Vacumatic Question

[antoniosz]

An unusual (to me) Vac fell into my hands. Canadian Vac (the second smaller size, Junior?), double jewel. Now the "peculiarities":

 

- It has a serial number Rc No 784404 at the top of the clip. I never knew that Vacs have serial numbers...

- The imprint is Made in Canada, Vacumatic, Patent 318982, 16 (instead of a .X. date code).

- The nib has an inscription: Parker 14K Duofold N

 

My questions... First a visit to USPTO shows that obviously the patent number is not a US number. Then off to the Canadian patent office and 318982 is a patent for a railroad joint So what is this patent ? What does 16 mean? I know how to read .8. etc. but this numbering system is new to me. Finally is the nib appropriate or a substitution.

 

Many thanks in advance.

[maxrhino]

Hello.

 

I'm unable to help with this unfortunately,but it's quite amazing that this should come up.I saw a vacumatic yesterday when I visited a blokes house.It had the same mark at the top of the clip and the same marks on the barrel.It also had other patents pending on the barrel.I didn't buy it as it was not in the best of conditions.No cracks or anything serious but the clip had some oxidation and the imprint was worn.With the patents pending mark how early do you think it could have been?

 

I shall watch with interest for any information you receive.

 

Cheers.

[Blorgy]

The nib has an inscription: Parker 14K Duofold N

Finally is the nib appropriate or a substitution.

I know little about Vacumatics, but I have an emerald pearl Parker Vacumatic oversize. It has an Arrow nib, on which was engraved "14K Parker Vacumatic N". I guessed that the nib was correct because it was engraved "Parker Vacumatic". I thought that the "N" meant that the nib was made in Newhaven.

 

A Duofold N nib would usually be associated with an English aerometric duofold.

Edited March 26, 2006 by Blorgy

[Johnny Appleseed]

I can't help with the patent number or the nib, but I think that 1930s Vacumatics used a slightly different date code than the three dots of the 1940s date codes - so I think that might make it a 1936 pen. I have an Emerald Pearl vac with a 17 date code that I know is from 1937 (well, I know the barrel is from 1937, but that is another story). I had, and sold, a 1942 Canadian vacumatic, which had the standard 3 dot style date code, so I think Canada used the same date code system as the US.

 

Richard? . . .

 

John

[david i]

Hi.

 

 

 

An unusual (to me) Vac fell into my hands. Canadian Vac (the second smaller size, Junior?), double jewel. Now the "peculiarities":

 

Some answers from a hack amateur vac quack...

 

 

It has a serial number Rc No 784404 at the top of the clip. I never knew that Vacs have serial numbers...

 

Vacs from the 1930's though perhaps not quite from the very start of the Vacumatic proper (perhaps mid 1933) so let's say late 1934 through the later-than-usa introduction of blue diamond- let us say mid 1940 in canada- feature this registration mark. Whilst i don't know its exact meaning, my recollection is that chat with Graham Oliver from England suggested it was a registration or copyright-ish sort of thing for the clip style. It disappeared at latest when BD appeared. Some suggest this was needed for the English market.

 

 

- The imprint is Made in Canada, Vacumatic, Patent 318982, 16 (instead of a .X. date code).

 

It does have a date code. Recall that pre mid-1938 vacs have two number date code in which first number is quarter, second number is year. Your pen is from first quarter 1936

 

- The nib has an inscription: Parker 14K Duofold N

 

Probably a replacement nib and one that suggests the pen did find its way to England, not uncommon as Parker Canada was the conduit to England in many cases. The "N" indicates Newhaven production for the nib.

 

 

My questions... First a visit to USPTO shows that obviously the patent number is not a US number. Then off to the Canadian patent office and 318982 is a patent for a railroad joint So what is this patent ? What does 16 mean? I know how to read .8. etc. but this numbering system is new to me. Finally is the nib appropriate or a substitution.

 

Cannot help with patent number. Perhaps check England too, since perhaps Parker Canada wanted its pens to be patent guarded in the large English market. We've addressed the date code thign already. The nib is a substitute at least relative to what we'd expect an original nib to be as per the factory. Of course our expectattions...

 

regards

 

david

 

 

Many thanks in advance.

 

[david i]

to clarify, as my note perhaps left it a bit fuzzy.

 

That whole shmooze on the registration mark on the clip pertains to canadian made vac, not USA-made vacs.

 

regards

 

david isaacson

http://www.removed.xyz

[antoniosz]

Thanks David.

 

It is a English patent indeed for a Vac. GB318982 assigned to Dahlberg, Arthur Olans, 145 Iota Court, Madison, Wisconsin. (convention date=Sept. 14, 1928, publication date=Jan. , 23, 1930)

Ah huh!.... I assume that there is a US one too but I could not find it.

 

Who is Arthur O. Dahlberg?

Professor Arthur O. Dahlberg, an instructor in machine design at the University of Wisconsin - the inventor of the Vacumatic. He sold the patent to Parker (source: R. Binder's web page). Bingo...

Edited April 16, 2006 by antoniosz

[david i]

Interesting. I've a couple Dahlberg references buried somewhere but not sure i've a 1928 patent- English or otherwise.

 

If you have chance, run me a print of it (or send me to where i can print it). I'd like to grab that in hard copy.

 

best

 

daivd

[Richard]

It's interesting that the middle name of the assignee on the UK patent does not begin with C. I got Dahlberg's name and position from the administrative offices of the University of Wisconsin. I'm wondering if the person who read it to me made a mistake on the initial. More research is needed, methinks.

[antoniosz]

It's interesting that the middle name of the assignee on the UK patent does not begin with C. I got Dahlberg's name and position from the administrative offices of the University of Wisconsin. I'm wondering if the person who read it to me made a mistake on the initial. More research is needed, methinks.

The Wisconsin Engineer Vol. 29, No. 1 (October 1924) page 4 says:

 

"Arthur O. Dahlberg has returned to the department of machine design as an instructor"

 

But there are 2 other issues where he is refered to as Arthur M. Dahlberg and and alumni list where there is a reference to Dahlberg Mrs. Arthur C. (?). Maybe an example of the effects of cacography ?

Edited April 16, 2006 by antoniosz

[Ruaidhri]

Just sitting here, happily, LEARNING.

You can't buy this sort of stuff

Thanks folks.