Piston fill vs. C/C

[greencobra]

As I gain more experience, I'm now thinking about the filling system. I think I prefer the piston fills over the C/C's and the reason why is my few pistons (Pelikan Shanghai and a couple of MB 146's) seem way more reliable than the rest of my stuff that's run by converters. By more reliable I mean they don't skip or hesitate from a cold start so of course I think these are better pens because of the piston method. Is this way of thinking on my part something I'm imagining or does anyone else pick up on this.

 

I'm in the process of ordering a couple of nice pens with the piston fill but they are available with C/C too at a bit of a savings.

 

I value you guys opinions, well most of ya anyway , so let me know what you think on this and why, if you would.

 

In prior discussions regarding this topic that came up in a search, no one really explained why they were partial to a certain filling system, so....

[pvdiamon]

My impression has been that there tons of Pelikan afficionados out there. Not owning a Pelikan, I've found my other piston pens can be hard to clean since you can't remove the nib. Hence my preference for converters. If I ever spring for a Pelikan, I may change my mind. I know my Wality piston is awful to clean--feels like billions of fill/empty cycles with water. I also like rotating different pens, and don't need the larger ink capacity of the piston pens.

 

John

[bbrovold]

I guess I prefer piston or any sac fill over a convertor. I have actually had a convertor come loose in the barrel and rattle around.

[shahrincamille]

And if the convertor is not tightly attached to the section, the pen will leak at the nib/feed end everytime you uncap, as what happened to my Sailor.

 

 

On top of that if your convertor has a narrow neck, the problem of ink 'starvation' might possibly arise.....

[petra]

I prefer converters because it's easy to check ink supply, they're easy to clean and I like being able to switch to cartridges for travelling. They're also easy and cheap to replace if anything goes wrong. When things go wrong with piston fillers, I have to send them out for repair.

 

I've had ink starvation & picky "start-ups" with piston fillers as well as converters. On the other hand, I almost never have problems with cartridges, and I'd like to know why...

 

One thing is for sure, I will never buy another pen that does not allow me to see the ink supply clearly and easily -- no sacks, no touchdowns, no piston fillers without ink view windows.

 

I'd say that basing decisions on your own experiences & preferences is a good way to go.

 

Petra

[zyg]

Yes, some converters may come loose.

But I have two pens that have screw-on converters - Visconti van Gogh and Dunhill Sidecar.

Are there any other pens with screw-on converters?

zyg

[FrankB]

I just responded to the thread about my favorite piston fill pens. I reiterate what I said there that I focus on the nib and the writing qualities of a pen, and I have just accepted the filling mechanism as it is. Piston fill pens have the advantage that they do hold a lot of ink. I like that feature from time-to-time. But I also like converters for their ease of cleaning, and the ability to change ink colors easily. I have personally found converters to be safe and reliable.

 

I am in the process of looking at a couple of Stipula Etrurias. I love the O/S Etrurias, and I have several, a couple are piston fillers, but most are c/c. There are some new colors available, and those pens come in either piston fill or c/c versions. I have to save up for the pens so I have time to give careful consideration to the fill mechanisms I want. I will probably choose the c/c versions for convenience, as I said above. But I might get at least one with a piston for the sake of variety.

[goodyear]

QUOTE (zyg @ Feb 17 2007, 07:27 PM)

Are there any other pens with screw-on converters?

Some Cross pens - I know the Century II for sure as I have a couple.

[MYU]

QUOTE (pvdiamon @ Feb 17 2007, 12:18 PM)

I've found my other piston pens can be hard to clean since you can't remove the nib.

In the case of Lamy pens (2000, 27, 99, plus others I haven't seen like the Studio), you can easily remove the nib section for cleaning of the ink chamber. In my book, Lamy makes one of the most reliable piston mechanisms.

 

But I guess the CC vs. Piston design all depends on the pen. Some ink feeders don't need a lot of pressure behind them, thus the more slender ink converters work just fine. But I would have to imagine that in the long run, piston fillers on average will perform better than your average CC.

 

The drawback of a piston is that eventually you will have to replace seals. Plus, if by chance there's enough stress to cause a crack in the screw, forget it--you've got an expensive proposition before you. With a CC, you're out $4 to $15, depending on the brand.

Edited February 17, 2007 by MYU

[georges zaslavsky]

I never had real probs with my sheaffer and my duofold who both use converters, but I do prefer a piston filling or vacumatic system.

[ConnallMac]

I have to vote for the piston fillers as well. They tend to hold a huge amount of ink, and they are very reliable in my experience. I find that converters, while preferable to cartridges, don't hold as much ink, and they don't flow as well as piston filled pens.

 

--J. Haney

[Phthalo]

Piston-fillers tend to be in better-made pens - but that doesn't mean they are better overall.

 

Piston-converters are great. Squeeze-converters not so much, as it can be hard to fill them to their total capacity, and check the ink level. Cartridges are easy to clean and easy to refill.

 

I have about ~70 pens, I can think of two models (4 pens in total, cheap and cheerful squeeze-converter and cartridge driven) which have skipped, or failed to start.

 

Otherwise, I've never had a converter come loose or experienced ink starvation or had flow issues. Luck? Good housekeeping? Who knows? As a result though, I could care less about the filling mechanism – as long as it works, it’s all good.

[Mocksy]

As a person who almost exclusively uses ink from bottles, I don't like the fact that almost all modern pens have their designs comprimised so they can use cartridges and have to be "adapted" to fill from the bottle.

 

So I don't really have a preference for filling mechanisms, I just wish that more new pens were designed without the comprimise of a cartridge system.

[amadeus06]

I usually rather have a piston fill pen over a Converter. All my pens are converter for the exeptions of an Omas and a Pelikan.

 

I usually run out of ink faster on my converter pens, and it's not only due to the fact that my piston fill pens have more ink capacity but also because I always seem to get and air bubble when ever i fill up with a converter. this usually takes up a good fifth of the total capacity which i always have trouble filling.

 

I especially have trouble with my namiki converter. I never seem to draw enough ink. Sometimes i feel i filled it just right and i'm surprised a day later when it just runs out. This problem is caused by the nib covering 70% of the visible converter, so i never know if got an air bubble or what. I tried fixing this by using one of their optional squeeze bladder converter but that did not help reduce the problem. Now, i succumbed to using Cartridges on my retractable fp, which i'm not very happy about because they get expensive having to continually buy them, i rather just use my bottled inks.

[Kelly G]

I prefer Piston fillers. They hold more ink and are more reliable, in my experience. I have six Pelikan piston fillers and all are good pens. My Lamy 2000 is equally good. I prefer lever fillers, vacumatics, aerometrics, TD's and vac fillers to c/c pens. Generally, any vintage filling system is my preference.

[rattybad1]

I like converters because they're removable and can be more easily replaced if something goes wrong with them—i.e., you just buy a new one, no need to send it out for repair and have a long wait in store.

[alvarez57]

QUOTE (zyg @ Feb 17 2007, 07:27 PM)

Yes, some converters may come loose. But I have two pens that have screw-on converters - Visconti van Gogh and Dunhill Sidecar. Are there any other pens with screw-on converters? zyg

Delta pens.

 

I tend to prefer the piston system in spite of some of the cons. I am using Noodler's Eel ink which supposedly is a "lubricating ink" . The only problem is that is not as saturated as I would like it to be, but it has smoothened the piston in one of my Omas . Converters should solve the problem of using different inks instead of the limited colors available in cartridges...but somehow I hate converters , but if I have to use them , I do.

 

http://www.swisherpens.com/catalog/noodler...ain-pen-ink.htm

Edited February 18, 2007 by alvarez57

[greencobra]

I guess in the original post I really intended to mean my piston pens seemed to work better than the cartridge FP's. The C/C's seem to be fickle...they skip, hesitate and all that good stuff whereas the piston fills are a joy. I was wondering if anyone else felt that way.

 

Of course there are exceptions...Omas & Stipula come to mind as nearly perfect with their converter feeds.

[fjf]

I used to say ...piston always. But I just got a Tibaldi iride, sort of a vacumatic, and I like it. Holds a lot of ink, beautiful pen, ink window, very good flow...I am in love with this one.

[DennisU]

Until a few months ago, I was perfectly content using Watermans with Florida Blue cartridges. However, now that I've gotten indoctrinated into the FPN world with custom nibs and custom mixed inks, I am only using converters. I also have several Pelikan piston fillers and one Montblanc 146.

 

I have not noticed any difference in performance based on whether or not it is piston filled. Both types work fine for me, at least over the few months since I've switched away from cartridges.

 

I must admit that when I am in my ink-mixing mode, I will only use the cartridge/converter pens, just for the ease of cleaning. Altho it is easy to remove the nib from the Pelikans, I find cleaning out those nibs to change colors to be tough.