Greatest Quantity Of Ink Per Filling Mechanism

[punchy71]

Kind of a newbie question here. Generally speaking, which type of all the different filling mechanisms hold the greatest amount of ink?

 

Thank you

[Shangas]

Eyedropper probably wins out here.

[jar]

On average, long international cartridges, Parker long cartridges and the Sheaffer cartridges.

[777]

Piston fillers for me. They take ink like a c/c filler, but hold about 2-3 times as much...

[FarmBoy]

Eyedropper probably wins out here.

Well a Waterman 20 certainly holds more ink than a doll pen but they are both eyedroppers.

[tonybelding]

Kind of a newbie question here. Generally speaking, which type of all the different filling mechanisms hold the greatest amount of ink?

 

Eyedropper-filled pens hold the most. Although, I'm not sure if that really counts as a filling mechanism. It's more the lack of one.

 

Of self-filling pens, bulb-fillers generally are the champs. The Edison bulb-fillers and the New Postal pens hold a monstrous amount of ink.

[kauloltran]

For the purpose of this discussion, since you're a newbie to fountain pens, I will only include the most popular and widely available filling systems on the more expensive modern pens. Not that many people use eyedropper or the aerometric types. If you're comparing pens of the same sizes, then the plunger system holds the most ink. For small pens, something like a pelikan M400, the built-in piston system holds less ink than a long international cartridge. Larger pens with a built-in piston system can hold more ink than a long cartridge. Here's the order hierarchy:

- Small pens: plunger(not commonly found) > long cartridge > piston > converter > short cartridge

- Larger pens: plunger > piston > long cartridge > converter > short cartridge

[punchy71]

So which of the filling mechanism do the vast majority of fountain pens have then?

[jar]

So which of the filling mechanism do the vast majority of fountain pens have then?

 

In modern pens it will be the cartridge/converter by a very, very, very wide margin.

[punchy71]

Which of the filling types is the oldest then?

[jar]

Which of the filling types is the oldest then?

 

Eyedropper.

[ticoun]

i don't think eyedropper filling could be classified as a "filling system", as it's not a self filler. for self fillers, the greatest capacities would be (in no specific order): vacuum filling, pump fillers (vacumatic, ink-vue, dunn, bulb filler), and piston fillers.

Edited August 6, 2011 by ticoun

[Shangas]

If not eyedropper, then I would think vacumatic. Or a straight-sac filler (Button, lever, crescent for example)

[andybiotic]

i don't think eyedropper filling could be classified as a "filling system", as it's not a self filler.

 

I believe self filler is just one of the filling systems, just because a pen can't fill it self that doesn't mean there is no other system to fill it.

 

In this sense, I think the eyedropper IS a type of filling system, it is a way (thus system) for you to fill a pen with ink, hence "filling system". It may be the simplest and arguably the clumsiest system but a system nonetheless. Most dip pens are the ones don't have a filling system, it has a "inking" system but not "filling". Just my thoughts.

Edited August 7, 2011 by andybiotic

[Hohn]

No pen fills itself. Each requires something of the user to actually do the filling. I think self-filling is a misnomer.

 

Moreover, one system or another need not automatically have a larger or smaller capacity than another. That said, the generalizations mentioned here apply.

 

Because an eyedropper has no self-contained mechanism to draw up ink, there is more space available within the pen body to actually store the ink. No pen mechanism can store as much as if that same pen were designed for eyedropper filling.

 

Convenience has a price.

[rockspyder]

At an average of 2,6ml capacity, Visconti's double reservoir powerfillers probably top the list.

[Ernst Bitterman]

Top Heading: Filling Systems

Next Headings: Self-Filling Non-Self-Filling

 

BUT... the question is about mechanism, which implies a self-filling pen. In this, bulb-fillers are almost indistinguishable from eyedropper pens of the same size-- you lose a little bit at the top of the bulb, and a miniscule amount to the displacement of the breather tube, but that's it. The ones I've had to do with, apart from the miniscule Wahl Bantam, have held 2.5 - 3.5 ml of fluid, while the eyedroppers I've got hold the same range (the biggest, which is not a huge pen, holds 3.6). Parker Vacumatics (the Major) size, mid-range) hold about 1.4 ml, the same as most screw-piston fillers. Sac-based pens of standard size hold 0.9 - 1.2 ml, and the converter average is about 0.8 ml. I have been very busy with a graduated syringe, lately.

 

The follow-up question I have is... so what? The most writing intensive days I've ever had, 25 to 30 pages of notes in unusually gripping university classes, only just emptied a sad little Waterman converter (0.7 ml). Your arm is apt to catch fire if you're writing enough to empty any non-converter pen, and if you're REALLY worried about it, why not get an Esterbrook DipLess (30 ml), or a Sheaffer Desk Well (50ml)? You have to dip at the end of each paragraph, but you're going to be writing for days before you run out of ink.

[rwilsonedn]

Interesting how so many incorrect generalizations persist on this question, even one week after another thread published actual data (thanks, Bo Bo) on measured capacities. Here are some weak generalizations to muddy the water.

The amount of writing you can do with a given volume of ink depends on the nib, flow, ink, and sometimes the paper.

Big pens often hold more ink than small pens, unless they are cartridge/converter fillers.

The large Parker cartridge holds more ink than most piston fillers.

Most converters and non-aerometric squeeze-fillers, in practice, hold less ink than you want them to.

A large eyedropper-filler without an obstruction in the barrel holds more ink than anything except an even larger eyedropper.

The various vacuum fillers once held a lot of ink, and might again if they are restored correctly.

A properly-restored lever-filler may hold more ink than any other self-filler of its size.

Any pen holds enough ink to write for about three days after you are bored and want to swap it out for another pen or ink.

ron

[Bo Bo Olson]

"""Any pen holds enough ink to write for about three days after you are bored and want to swap it out for another pen or ink."""

 

LOL cubed.

 

Other folks did the measuring. I just copy everything of interest...must have 3-4 megs that I forget to re-read. :embarrassed_smile:

 

If you use a Fine nib, along with paper and ink flow...that will keep you writing longer.

 

Always carry two pens.....even if one is a BP....well you'd not want some one jackhammering a fountain pen of yours now would you.

Fill you pen in the morning with your morning cup of coffee.....not with coffee, you are liable to put some ink in the coffee and it will surely stain your lip.

 

Pelikan pen ink capacity

 

Modern 200/400 : piston bore 8.2mm, piston stroke 24.5mm, potential ink volume:1.29 ml

Modern 600 : piston bore 8.2mm, piston stroke 26 mm, potential ink volume:. 1.37 ml

Modern 800 : piston bore 8.2mm, piston stroke 26 mm , potential ink volume: 1.37 ml

Modern1000: piston bore 8.2mm, piston stroke 28 mm , potential ink volume: 1.47 ml

Vintage 400NN : piston bore 9.0 mm, piston stroke 31 mm , potential ink volume: 1.97 ml

 

 

MB Kafka: 0.88

MB Hemingway: 1.26

MB Dumas: 1.26

MB Twain: 1.35

MB Lennon: 1.39

MB Shaw: 1.48

MB 149: 1.60

 

 

This is new to me and another fountain pen Myth down the drain...the next myth that needs to die, is there is a 'norm' when talking nib width.

 

Some one measured gel pens and they too vary madly not being near the size marked. :roflmho:

 

Parker slide converter: 0.60

Standard converter: 0.75

International short: 0.87 (normally have two in a pen)

Sheaffer slim: 1.20

Parker: 1.47

Sheaffer standard: 1.50

International long: 1.66

 

Double reservoir powerfiller Visconti's:

Titanium skeleton: 2.35

Wall street LE: 2.60

 

"""""It would be good to compare fountain pens on the basis of the maximum number of words they can write from a single filling, but any fountain pen nib can be adjusted for stingy or generous ink flow, so the ranking of pens in these terms is meaningless. The smoothness and absorbency of the paper also has a large effect upon the number of words that can be written.

 

During my repair work and testing prior to return, I have monitored ink capacity for a number of pens. This has been done with water fill and the volume quoted is the maximum in ml. that can be extracted from the full pen. Measurements were made with a fine-needled medical syringe graduated in 0.02ml intervals. To facilitate comparison with previously published data on ink capacities, the conversion factor from ml to drops is between 20 and 25, bearing in mind that drop volume is dependent on the surface tension of the ink and on the geometry of the nib.

 

It is regrettable that many modern pens hold so little ink in comparison with their ancestors and thereby compare unfavourably with ball-point rivals in their ability to write for long periods without recharge.

Penpractice.com

Ink Capacities

Back

 

Fountain pen ink capacities

Make

Date

Model

Filler type

Vol. (ml)

Conklin

1933

Nozac Oversize

Syringe

2.00

Conklin

1933

Nozac Standard

Syringe

1.46

Conway Stewart

1938

475

Lever/sac

1.12

Conway Stewart

1951

28

Lever/sac

0.95

Conway Stewart

1938

700

Syringe

1.25

De la Rue

1944

6233/64

Plunger

1.62

De la Rue

1940

Magna 1

Plunger

2.80

De la Rue

1948

Magna 2

Plunger

3.30

Eversharp

1937

Doric Standard

Plunger

2.05

Ford

1933

Magnum

Syringe

7.25

Ford

1933

Short Standard

Syringe

3.36

Goldfink

1970?

0B

Syringe

1.15

Mabie Todd

1935

Blackbird Topfill

Diaphragm

1.78

Mabie Todd

1939

Blackbird Bulbfill

Diaphragm

1.25

Mabie Todd

1935

Visofil V

Button/sac

1.60

Mabie Todd

1937

Visofil VT

Diaphragm

2.35

Mabie Todd

1946

SM100/86

Lever/sac

0.56

Montblanc

1959

22

Syringe

1.15

Montblanc

1950

246

Syringe

1.85

Montblanc

1985

149

Syringe

1.60

Osmia

1933

Supra Progress 196

Diaphragm

2.85

Parker

1928

Lucky Curve Senior

Button/sac

2.10

Parker

1934

Vacumatic Oversize

Diaphragm

3.25

Parker

1935

Vacumatic Standard

Diaphragm

2.70

Parker

1937

Vacumatic Maxima

Diaphragm

2.50

Parker

1952

Maxima

Button/sac

1.45

Parker

1948

51 Vacumatic

Diaphragm

1.22

Parker

1958

51 Aerometric

Pressure bar/sac

1.12

Parker

1975

61 Aerometric

Pressure bar/sac

0.80

Parker

1990

International

Syringe

0.75

Pilot

2006

Custom 823

Plunger

1.55

Sheaffer

1936

Balance 350 Lady

Plunger

1.42

Sheaffer

1938

Balance 1000 Senior

Plunger

2.70

Sheaffer

1945

Tuckaway 875

Plunger

0.76

Sheaffer

1950

Touchdown

Air pressure/sac

0.64

Sheaffer

1960

PFM

Air pressure/sac

0.85

Waterman

1936

Ink vue (Standard ray)

Lever/diaphragm

2.50

Waterman

1936

Ink vue (Lady)

Lever/diaphragm

1.70

Waterman

1937

Ink vue Mk 2

Lever/diaphragm

2.28"""""""""

Edited August 9, 2011 by Bo Bo Olson

[georges zaslavsky]

The sheaffer vac fill, piston filler and eye dropper