Comparative Review: MB149, Lamy2k, Aurora Optima, & Others

[DJJM19951998]

Here is part two of the review. Again, the pens being reviewed are:

1. MontBlanc 149 (F)

2. MontBlanc 144 (F)

3. Aurora Optima Burgundy Celluloid (M)

4. Lamy 2000 (F)

5. Namiki Impressions Sapphire (M)

 

First Round Part 2!

Nib and Performance. This section will count double, and will solely be about nib performance. I feel the nib is part of the whole design, so I put the design of the nib in Appearance and Design. Think about this, wouldn't a 149 with a Mozart nib look a little weird? The Mozart nib is beautiful, but would not go with the size of a 149. This is why I put the nib's looks in Appearance and Design.

 

1. MontBlanc 149-(Fine,Firm) The nib is very smooth and wet, with a very large sweet spot. Basically the entire right half the nib is the sweet spot, so when writing I rotate the pen about 10 degrees to the right. This nib is sensitive to the quality of the paper, and very sensitive to ink. On rough or low quality paper it writes very bad. But it is probably the best writer I have on decent to higher quality paper. Also, it responds very differently to different inks. It did not write well with MontBlanc Black or Blue. It writes really wet and smooth with Aurora Black, and basically any other ink that is not made by MontBlanc or Pelikan it performs well with too. This nib is more aimed towards being smooth, and with a good ink and paper combo is one of the best writers I have ever used. (18/20)

 

2. MontBlanc 144-(Fine,Firm) The nib has a very large sweet spot, and is very smooth and wet. Not to sensitive to paper or ink. It does not quite feel the same as the 149 though, even in the sweet spot. It feels like a lesser expensive nib, pretty close to the Lamy 2000 actually. I like it a lot and this is my daily pen I bring with me. (17/20)

 

3. Aurora Optima-(Medium,Firm) The whole nib is one large sweet spot. I like this pen a lot. It is the wettest writer being compared today, and will write well on almost all paper. It is ink sensitive though. It hates MontBlanc Black, and prefers wetter inks like Visconti and Aurora (Black), and even Parker and Waterman inks work well. The nib is made very well and feels really good too. This nib is not meant to be smooth. It has "tooth," "feedback," whatever you wish to call it. The extreme wetness makes up for this, but you still feel it. If you want a smooth nib, do not buy this pen. The "tooth" is not a bad thing, and for that matter I like the feel of it. You should definitely try it before you buy one. Since not many other companies make a nib with "tooth" that can still feel like a really good nib, I am giving this pen an 18. (18/20)

 

4. Lamy 2000-(Fine) This nib is really good. For its price range you will have trouble finding a better nib. It is very smooth, wet, and less firm than the other pens. Writes well with any ink, but keep in mind that Noodler's ink kills this pen. It has destroyed so many feeds. Do a search and see how many "Help my Lamy 2000.....Noodler's Ink!" posts come up. It feels like a much more expensive nib. The sweet spot is towards the top of the nib, so it works well for me. This pen is my other everyday pen. In addition, Lamy has an excellent nib exchange policy. This earns it a 19. (19/20)

 

5. Namiki Impressions-(Medium,Firm) This nib is the smoothest I have ever used. The whole nib is a sweet spot. I absolutely love this nib. Wet, but less than the 2000 and Optima, and smooth make this nib write well on basically any piece of paper. It is weird with ink though. It did not like the typically wet Aurora, but preferred the typically dry MontBlanc. I do not know if Namiki has a nib exchange policy, but I would never want to exchange my nib anyway. This is my favorite nib and I can't think of a way to possibly make it any better. (20/20)

 

 

 

Round 2!

Filling System.

This is a very subjective topic. I might prefer one filling mechanism, you may like another.

 

1.MontBlanc 149-It has a two stage piston that is smooth. It holds a lot of ink. Go to nibs.com and it has a list of ink capacities. I am pretty sure this holds the most ink of any piston filled pen. I like it a lot, but it is not a Visconti Dual Reserve Power Filler. (7/10)

 

2.MontBlanc 144-It is simply a cartridge converter. The MontBlanc converter is the best piston converter I have used, but still it is only a converter. (4/10)

 

3.Aurora Optima-This is piston filled, but the mechanism seems a little flimsy to my. I don't like filling it like I do with my other pens. Fortunately, it holds a lot of ink so I don't have to use the piston that often. It does have a hidden reserve, but most people realize that there pen is near empty before it actually stops. (6/10)

 

4.Lamy 2000-This is also piston filled. The piston is a little tight, and not as smooth as the MontBlanc. I still like it a lot anyways. A nice thing about it is that it can easily be removed for greasing, unlike the Aurora or the MontBlanc. (6/10)

 

5.Namiki Impressions-It has a CON-70 converter. It is basically a Vacumatic Filling Mechanism that has been refined. It looks like it holds a lot of ink. I like it a lot because it is easily replaceable, looks cool, and operates very well. (7/10)

 

That concludes Part 2. Part 3 should come tonight. Here are the score for Part 2:

1.MontBlanc 149-(25/30)

2.MontBlanc 144-(21/30)

3.Aurora Opitma-(24/30)

4.Lamy 2000-(25/30)

5.Namiki Impressions-(27/30)

 

Cumulative Scores For Parts 1 and 2:

1.MontBlanc 149-(54/60)

2.MontBlanc 144-(45/60)

3.Aurora Optima-(52/60)

4.Lamy 2000-(49/60)

5.Namiki Impressions-(54/60)

 

I am sorry about it coming in so many parts but I can't do one big review because it would take way too long. Please post if you have any opinions about if I overlooked any factor of any pen, or about how I can make my review better, thanks.

Edited December 5, 2009 by MYU

[vieuxcarre]

Great review of a nice collection of pens. Can you post some pictures?

[DJJM19951998]

Great review of a nice collection of pens. Can you post some pictures?

Thanks,I tried but it did not work. I don't have a online picture account either, so I can't post my own pictures. These are all pretty popular pens, try going to Google images.

[dizzypen]

You know you could open up a picture account with Flickr or Photobucket free of charge.

 

Still, it's a nice review. It really does need some pictures though.

[Nikhil]

Nice review. Dom, I get my pictures posted by Picasa

[Nikhil]

also, one thing you could do is link to the other part, so that if they get widely seperated, viewers can see the next or prior parts.

[Geoff V]

4. ... Writes well with any ink, but keep in mind that Noodler's ink kills this pen. It has destroyed so many feeds. Do a search and see how many "Help my Lamy 2000.....Noodler's Ink!" posts come up.

An excellent, concise review! I took your advice and, as I use Noodlers a lot and wish to purchase a Lamy 2000, attempted a search for the subject you outlined. However, due largely to the open-ended nature of the search term thesaurus in the site, I got so many responses that it rendered the search almost useless. Given that this is a very important matter for both manufacturers, not to mention for potential purchasers of both L2Ks and Noodlers inks, could you point us to a couple of these discussions?

 

Regards

 

Geoff V

[DJJM19951998]

4. ... Writes well with any ink, but keep in mind that Noodler's ink kills this pen. It has destroyed so many feeds. Do a search and see how many "Help my Lamy 2000.....Noodler's Ink!" posts come up.

An excellent, concise review! I took your advice and, as I use Noodlers a lot and wish to purchase a Lamy 2000, attempted a search for the subject you outlined. However, due largely to the open-ended nature of the search term thesaurus in the site, I got so many responses that it rendered the search almost useless. Given that this is a very important matter for both manufacturers, not to mention for potential purchasers of both L2Ks and Noodlers inks, could you point us to a couple of these discussions?

 

Regards

 

Geoff V

You are right, the search function really is pretty bad. I do not use Noodler's inks so I am glad to say this has never happened to me, try starting a post about this. I believe it is 'Bay State Blue' in particular that has given the most problems for Lamy feeds.

[lowks]

When you say that Aurora Optima 'does not like MB Black ink' could you describe a bit how the pen performs or does not perform using the ink?

[DJJM19951998]

When you say that Aurora Optima 'does not like MB Black ink' could you describe a bit how the pen performs or does not perform using the ink?

It writes very dry, and very scratchy with MB Black. In addition it also skips. However, with Aurora Black it has very wet consistent flow, not scratchy, and absolutely no skipping.

[spot]

Here you can upload pictures free of charge

Have you skipped the price comparison?

Edited October 24, 2009 by spot

[lowks]

When you say that Aurora Optima 'does not like MB Black ink' could you describe a bit how the pen performs or does not perform using the ink?

It writes very dry, and very scratchy with MB Black. In addition it also skips. However, with Aurora Black it has very wet consistent flow, not scratchy, and absolutely no skipping.

 

Thanks for that. I am using my Optima with MB Royal Blue. While it doesn't skip I would like the flow to be a tad better. It's hard to get Aurora ink here though since the distributor ran away literally! Sigh! Wonder what I need to do to be an Aurora distributor?!

[Robert Alan]

This is an error. Please forgive the mistake. I was attempting to upload an attachment and it failed!

Edited October 26, 2009 by Robert Alan

[Robert Alan]

Hello!

 

Thank you for taking the time to share your comparisons on FPN. I love this stuff!

 

I want to give you some additional information that I found very interesting. It's from an article in volume 11 of "Shumi-no bungu bako," the Japanese "mook" (magazine-book). The mook's title is idiomatic, and I translate it as "Stationery Collector's Toolkit." I really enjoy and respect this periodical and trust the accuracy of the information (I worked in Japan for a year, and found the stationery stores to be intoxicating).

 

Anyway, I was surprised to see your 7/10 "average" rating for the Pilot CON-70 converter because I think Pilot has designed the best converter system with the CON-70 and the Pilot/Namiki cartridge. The CON-70 vacuum-filler works flawlessly (3 or 4 strokes fill it), and there is always a good seal between it and the feed nipple. No additional air is allowed into the converter. (Have you ever noticed how, sometimes, ink is stuck at the wrong end of a converter?) Air leaking into a converter at the feed nipple is a big problem with most converter/cartridge systems. As a matter of fact, many of the nib flow complaints (with cartridge/converter pens--including Bexleys) that I see posted on FPN are really converter problems, and no "nib-meister" is needed (Heck! A new pen should work correctly out of the box!) Of course, eventually, there is a possibility of a poor connection with any converter. That's the time to buy a new one!

 

According to the article's comparison chart the CON-70 holds 1.10cc of ink, more than any other converter or some fountain pens with enclosed filling systems, including the Pelikan M-1000 (1.02cc). Also, I was surprised to see that the Montblanc 146 holds slightly more ink (1.37cc) than the 149 (1.32cc). A Pelikan M-800, in my opinion one of the best fountain pens available, holds 1.22cc of ink. An Aurora 88, another personal favorite, holds 1.26cc of ink and that is probably what the Optima holds since the filling mechanism is just about the same (lay an 88 next to an Optima and line up the ink-view windows).

 

I wanted to load a scan of the article, but it seems that the FPN attachment system isn't working the way it used to.

 

BTW, subjectively, I would rate all the filling systems, except the Montblanc cartridge/converter system, at least an 8/10 since they are "good." However, comparing a converter to a dedicated filling system, like piston-fillers, is not really fair. Although the CON-70, I believe, blows away some self-contained systems, if one compares it to other cartridge/converter systems, including the CON-50, it deserves 10/10. The CON-70 must come from Lake Wobegon because it is way above average!

 

Cheers, Robert Alan

[DJJM19951998]

Hello!

 

Thank you for taking the time to share your comparisons on FPN. I love this stuff!

 

I want to give you some additional information that I found very interesting. It's from an article in volume 11 of "Shumi-no bungu bako," the Japanese "mook" (magazine-book). The mook's title is idiomatic, and I translate it as "Stationery Collector's Toolkit." I really enjoy and respect this periodical and trust the accuracy of the information (I worked in Japan for a year, and found the stationery stores to be intoxicating).

 

Anyway, I was surprised to see your 7/10 "average" rating for the Pilot CON-70 converter because I think Pilot has designed the best converter system with the CON-70 and the Pilot/Namiki cartridge. The CON-70 vacuum-filler works flawlessly (3 or 4 strokes fill it), and there is always a good seal between it and the feed nipple. No additional air is allowed into the converter. (Have you ever noticed how, sometimes, ink is stuck at the wrong end of a converter?) Air leaking into a converter at the feed nipple is a big problem with most converter/cartridge systems. As a matter of fact, many of the nib flow complaints (with cartridge/converter pens--including Bexleys) that I see posted on FPN are really converter problems, and no "nib-meister" is needed (Heck! A new pen should work correctly out of the box!) Of course, eventually, there is a possibility of a poor connection with any converter. That's the time to buy a new one!

 

According to the article's comparison chart the CON-70 holds 1.10cc of ink, more than any other converter or some fountain pens with enclosed filling systems, including the Pelikan M-1000 (1.02cc). Also, I was surprised to see that the Montblanc 146 holds slightly more ink (1.37cc) than the 149 (1.32cc). A Pelikan M-800, in my opinion one of the best fountain pens available, holds 1.22cc of ink. An Aurora 88, another personal favorite, holds 1.26cc of ink and that is probably what the Optima holds since the filling mechanism is just about the same (lay an 88 next to an Optima and line up the ink-view windows).

 

I wanted to load a scan of the article, but it seems that the FPN attachment system isn't working the way it used to.

 

BTW, subjectively, I would rate all the filling systems, except the Montblanc cartridge/converter system, at least an 8/10 since they are "good." However, comparing a converter to a dedicated filling system, like piston-fillers, is not really fair. Although the CON-70, I believe, blows away some self-contained systems, if one compares it to other cartridge/converter systems, including the CON-50, it deserves 10/10. The CON-70 must come from Lake Wobegon because it is way above average!

 

Cheers, Robert Alan

I am not sure about the measurements, as I trust nibs.com. http://www.nibs.com/pen_measures/ It is a little hard to believe that the 146 hold more than the 149, which both hold much more than the Pelikan M1000, which hold a lot less than the smaller M800. Here is my rating scale for filling mechanisms:

 

1.Parker Slide Converter

2.Simple Cartridge only

3.Waterman Piston Converter

4.MontBlanc converter or any other larger piston converter

5.small or inefficient piston or other internal filling

6.Good piston, could be better

7.Something special, holds a lot of ink, great piston, cool, etc.

8.Snorkel Filler and other super cool fillers

9.This space is reserved for those intuitive designs that are super efficient, work super well, look really cool, etc. An example would be a Scheaffer Vac-Fil, or Visconti Power filler.

10.Visconti Dual reserve power filler, I still have yet to use better.

 

You may have noticed I did not include eyedroppers anywhere here. I have never used one and I feel you can't rate something until you try it, so until then they are out of the chart. Also, all these filling mechanisms are all really good, so I could give them all 10/10. I have never had a particular problem with any. But this is a comparative review and I must give one a higher score if it is better than something else based on its stats, ease of use, cool factor, ...

[Nikhil]

when is the next part coming

[DJJM19951998]

when is the next part coming

I am not sure, I am going to have to find time. Sorry about the delay.

[Nikhil]

take your time

[Robert Alan]

8.Snorkel Filler and other super cool fillers

9.This space is reserved for those intuitive designs that are super efficient, work super well, look really cool, etc. An example would be a Scheaffer Vac-Fil, or Visconti Power filler.

10.Visconti Dual reserve power filler, I still have yet to use better.

 

...I must give one a higher score if it is better than something else based on its stats, ease of use, cool factor, ...

 

Hello again! Thanks for the reply and info--very interesting. However, I disagree with giving an "8" for the Snorkel. I actually prefer the Touchdown models just before the Snorkels came out. There is so much inside a Snorkel filler that there's not much room for the sack. I guess you factored in a lot for "coolosity." To be really cool, I think Sheaffer should have added a transistor radio and had a little antenna that telescoped out of the cap. That would deserve a "9."

Thanks again for the effort on your reviews.

Ciao, Robert

[cpsantillan]

Very nice review!!you could of add some pictures,but I guess everyone here knows very well the pens compared,I am a little bit confused with the comment you made about noodler's ink destroying the lamy 2k nib,I am going to look forward for info related to this,and if anyone has had any problems with this ink in this particular nib,please your info will be very helpful and welcome...thanks for your review