arena.

 

Which one pen would you take with you anywhere and would always be your first choice ?

 

Any comments about why you would choose one over the other in regards to construction, durability and performance....

 

Seconds out........ROUND 1 ! .......both pens come out fighting..

 

 

[randyholhut]

As the owner of both, I reluctantly voted for the "51."

 

I've been using a PFM V for about a month now. It's a big and beautiful 14k fine point that writes with the inimitable Sheaffer smoothness. It truly deserves its status as the last great fountain pen of the pre-1960 era.

 

And yet...

 

I have three "51s." one aero and two vacs (one is in DL's shop that I hope to someday see again). The "51" is still the best designed, most reliable pen there is. Starts up quickly. Holds a ton of ink. Not too heavy, not too light. Understated elegance and classic lines. Made to write with a minimum of fussiness. A writer's pen.

 

The PFM V is a gorgeous piece of pocket jewelry. But the "51" is a trusted tool.

[psfred]

I voted for the "51" only because the PFM is, I feel, too large. Change that to a Sentinel/Statesman/Valiant, and I'd vote Sheaffer without question -- all of mine write better and fit my hand better than the "51".

 

There are reasons the PFM was a marken failure where the Imperial was not.

 

Peter

Edited March 26, 2008 by psfred

[Metric]

VERY tough call, but in the end I voted for the P51, mainly due to price-performance. The PFM is awesome, but for that price it SHOULD be awesome. Being able to get one of the world's great pens for ~$60, though, is pretty miraculous.

[Garageboy]

I love both, but 51 is more everyday writer. I DO want a solid color PFM I

[Martius]

Shouldn't this competition be between the "51" and the TM line? The Triumph nib pens, after all, were invented to compete with the "51".

[blopplop]

Shouldn't this competition be between the "51" and the TM line? The Triumph nib pens, after all, were invented to compete with the "51".

 

I think I'd have to agree with Martius on this one. However, to be fair, I've never had the privilege of writing with a PFM, so I won't stuff the ballet box. But I will say that if I was stranded on a desert island and had only one pen to choose from, it would be a P-51 hands down.

 

Dave

[TrevorML]

won't stuff the poll, but I just recently received a "51" demi cedar blue GF cap after being more of a classic vintage type of guy... Pelikan 140's, old Conklin Endura's, Vacumatics and the like... all the exposed nib types... and tended to frown on the hooded nib pens... until I decided to try them and got this one... now... I can't stop using it... they are great pens indeed!!!!!

[snorkeler]

No question about it for me-PFM. I like the 51 and do understand its high reputation. But when I was in graduate school I used my Dad's PFM, and it was simply the best pen I have ever written with; the nib was just perfect. I measure every pen I write with by that standard, and no other pen has yet met that standard; the closest have been some Japanese pens and some TM Sheaffers with Triumph nibs.

[kavanagh]

What is the 'TM' line for Sheaffer ? ( apologies - but I am unfamiliar with it ).

[snorkeler]

TM=Thin Model. Designation refers to many different lines of touchdowns and snorkels.

[ruud2904]

I have them both in the collection. I like big pens, so I prefer the PFM. But, there is nothing wrong with a nice 51

[david i]

This head to head was a long time coming.

 

To the Parker and Sheaffer acolytes........this is where the Parker 51 and Sheaffer PFM enter the same arena.

 

Which one pen would you take with you anywhere and would always be your first choice ?

 

Any comments about why you would choose one over the other in regards to construction, durability and performance....

 

Seconds out........ROUND 1 ! .......both pens come out fighting..

 

 

I'll comment based on 10 years as hack-amateur-newbie pen collector and would-be dealer. Probably have sold a couple dozen PFM's and many dozens of 51.

 

 

In terms of general market 1950's, more fair to compare similarly sized Snorkel and PFM. PFM is a much larger pen. That changes the ergonomic issue in huge way. If one likes a fat pen PFM blows out the 51. If one likes thin pen, 51 blows out PFM. To equalize playing field in that arena, it is more fair to compare quality, style, affordability, collectability of Snorkel to PFM.

 

That said, as one who likes fat pen, the tapered fat grip of PFM which blends into the barrel, for me makes it a far more usable pen. I like fat pens. So there is no real comparison. End of chat for me.

 

But, beyond user issues and getting into collecting, there is a far wider spread of 51 out there from its 30 year run, than there is for PFM with its 4 year run. Far more meat for the collecting tiger.

 

Both pens are very reliable. The inlaid nib of the PFM tends to be smoother when found in the wild than the 51 nib, though both can be made to write nicely.

 

regards

 

David

 

http://removed.xyz/penteech/sheafferPFMautographset50pe.jpg

 

http://removed.xyz/penteech/sheafferPFM3closeup600.jpg

 

http://removed.xyz/penteech/parker51collection.jpg

[jonro]

I prefer the PFM to the P51, mainly because it is a fat pen. It fits my fat hands very nicely. Between the two nibs, I would give the edge to the P51. I like the PFM's spring-loaded clip and the aesthetics of the PFM's inlaid nib. I also appreciate the PFM's place in history as Sheaffer's last offensive against the unstoppable wave of ballpoints washing over America. Sheaffer gave it their all when they designed the PFM. I like the snorkel filler a lot, but give the edge to Parker's uniquely simple aerometric filler that has stood the test of time so well. It's unfortunate that the PFM had such a short run. That has made them a lot more expensive than they would be if they had a ten or twenty year run. It's also too bad for us that Parker never made an oversized version of the 51.

[Robert Hughes]

I've never used a PFM but have an Imperial VI. After the first, difficult break-in period (it was a 40 year old NOS when I got it) the Imperial writes flawlessly and starts up without an issue, just like my 51 pens. The Imperial VI's pseudo-aerometric squeeze filler is not to my liking, as it sticks in the barrel when I unscrew the section. So my vote goes for a real aerometric pen - Parker 51.

 

Neither the 51 or Imperial pens are inked right now; I prefer my Aurora this month.

Edited March 27, 2008 by Robert Hughes

[trent]

The PFM is beautiful and so evocative of late 50's and mid 60's design. I love the inlaid nib. BUT! It is much more delicate than my Parker 51. The filling system seems complicated. The pen sometimes "burps," leaving a big blot on whatever I was writing. I think the sac is small; the pen needs more frequent refilling. I can never be too sure it will work smoothly. My Parker 51 by contrast is flawless and dependable, year after year, and holds more ink. I've had several P-51's, by the way, and they have all been like this---rock-solid workhorses.

[Nihontochicken]

It's also too bad for us that Parker never made an oversized version of the 51.

 

You beat me to it. An oversize 51 Flighter gets my vote, unfortunately unobtanium.

[inkstainedruth]

Definitely a 51. That's a no-brainer, IMO.

A PFM would be too big for my hand (I picked one up at a pen show, and found it to be a bit on the heavy side as well). I have three Snorkels, and the fill system is kinda cool (the old "Buy your husband a PFM for Christmas" ad was pretty obnoxious -- until I saw the Snorkel system in action). But every one of those Snorkels needed to be repaired for me to really use them. My 51 Aeros, on the other hand, just needed a good flushing and then worked great. I did eventually have to have the Teal one worked on, but the Demi (which is a Plummer -- and I think it might have a medium nib to boot) works just fine, and is currently sporting Noodler's Purple Heart.

I'm betting that a restored PFM might cost more, as well (okay, I did do pretty well to extremely well price-wise on all my 51s).

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[Arkanabar]

I have both. I almost never use either. To be fair, the "51" was my dad's, and is precious as a result, and the PFM was a gift from my brother in law, which he got NOS (it still had chalk marks at the barrel). I would be very distraught were I to lose or damage either.

 

I think the "51" is better in terms of durability and write-out. I like the ergonomics of the PFM more, not to mention its internally sprung clip and aesthetics. But the real problem with both is that I don't really like sleek pens. I want a distinct stop at the end of the section.

[pajaro]

I think these two pens are apples and oranges. The PFM is a more deluxe higher end pen. I like mine for its looks, but it is a parts pen. The several 51s I have are less expensive pens, and the mechanism, Vac or Aero, is simpler. The snorkel was a neat gadget, but I didn't like the way I had to work it. Unscrew the blind cap do something else so I could pull it back . . .meh. The Vac 51 might be the easiest of these pens to fill. I can fix them now, so I am confident to use them. If I can fix the PFM it would be nice, but I'm not spending more money sending it out, and an in-law wants it to mess with it. He might get it, being an in-law.