Dating Montblanc 146 (Legrand)

[AcLondon]

Thanks for that quick and helpful response!

[sansenri]

I'm having another go at interpreting the information on my 146

 

The ring on the cap says Meisterstuck 146

the length of the pen when capped is 14.2 cm

(both mean 73-94)

 

nib: monotone 14K so 75-90

feed: ebonite split feed 75-90

ink window: grey solid 78-90 (this narrows it down to 78-90, and still valid even in case the nib had been changed)

piston: black plastic! 75-84 (this would narrow it further down to 78-84)

engraving on clip: Germany, before 80 (this would narrow it down to 78-80)

 

collar: it looks like a trumpet collar which should be from 85 onward...

but is it in fact? any comments useful...

 

[Michael R.]

The solid grey ink window is found on early 1970s pens as well. 
 

Only very few pens from the 1960s show the blue ink window but have the straight section without the rim.

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[sansenri]

that would be in contrast with the table here, in which the grey windows starts not before 78.

At any rate this would not change the lower limit too much because in any case nib, feed and piston all start from 75,

at worst the range would widen to 75-80.

 

My problem here is the collar.

 

the clip with Germany on it (not W-Germany) is only found until 80 (if I go by what the table says) but the trumpet collar only starts from 85!
That is why I am wondering whether mine is a trumpet collar or not (or the table is incorrect...)

 

 

 

[como]

The fun and/or frustrating thing of dating a Montblanc, which sometimes is made even more difficult by sellers knowingly or unknowingly having swapped parts around.🤔

[sansenri]

On 3/5/2021 at 11:26 PM, JCC123 said:

So how do we get the author to update the spreadsheet to reflect this new information? We're trying to have the most accurate spreadsheet are we not?

unfortunately one exception does not make a rule...

we need larger statistics, to change the table...

it could even be my misinterpretation of the data

 

[sansenri]

5 hours ago, como said:

The fun and/or frustrating thing of dating a Montblanc, which sometimes is made even more difficult by sellers knowingly or unknowingly having swapped parts around.🤔

yes, you're right como.

the thing puzzling me here is that as far as I know this 146 was probably bought in the late 70s early 80s and kept in a collection by the single owner.

 

 

The black plastic piston is indicative in my opinion, should this fail a new brass one would likely be installed so I'm rather confident on 75-84.

 

The grey ink window also, you cannot swap this so easily, you'd likely have to change the whole pen, so 78-90 (assuming the table is correct, and that the grey ink window does not start earlier) I'd be confident too.

That means 78-84.

 

 

Engraving on clip also matches, Germany, so before 80, that means 78-80.

 

146 on the cap ring

 

The collar is the odd one out.

 

Would you say that this is a trumpet collar?

 

Nib and feed match the 75-90 period

 

[Michael R.]

From my observations, catalogues and other documents I cannot agree with everything stated in the original table here.

 

Also I do not expect a pen company like Montblanc to strictly change "model years" like some car makes do. While there most likely is a set - mostly unknown - date when new parts became available, older stock still might have been used for production; resulting in a mix of parts from a contemporary point of view. Then selling date is a totally different story.

 

To make things more complicating I have seen a couple of modern pens with parts obviously being mismatched in the store by accident. 

 

Repair and restoration work add other uncertainty.

 

If you are really interested in putting some time frame on certain Montblanc 146 features one must distinguish more details first which have not been mentioned here in the original chart. While there was put a lot of effort in it obviously, unfortunately it adds a lot of confusion by suggesting facts which are not accurate.

 

Also I don't completely trust original catalogue photography. Sometimes it may be the most accurate documentation we have, but there is no guarantee that they really used the exact temporarily correct, newest models for marketing photography.

To start with I suggest to take a look at the following documents of which Tom Westerich was generous enough to share them with the pen community via his Goldfink blog. Many valuable information comes from there.

 

I try doing the same with some of my catalogues via my flickr.

 

43853257144_c692f7cac0_o by pensninks, auf Flickr

 

Using those sources I will claim the following for your consideration:

 

• a Montblanc document signed in 1973 suggests that repair of the older 146 celluloid models is not possible anymore with celluloid parts. Instead replacement parts in resin are supplied with a list of what parts could be re-used from broken celluloid models during repair. Pens repaired this way with new parts might have resulted in the blue ink window transitional models. This gives a plausible explanation why those pens have not been seen in any public catalogues and share some parts with the older celluloid models. The design follows some features seen on other Montblanc pens from the 1960s. So maybe it was never sold like this and most likely those are repair pens with replacement parts from Montblanc.
  
  Also blue ink window 146 pens never had a section rim.
  
  43853252524_4f79b81711_o by pensninks, auf Flickr
   
• the grey ink window pens were the first regular production resin models after the celluloid models were discontinued.
  
  A 1973 price list already shows the resin 146 with the straight section rim (drawing only) so it was available in 1973 already.
  
  P1440894 by pensninks, auf Flickr
  
  My 1975 catalogue still shows the straight rim 14C 146 with grey ink window; so does my 1979 catalogue. The 1982 one still shows the straight rim.
  
  
  montblanc-19755_42086596275_o by pensninks, auf Flickr
  montblanc-4_42269670004_o by pensninks, auf Flickr
  montblanc1_42988156231_o by pensninks, auf Flickr
  1 by pensninks, auf Flickr
   
• early versions of the grey ink window resin pens have a singlepiece barrel while later models have a two-piece construction as shown on my picture below:
  
  P1440868 by pensninks, auf Flickr
  
  At least two versions of the grey ink window two-pieces barrels are known to me. One with and the later version without a securing against turning the section during assembly. Tom's document suggest adding the securing against turning was added during 1987.

 

So this gives some additional designs to differentiate production periods of those parts:

 

grey ink window pens:

• single-piece barrel <> two-pieces barrel
• two-pieces barrel w/o securing <> two-pieces barrel with securing (> 1987)
• 14C/18C <> 14K/18K nibs (> 1982)
  P1440879 by pensninks, auf Flickr
• straight section rim (still in use c. 1982) <> angled section rim (trumpet section) 
  P1440871 by pensninks, auf Flickr
• ebonite feed (in use with straight & angled section rim) <> first generation plastic feed (only with angled section rim & 14K/18K nibs)
  P1440881 by pensninks, auf Flickr

 

I look forward to hear more suggestion based on documentation or your observations.

 

Cheers

 

Michael

 

 

[como]

@Michael R.Excellent illustrations, very detailed and compelling! Thank you so much for sharing this.

@sansenriI believe you pen is a 70s MB with a replacement barrel (of blue ink window). If it’s a single owner pen, most likely MB used it at the production level or for repair. They don’t like wasting parts 🙂 I‘ve only seen blue windows on earlier pens of 50s or so.

[AcLondon]

Can someone show me exactly what a blue ink-window looks like out of the pen?  I've  seen three (at least) blue-ink windows that have rims but look to be nothing like grey windows with ink stains.  They weren't my pens so I couldn't take them apart. If you believe as a matter of dogma that blue-ink windows must have rimless ends then you will always offer the ink-stained (or other) interpretation. But I'm keeping an open mind. For now.

[Michael R.]

@como Thank you - you are welcome. I really need to put together a more complete chart but I'm still searching for a suitable format.

 

The pen shown by @sansenri is not a blue ink window pen. The blue ink window barrel does not fit the shown section rim/nib unit. It's ink residues in a grey ink window pen. Cannot tell if it is a two-piece barrel for sure but I'd assume.

With the 14K nib and trumpet section but ebonite feed it is roughly 1980s (not 70s but also not 90s). You could check if it already has thee securing against turning (> 1987) or not (< 1987). With trumpet section > 1982.

So this could put your pen either 1982-87 or 87-92 according to my observations.

Regarding the clips:

Most agree that the order was:

 

• no engraving
• Made in Germany
• Germany
• W.-Germany
• W.-Germany & serial number (laser)
• Germany & serial number (laser)

 

Usually I don't pay that much attention to the clip as it is one of the easiest parts to replace/interchange and maybe older parts were not thrown away at the factory but still used for assembly even newer clips were used at the same time already.

 

Also check the ball under the clip:

P1440882 by pensninks, auf Flickr

Cheers

 

Michael

[Michael R.]

@AcLondon: It's shown in my pictures above your post.

It is unmistakably blue. Not blue-gray. When you see it you know. Just like on other 1960s Montblanc pens.

[como]

@Michael R.@sansenriSorry I didn’t pay attention. Michael is right that this pen does not have a blue window as the blue windows of 1950s. The blue windows as we know them are very indigo blue throughout. In the photo where you can see the piston seal, it’s not very blue any more.

[sansenri]

1 hour ago, como said:

@Michael R.Excellent illustrations, very detailed and compelling! Thank you so much for sharing this.

@sansenriI believe you pen is a 70s MB with a replacement barrel (of blue ink window). If it’s a single owner pen, most likely MB used it at the production level or for repair. They don’t like wasting parts 🙂 I‘ve only seen blue windows on earlier pens of 50s or so.

 

no, I was afraid my photo would be misinterpreted but the ink window as stated is clear grey... that's just some Royal blue in there...

 

[sansenri]

7 hours ago, Michael R. said:

@como Thank you - you are welcome. I really need to put together a more complete chart but I'm still searching for a suitable format.

 

The pen shown by @sansenri is not a blue ink window pen. The blue ink window barrel does not fit the shown section rim/nib unit. It's ink residues in a grey ink window pen. Cannot tell if it is a two-piece barrel for sure but I'd assume.

With the 14K nib and trumpet section but ebonite feed it is roughly 1980s (not 70s but also not 90s). You could check if it already has thee securing against turning (> 1987) or not (< 1987). With trumpet section > 1982.

So this could put your pen either 1982-87 or 87-92 according to my observations.

Regarding the clips:

Most agree that the order was:

 

• no engraving
• Made in Germany
• Germany
• W.-Germany
• W.-Germany & serial number (laser)
• Germany & serial number (laser)

 

Usually I don't pay that much attention to the clip as it is one of the easiest parts to replace/interchange and maybe older parts were not thrown away at the factory but still used for assembly even newer clips were used at the same time already.

 

Also check the ball under the clip:

P1440882 by pensninks, auf Flickr

Cheers

 

Michael

Thank you for the extensive wealth of information.
It would be great to see a refined chart, when you are ready.

As I have stated the window is grey on my 146 and the barrel is two-piece, I checked with a lens.

The section rim looks trumpet shaped to me.

Would that match with the rest of the pen, in particular with the clip that just says Germany?

What you say is understandable and I had already given myself the same explanation, even if the pen was early 80s, if MB still had a gold plated clip with Germany available in stock, they would certainly not have thrown it away...

As far as securing against turning, I'm not sure what that is exactly?

ah yes read your post more carefully

"One with and the later version without a securing against turning the section during assembly. Tom's document suggest adding the securing against turning was added during 1987."

would I be able to see that without disassembly (which I don't want to do...)?

The black plastic piston would in any case suggest my 146 is earlier than 87.

 

(I've just added the Germany engraving on the clip - no other markings on the clip -  in the pictures above)

 

Oh, and I've just checked the ball under the clip, it's like the one on your picture, closer to who is looking, more roundish.

 

[como]

19 hours ago, sansenri said:

 

no, I was afraid my photo would be misinterpreted but the ink window as stated is clear grey... that's just some Royal blue in there...

 

Haha, Royal Blue is not too difficult to clean out. Nothing looks too out of place otherwise. Do you like how it writes?

[sansenri]

7 hours ago, como said:

Haha, Royal Blue is not too difficult to clean out. Nothing looks too out of place otherwise. Do you like how it writes?

very easy, even more so because I put that ink in there to test the pen!

 

The nib is no doubt an F, and initially it was rather scratchy too. Or at least it was scratchy for the way I hold my pen (rather straight on the horizontal plane and at a very typical 45 degree angle... due to a lot of exercise in elementary school!).

If I twisted the pen sideways slightly the scratchiness was reduced but not completely. 

On inspection it was not difficult to see that the tines were misaligned. You can even spot that in my photos because I took them before aligning the nib.

So I re-aligned them, it only took me a few attempts as one of the tines was clearly higher than the other.

Once I got them level again the nib was still scratchy...

I checked very carefully but they were correctly aligned, so I have assumed that whoever has used the pen before me was writing with misaligned tines, and had not noted and went on for some time like that, actually shaping the nib in that position...

 

I hope this will not be seen as blasphemy on a MB nib but I set out to micromesh the tip...

OK, easy does it with 12000 micromesh, I got rid of the scratchiness.

The 14k nib is now smooth and really nice, with some slight flex (which I don't like to force anyway).

Very slight hard start every now and then but not frequent, probably needs to get used to my hand now...

 

[Michael R.]

On 3/14/2021 at 3:56 PM, sansenri said:

 

"One with and the later version without a securing against turning the section during assembly. Tom's document suggest adding the securing against turning was added during 1987."

would I be able to see that without disassembly (which I don't want to do...)?

The black plastic piston would in any case suggest my 146 is earlier than 87.

 

 

No, only when taking the pen apart.

 

For clips and imprints/engravings you could check:

 

http://blog.livedoor.jp/whitestar_ftl/部位推移年表201708.08_001.jpg

 

This is the most extensive chart I know. It's for the 149 but it appears plausible that certain design elements have been changed during the same time frame on the 146.

 

However I'm not sure that all dates have been proved already.

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[sansenri]

do you know whether the 146 switch from plastic to brass piston took place in a specific moment or covered a period?

That would seem rather important to define the year upper limit (later date) of this pen.

The table proposed by the OP seems rather sure that from 85 on all pistons were brass.

 

The table you referred to also says middle of the 80s.

[Michael R.]

Aren't 149 piston units (the threaded connectors) identical to the ones used in 146 pens (only difference being the little metal ring)?

So most likely changes occurred at a similar time.

 

Cheers

 

Michael