Piston Or Vac Fill

[Denver]

I have recently acquired more than a dozen vacuum fillers and definitely prefer the piston fill because it is simpler, more reliable and easier to clean and service. In my opinion, the vacuum fill frenzy is just a fad.

[Ste_S]

On 5/10/2021 at 8:30 PM, Denver said:

I have recently acquired more than a dozen vacuum fillers and definitely prefer the piston fill because it is simpler, more reliable and easier to clean and service. In my opinion, the vacuum fill frenzy is just a fad.

 

It's not just about simplicity, reliability and the ability to clean; otherwise everyone would prefer cartridge/converters. Part of it is the novelty and the experience when filling the pen.

[A Smug Dill]

12 minutes ago, Ste_S said:

Part of it is the novelty

 

Exactly why I concur with @Denver above that it's a fad.

 

12 minutes ago, Ste_S said:

and the experience when filling the pen.

 

OK, and experience — and the evaluation of it — is subjective; there is nothing objectively, technically or ergonomically superior, or (inherently or universally) more rewarding psychologically, about manually pushing a piston down (while the nib, feed, and front of the gripping section is submerged in ink) against resistance until it ‘pops’ and yields, than rotating a piston knob, or mindfully eyedropper-filling a barrel standing on its end for that matter, even if the individual user particularly desires ink reservoir capacity greater than that of a long ink cartridge outside of the consideration of the filling experience.

 

I understand fans of whatever experiences (Bungee jumping, anyone?) and phenomena rejoice in such, and probably delight in hearing other individuals enjoying same, but that's not a reason to be one-eyed about “talking it up” and evangelise, as if fellows in the other camp(s) just don't know what they're talking about and/or missing out on, and that the latter's preferences are simply misguided and should not be championed and evangelised in kind.

 

Personally, as someone who owns and used multiple units of each of Pali 013, PenBBS 355 and Wing Sung 699 fountain pen models, I much prefer the filling experience of piston-filler pens — from the humble (but effective and great-value-for-money) Wing Sung 3008 and PenBBS 494 to the Pelikan M600 and Aurora Optima — for the fine control. In fact, these days I just fill the reservoirs on my vacuum-filler pens with an eyedropper or syringe, as if they were eyedropper-filled pens; but then I prefer the likes of Opus 88 pen models for honest-to-goodness eyedropper-fillers.

[Ste_S]

6 minutes ago, A Smug Dill said:

I understand fans of whatever experiences (Bungee jumping, anyone?) and phenomena rejoice in such, and probably delight in hearing other individuals enjoying same, but that's not a reason to be one-eyed about “talking it up” and evangelise, as if fellows in the other camp(s) just don't know what they're talking about and/or missing out on, and that the latter's preferences are simply misguided and should not be championed and evangelised in kind.

 

That kinda amused me, when we're all doing that anyway when talking about Fountain Pens.

[A Smug Dill]

1 hour ago, Ste_S said:

That kinda amused me, when we're all doing that anyway when talking about Fountain Pens.

 

That's just the thing. We're all in the same hobby here, and perhaps that sets us apart from other consumers who may prefer to be writing with ballpoint and/or rollerball pens; but within the community that is ‘us’, there are factions — and damn well should be — who don't agree on tastes, preferences, and what is technically superior. Isn't that what we're all here to discuss among ourselves, instead of just gathering to back-slap each other and talk about how those who don't use fountain pens are misguided and/or don't know on what they're missing out?

 

Edit:

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. Saying it's “the experience of filling the pen” doesn't tell others what specifically it is that makes that experience good for you, so that other readers/members/hobbyists can decide whether they feel the same about that aspect. If someone said demonstrators that use the barrel cavity directly as the ink reservoir are wonderful, and/or superior to opaque barrels, because seeing ink slosh around against the see-through walls really get their personal juices flowing, then others can decide whether they feel the same way to that phenomenon or stimulus. Simply saying, “demonstrators are great because of the visual” is non-specific; not all demonstrators use the barrel cavity directly as the ink reservoir, and the reservoir is not always so full of ink that there's much sloshing around to be observed, etc. and others cannot pinpoint what they're supposed to relate to, or on what they're supposedly missing out if they don't use/prefer demonstrator pens.

[ASCIIaardvark]

I have a bunch of both.

 

Why I love piston fillers

• they're more common, so more pens with this filling system to choose from
• easy to fill from sample-vials without making a mess. The first time I used a Visconti traveling inkwell with a plunger-filler, I didn't hold on and the air-pressure launched the inkwell across my desk 😅
• no "ink shut off valve" - I remove gaskets in plunger fillers where I can, but am afraid to try disassembling my Visconti to make a single ink chamber. Some folks love the ink shut-off, but I find it a hassle.

Why I love plunger fillers

• holds more ink
• refilling looks cooler (IMHO), the way ink keeps filling after I stoped doing anything
• in demonstrators, having just the plunger-shaft visable is a nice cohesive design. The piston mechanism is interesting, but I don't like the aesthetics of it taking up 50% of my barrel space -- so for piston-fillers, I prefer a non-demonstrator with an ink window toward the grip-section.

 

The detachable syringe filler that Conid uses seems like the best of both worlds. Except I don't have the budget for a Conid and both my PenBBS bulk-fillers broke (at least one of those was probably my fault).

 

I like collecting filling systems -- they've all got their pluses & minuses, and the engineering is fun. 

[JakobS]

On 5/10/2021 at 3:30 PM, Denver said:

I have recently acquired more than a dozen vacuum fillers and definitely prefer the piston fill because it is simpler, more reliable and easier to clean and service. In my opinion, the vacuum fill frenzy is just a fad.

 

Fads tend to linger in the FP world quite awhile if you think about it...cough cough...replying to a post originally made in 2012. 😀.  2012 was quite the fad year actually, that year sheen inks exploded onto the scene with Diamine Majestic Blue.....and have only quadrupled in popularity.....

[Karmachanic]

On 5/10/2021 at 8:30 PM, Denver said:

the vacuum fill frenzy is just a fad.

 

Onoto was making them in 1905. Then there's that Parker Vacuumatic thing from the early 1930's. Quite the fad! 😆

[chemgeek]

I like both piston and vac fillers. Vac fillers are quicker to fill, and easier to clean out than piston fillers. And the feed seal of a vac filler is a boon for air travel. On the other hand, vac fillers require you to remember to loosen the end cap to write more than a short note.

[silverlifter]

5 minutes ago, chemgeek said:

vac fillers require you to remember to loosen the end cap to write more than a short note.

 

Many vac-fillers don't work that way. Sheaffers, for example. 

[A Smug Dill]

3 hours ago, chemgeek said:

Vac fillers are quicker to fill, and easier to clean out than piston fillers.

 

I haven't found that to be the case regarding cleaning, comparing the PenBBS 355 with a PenBBS 309 or PenBBS 494. Or comparing a Wing Sung 3013 with a Wing Sung 3008, for that matter. (I'm talking about full disassembly and reassembly here to completely remove stubborn ‘stains’ that take soaking in pen flush or ammonia solution, scrubbing with a cotton-tipped swab, etc.)

 

4 hours ago, JakobS said:

Fads tend to linger in the FP world quite awhile if you think about it...

 

True!

[Denver]

I just finished disassembling, cleaning and lubing my PENBBS 268 and was amazed to find 20 separate pieces, and I'm not counting anything that is epoxied together as more than a single part. That would give this vac filler more than double the parts of most piston fillers. Like most mechanical devices, the reliability of a machine is inversely proportional to the number of parts. Hence the order of reliability would be ink dropper > piston filler > converter > vacuum filler. If they get the bugs worked out, a magnet filler like the PENBBS 487 with fewer moving parts could someday prove to be even more reliable than a piston filler.

[Denver]

On 5/12/2021 at 3:00 PM, chemgeek said:

I like both piston and vac fillers. Vac fillers are quicker to fill, and easier to clean out than piston fillers. And the feed seal of a vac filler is a boon for air travel. On the other hand, vac fillers require you to remember to loosen the end cap to write more than a short note.

Loosening the cap and pulling the piston back 5mm was also something I was also doing to keep my PENBBS 268 from running out of ink after a short writing session, and I think I now know why. I also had hard starts and initially cleaned the pens exhibiting this problem, adjusted the tines and changed the feed, but these measures didn't help. Two years ago PENBBS pens had a nut on the top of the piston rod that extended all the way up into the end cap (see attached photo). My newer 268 and 456 pens stopped short, and full disassembly revealed a machining defect on all my PENBBS vac fillers acquired in 2021. If you look at the top of the piston rod, you may find a shoulder that keeps the piston rod from extending all the way into the end cap. You may also note on inspection of an empty pen that the conical portion of the piston fully blocks the internal opening of the section like a cork in a bottle. Further, the larger rubber part of the piston is pushed against the face of the section and is even deformed by the pressure when the end cap is tightened. Combined these two issues isolate ink in the section available to the feed and limit the amount of ink that can be used when writing . . . unless, you loosen the cap and pull back on the piston rod to position the piston closer to the middle of the widened area in the ink chamber. I have the ability to re-machine the piston rod and remove the shoulder so that the nut on the end of the rod can reach the top of the cap. This fixes the problem with new 268 and 456 vac fillers from PENBBS.

[sirgilbert357]

I like both filling systems. I have more piston fillers than vacs, but I largely buy pens for their expected writing characteristics (either ergonomic, or the performance of the nib on paper -- or both) and their appearance. The appearance is huge...this is the first criteria, honestly. If I don't like the look of the pen, I won't buy it. After that, I need to have a reasonable belief the nib will be to my liking. The filling system is usually just a side note or of no concern at all. I didn't always use to feel this way though...

 

It is quite rare that I find a pen I like and want in two different filling systems and have the option to choose one or the other, but this happened recently with the Wing Sung 699. It is available either as a piston filler or as a vac filler. I just ordered one last week so I could put a Nemosine nib into it. I chose the vac filler version. I largely just want to compare it with my Pilot Custom 823. Getting the vac filled version seems to be the most "apples to apples" way to compare it (for weight and balance).