Interest In Bulk Filler Convertor?

[fountainbel]

Hi all,

Given the positive reactions on the CONID/Fountainbel Bulkfiller filling system , Conid is evaluating the possibility in making a standard convertor using this technology.

Aiming to reduce the cost, the convertor will be made using injection mould parts.

This requires however a serious investment in moulds and tools as from the start.

First conservative calculations show a potential convertor ink intake of 1.3 ml - starting from an external diameter of 7.8 mm and a total convertor length of 70 mm

Important question is : in how far there is interest in such a convertor ?

Other questions are :

How to cope with the different cartridge nipples between various brands, ?

Should Conid start from the most standard cartridge and provide convertor transition inserts for other nipples?

Is there affectively already a "standardized" ink cartridge available?

And are pen manufactures actually evolving using a "standard nipple on their pens?

Your input and suggestions are most welcome !

Thanks in advance,

Francis

[hari317]

Francis,

 

One converter to look at is the Pilot Con-70 that already holds a potential 1.0ml source. I have not measured its mechanical dimensions, so I don't know how it compares to your proposed convertor's form factor.

 

Perhaps the "international" converter nipple size is most widely used. however, I think you should start with the widest orifice currently available e.g the pilot size and then supply individual adaptors to adapt to other systems.

 

Best

Hari

 

ETA: the interest level will also depend to a very large extent on the price, what is the approximate target selling price?

Edited October 16, 2012 by hari317

[tmcneil82]

Agree with Hari that it will depend largely on price. Buying a whole pen is an easy justification for many, but laying down a substantial amount on a converter might be a hard sell. Especially when we aren't talking about a very large gain in ink (I know that 1.3 is roughly .6 ml larger than a lot of converters, but I'm referring to the overall ink capacity).

[Oranges and Apples]

I would not purchase a converter costing more than $15 USD and I have no problems with any of the other specifications.

 

And, the international size nipple would help you reach the greatest amount of clients.

[fountainbel]

Thanks a lot for your reactions !

As I've specified, the 1.3 ml is a conservative value, will be more close to 1.5ml.

As for the expected cost, it will be close to $15.00, but surely not higher.

I'm not so familiar with cartridges and convertors, can anyone tell me which FP brand is solely using" standard" converters?

Thanks in advance, Francis

[mirosc]

I would not pay more than $5, maybe $7 for a converter, furthermore: I don't need bigger converters, because I usually don't have to refill them during the day. My concern is that converters tend to wear out and so I'm not willing to spend too much money on an article I will eventually have to throw away.

 

The bulk-filler converter could be interesting if you can find a way of sealing it securely, so that transportation without leaking (outside the pen) is possible. As you are thinking of manufacturing adapters for different standards maybe it could be possible to manufacture a cap, too - even the adapters have to fit perfectly without leaking. For starting I would also recommend the Pilot converter as stated above.

Edited October 16, 2012 by mirosc

[hari317]

 

I'm not so familiar with cartridges and convertors, can anyone tell me which FP brand is solely using" standard" converters?

 

Montblanc

Pelikan

Waterman

Caran D Ache

 

all pens using stock nib-feed housings from JoWo or Bock or Schmidt.

Edited October 16, 2012 by hari317

[fountainbel]

Hi mirosc,

Thanks for your reaction.

Similar to the bulk filler , the convertor will be equipped with an integrated ink shut-off.

This feature allows closing the ink chamber prior to travel, avoiding any blotting risks triggered by temperature and/or air pressure variations.

Given this technology, I expect the cost you specified is unfortunately not within our reach.....

Francis

I would not pay more than $5, maybe $7 for a converter, furthermore: I don't need bigger converters, because I usually don't have to refill them during the day. My concern is that converters tend to wear out and so I'm not willing to spend too much money on an article I will eventually have to throw away.

 

The bulk-filler converter could be interesting if you can find a way of sealing it securely, so that transportation without leaking (outside the pen) is possible. As you are thinking of manufacturing adapters for different standards maybe it could be possible to manufacture a cap, too - even the adapters have to fit perfectly without leaking. For starting I would also recommend the Pilot converter as stated above.

[dgturner]

I find I agree with Hari, start with the widest mouth, and add adapters for the various nipple sizes if a "universal" converter is the goal. Oherwise go for the standard international style.

 

The comments on pricing and durability are valid concerns, I have cheap converters that have outlasted some more expensive ones. If the durability matches the projected durability of your pens, then $15-$25 is reasonable for a universal converter.

[Namo]

From a strictly user point of view, such a convertor, working for standard c/c pen, would be very, very welcome.

[SteveE]

While it may theoretically be a good solution, designing a converter for the largest nipple diameter and supplying adaptors for all the smaller sizes is likely a formula for product failure. Unless I am missing something, the adaptor would have to be a small, high precision part, but made at a very low cost. This is likely to be impractical. Also, the approach of designing to the largest diameter and adapting all the smaller ones puts the largest percentage of your market into the group requiring the use of an adaptor. If these adaptors are not perfect in all ways (size, fit, cost, price, etc.), the largest percentage of your users will quickly become dissatisfied and your sales will decline rapidly.

 

I believe it is a better business model to design the converter for the size having the largest "installed base." Currently this would likely be the standard international converter market. If you design the injection molds with removable inserts, you could at a later date, make an insert for the other lower-volume nipple sizes. Marketing is a game of numbers. You want to address the largest possible portion of the market as soon as you can, in order to amortize your fixed costs over the greater volumes, allowing for lower cost and selling price.

 

Just bear in mind that this has been free advice from a recovering management consultant. This advice is probably worth just what you've paid for it.

 

I do wish you luck, because I would likely need a bunch of these things!

[alc3261]

Interesting.......!!

[NedC]

Definitely, I would like something with the Pilot Con-70's capacity and ease of filling that would fit pens with international standard converters. But, the Con-70 is large and won't fit many of Pilot's pens and with the enormous variety of pens that use the international converter, scores if not hundreds of models from dozens of manufacturers knowing whether the converter would fit any particular pen in advance might deter potential buyers from purchasing a $15.00 converter, especially if it's going into a pen which costs only $20 to $50 in the first place. I usually use the Schmidt K-5, which is also commonly include with higher quality C/C pens as an OEM part, but it's a bit large for some pens that have narrow tapered bodies. Database?

[Essensia]

I would happily pay up to $30 for a converter with guaranteed durability and absolutely consistent flow. Consistent flow is critical. My greatest frustration with converters is when the nib and feed go dry when there's plenty of ink in the converter, and I have to turn the pen over, tap it, etc., to move the air bubble to the back of the converter. Even if you just put a little ball bearing into the chamber. Whatever it takes.

 

Address those two issues in addition to greater ink capacity and and you will have a converter that's worth paying a premium for, in my opinion.

 

[Edited for typo]

Edited October 16, 2012 by Essensia

[Bo Bo Olson]

A Pelikan 200/400 takes @ 1.27mm. A 600-800 1.37.

So 130mm is a good amount.

 

How much does the Pilot take?

Edited October 16, 2012 by Bo Bo Olson

[stuartk]

A bulk filler with interchangeable screw-on front sections sized to fit various nipples would be the way to go. Inserts would be more prone to problems IMO.

 

However, I think that even a screw-on front section might be unacceptably leakage-prone. I would probably be more likely to buy a converter sized for a specific nipple or pen. (The international size would be a good place to start - I'd like to have more ink capacity in my two Bexley pens, for example.)

 

It would be very nice to have a converter with a larger ink capacity for some of the Parker or Waterman pens.

 

Lamy pens are quite popular too, so you'd have a large group of people that might want a better converter.

[Oranges and Apples]

Wow, I looked up which pens take the standard international cartridges and converters and GouletPens.com has a very good list (what a great resource).

 

http://www.gouletpens.com/Articles.asp?ID=404

 

All of the green highlighted take standard international cartridges and converters and the list seems very thorough.

 

The purple highlighted take proprietary cartridges and converters and as you can see is a very limited number. This, of course, does not factor in the number sales each brand has.

 

Good luck on your journey.

[olivier78860]

Dear Francis,

I am not particularly interested in such a converter.

 

Firstly, it looks like it's going to be a complicated mechanism to fit inside a pen. The classic converters might hold less ink, but they are faster to operate.

 

Secondly, I must confess that I am getting tired to wipe off my cartridge pens, everytime I fill the converter, so I'm slowly getting back to using cartridges.

 

Last but not least, your filling system's only drawback is the air bubble that appears after the first filling, which requires a second operation which can be quite messy. With the extra large capacity your pen gives, that's not a big trouble, because it doesn't happen too often.

 

Actually, I would be more prone to validate the approach of Visconti with the "mosquito" filling system, coupled with a converter. This way removes all the risk of getting dirty hands or to have to wipe the section and wasting ink when filling the pen. But this isn't the best idea with a converter, since the converter will eventually get damage from being removed too often from the nipple.

 

All in all, I'm slowly but surely getting back to cartridges instead of converters.

Edited October 16, 2012 by olivier78860

[jar]

Francis:

 

Personally I'd have no interest in yet another converter. The volume issue is unimportant to me, if whatever I use has enough ink to get through one day I'm happy. So far I've never used up even on International cartridge in a single day.

 

The shut off is also a feature I cannot imagine using.

 

Finally, the inner profile of many fountain pen bodies restricts anything wider than the piston grip of a conventional converter from fitting so the practical limit on an ink container will still be about the same as what is available today.

[fountainbel]

Dear Olivier,

Thanks for your input !

Please find my reply to your remarks in your text below.

Best regards, Francis

 

 

Dear Francis,

I am not particularly interested in such a converter.

 

Firstly, it looks like it's going to be a complicated mechanism to fit inside a pen. The classic converters might hold less ink, but they are faster to operate.

The system is surely more complicated, but after making the first drawings we see a 1.5 ml ink intake is within our reach.

Operation is surely somewhat slower, but this is greatly compensated by the ink volume, don't you think?

 

 

Secondly, I must confess that I am getting tired to wipe off my cartridge pens, everytime I fill the converter, so I'm slowly getting back to using cartridges.

 

Last but not least, your filling system's only drawback is the air bubble that appears after the first filling, which requires a second operation which can be quite messy. With the extra large capacity your pen gives, that's not a big trouble, because it doesn't happen too often.

 

As for your remark on the need for removing the air bubble on your bulk filler, we experienced this problem gradually disappears over time.

The air bubble tends to stick on the grease film coming the piston.

So after cleaning your pen a few times with a pen cleaning solution the problem will gradually disappear.

To get rid of the air bubble you can :

1- directly perform a second filling stroke over the bottle - as you do

2-After pushing the rod in the barrel- not yet screwing the filling knob on the barrel - hold the pen horizontally and slowly tilt the pen nib down.

The air bubble will move easily to the back doing so.Only after doing you screw the filling knob on the barrel.

`

Actually, I would be more prone to validate the approach of Visconti with the "mosquito" filling system, coupled with a converter. This way removes all the risk of getting dirty hands or to have to wipe the section and wasting ink when filling the pen. But this isn't the best idea with a converter, since the converter will eventually get damage from being removed too often from the nipple.

Thanks for your suggestion , but CONID will surely not opt for a filling solution on which one needs complementary - loose - parts (easily lost or mislaid and requiring extra rinsing)

All in all, I'm slowly but surely getting back to cartridges instead of converters.