Lever Fill Mechanism

[geoduc]

I'm considering a Conway Stewart Churchill for my next pen and it is available as either a c/c or a lever filler. I can live with c/c but prefer self fillers whenever possible.

 

So what are the advantages/disadvantages of a lever fill mechanism? I understand how they work, but would like to draw on the experience of those who have used them to get an idea of why they're good or what type of problems they may be prone to. Are they reasonable to repair if there's a problem? Are they any better or worse than piston fillers, or just different?

[LedZepGirl]

I'd go with the lever filler. The only problem with lever filling pens and most other vintage self-filling pens is the sac eventually goes bad, but that takes years. Take for example, there are still Esterbrooks out there with perfectly good sacs after 60 + years. The J-bar can also can go bad, but that takes years too, and it does not happen to all pens. I have 80 year old pens still with their original J-bars. It seems as long as the pen is kept clean the J-bar will last along time, as it is ink leaking from a back sac that causes the corrosion that causes the J-bar to grow brittle and break. Another point I'd like to bring up is look at all the vintage pens, which utilized the lever a means of filling- it was the most popular filling mechanism until cartridges and throw away culture came around.

[rwilsonedn]

+1 to what LedZepGirl says. The lever-filler with a properly-fit sac has quite large ink capacity--possibly larger than a similar-sized piston-filler because the mechanism takes up very little of the space in the barrel. They are robust, and if you don't treat them as would an outraged Chimp trying to get to a banana, the mechanism will last almost forever. Repairs are so easy that even I have succeeded at it. And replacement parts are generic, so you won't find yourself 20 years from now looking for a 9cm unobtainium rod with 6 threads per mm and an authentic Portuguese cork gasket so you can refill your pen. Filling is clean and easy, and the lever has a nice feel to it.

ron

[Shangas]

The only bad thing about a lever-filler that I can think of is the fact that if you try and force the lever on a pen with a hardened sac, you're liable to bend the lever and possibly break it. I have a couple of fountain pens with forced levers, but which are thankfully still workable.

[Yuki Onitsura]

The only down side I can think of to a lever filler is that you can't see how much ink is left. Granted, with a converter you'd usually have to unscrew the section, but it's an option.

 

Yuki

[PatientType]

The only down side I can think of to a lever filler is that you can't see how much ink is left. Granted, with a converter you'd usually have to unscrew the section, but it's an option.

 

Yuki

 

 

My Conway Stewart Churchill, Nelson, and 100 are all converter fill. I have a couple of vintage lever fill pens and I find I don't care for that style of filler. I recently sold the one modern Conway Stewart I had that was lever fill. As Yuki said, you can't check your ink level in a lever fill pen. And, while lever fill pens last for decades, the lever fillers feel frail when I operate them. Converters and piston fill mechanisms don't. I like the fact that, if a converter fails, I can replace it easily myself. If a lever breaks, I'd have to send the pen to a repair shop.

 

But, all that said, I think the bottom line is personal preference. If you feel that a lever filler is a self-filler and those are "neat" then you should get that type. Fountain pens are not something one uses out of necessity but for the pleasure of writing.

Edited June 17, 2010 by PatientType

[HelzBelz]

As others have said, lever fillers are easily fixed should they go wrong, which they're not likely to, especially not in your lifetime. They're not my favourite type of filler, because you can't check your ink leve, which means you always have to carry a back-up pen. I do feel that they're a more authentic way of filling a pen than c/c, although I use c/c pens willingly, too. I'm not sure which system I'd go for in your case. It depends, really, on how much you value being able to the ink level: some people don't mind not being able to, others hate it, still others (like me) dislike it but live with it.

[riff raff]

Another vote for the lever-filler. Reliable, easily repaired, and none of the (occasional) problems with the ink staying up in the wrong end of the converter, away from the feed.

[Bo Bo Olson]

Feel fragile yet last 60 or more years?

I'd gladly swap all my C/C pens for the same model in piston, button or lever.

 

You do fill your ink pens with your morning coffee??? No, you should.

 

If you run out of ink...well if you have a shirt pocket, you should have a second fountain pen.

 

A well made brief case, would have place for your traveling ink well, or your fanny pack.

You do have a antique traveling ink well, right? Visconti makes a mini- for modern use.

[tonybelding]

Neither lever or C/C is my favorite filling system. Of the two, however, I'd favor a converter.

 

With a lever-filler you can't see how much ink is in the pen -- unless it has an ink window, which most don't, and even when they do it's invariably a small window (in vintage pens, usually an ambered-and-stained small window). A lever filler is somewhat more tedious to flush thoroughly when changing ink, or when putting the pen into storage -- you can't take it apart and rinse the parts individually. I've had a couple of re-sacced lever fillers fail after a relatively short time. Maybe the parts inside were pinching the sac, or maybe I let ink dry in them and the crusty residue punctured the sac, who knows? A C/C pen is more tolerant in that regard, though, and easier to fix if the converter does get messed up. Replacing a sac isn't a hard repair, as fountain pen repairs go, but replacing a converter is trivial for anybody.

[Bo Bo Olson]

If you have an Esterbrook, take the nib out, use your rubber ear syringe you use to clean your C/C pens with...takes less than a minute.

 

Just what you was brought up on....when I was a kid, cartridge pens came in....but they was not "real" pens....so I kept the impression of what I learned as a kid.

If you fill your lever pens (2) every morning, there can be no problems.

Edited June 16, 2010 by Bo Bo Olson

[Ipno Tizer]

I can live with c/c but prefer self fillers whenever possible.

 

Which is probably the best reason to go for a lever filler.

 

I find it's easy to keep fingers away from the mouth of the bottle with a lever filler although the same would be true with a large thumb screw type converter.

 

Ink sacks are reasonably easy to replace although not a easy as a converter. The main problem is getting the section out for which you'll probably need some section grips (if you ever had to do it). But ink sacks commonly last especially silicone sacks which I would suspect modern pens would use. The piston seal in a converter is subject to friction and wear. Most of the time they last decently but I have had one go after only about 18 months.

 

Apart from that, the only thing I've noticed is that bladder fillers can become wet if the ink gets too low. That's why I always re fill my lever fillers in the morning before taking it to work.

 

The long and short is that you can't really go wrong with either filler in a decent pen.

Edited June 16, 2010 by Ipno Tizer

[RyanWakefield]

Get the lever filler.

[rwilsonedn]

Actually, there was a period (starting, I think, in the late 30s) when most lever-fillers had an ink-view window of some sort so you could see how much ink you had left. Later, Wearever started making a clear plastic feed for the same reason. Before then, I think most users refilled their pens on a regular basis--say every few days, or every Sunday evening. Given the large capacity of big lever-fillers, that would ensure that the pen always had ink in it. And it had the added benefit of making sure the pen was always recently flushed with fresh ink, helping to eliminate drying and clogging. That is still an issue with cartridge-fillers if you don't use the converter, by the way, You really need to take them apart, soak them, and force water through the feed periodically.

ron

[Ghost Plane]

Get the lever filler. Fills faster, fills easier, feels like it holds more, AND the flow is much nicer than the c/c if you get a bigger nib such as the IB or BB.

[Moynihan]

...Conway Stewart Churchill for my next pen and it is available as either a c/c or a lever filler.

 

Curious, do folks that have used a modern lever fill find them to as smooth functioning and durable as the "vintage" lever fills?

I got a modern made lever fill a few years back (Conway Stewart, "duro" replica i think?), and had problems with the mechanism (it failed). Would not want though to judge from just one instance. My 2 vintage CS's are a dream to write with and function very well.

[tonybelding]

Curious, do folks that have used a modern lever fill find them to as smooth functioning and durable as the "vintage" lever fills?

 

Considering the three fairly fresh sacs that I've had fail in vintage pens (two lever-fillers and one button-filler), I'm not sure what kind of durability you are really looking for there.

[Moynihan]

Considering the three fairly fresh sacs that I've had fail in vintage pens (two lever-fillers and one button-filler), I'm not sure what kind of durability you are really looking for there.

 

Sorry, good point. Guess I meant (as to the vintage), with new sacs for the most part...

[Ernst Bitterman]

I'm with the lever brigade. Apart from one example (from dozens, now) where I can point to how I've messed up, I've never had one go wrong on me after a refit, the capacity is greater than a converter, you have less pen bits floating around the desk during a fill, you can get a really good flush with the filler (vs. having to at least buy an ear-bulb and some amount to dismantling), and it's a cleaner operation to fill one than a converter. As far as checking ink level-- I agree with the morning fill as part of a routine. The risk of failure is further reduced by it being a BRAND NEW PEN, straight from the manufacturer, rather than a long-abused object suffering a refit from a semi-skilled lump such as myself. I do not call those who shy away from self-filling pens wicked or foolish, as it's a simple matter of personal choice, but having grown up on cartridges I have a great deal of trouble seeing why anyone would prefer a C/C pen over almost any self-filler (obviously, the blow-filler is a bit goofy).

[tonybelding]

having grown up on cartridges I have a great deal of trouble seeing why anyone would prefer a C/C pen over almost any self-filler (obviously, the blow-filler is a bit goofy).

 

Technically, a C/C pen with its converter installed is a self-filler.

 

I'm actually surprised by all the negative feelings towards converters. Negative towards cartridges, I can understand. I can't abide them myself, for a number of reasons. But a C/C pen with a good quality piston-type converter is, effectively. . . a piston-filler, isn't it?

 

So, you may say it's a nuisance to open up the pen to fill it, but I find that's minor in comparison with the need to locate a tissue and wipe ink off the nib and section, which is common to most pens that fill from a bottle anyhow. (I do like Snorkels, BTW!)