Jump to content

Is This A Snorkel Fountain Pen?


gammada

Recommended Posts

I just bought what to my eyes appears to be a Snorkel fountain pen, but am not sure what it really is. As of this moment the pen is awaiting to be shipped to me, so I have no way of verifying my suspicion.

 

The seller just stated that the pen was an "Old Sheaffer Canada 14k Nib Suction Fountain Pen", but looking at the Snorkel photo thread on this forum, it looks quite similar in shape and nib. If this is jot the case, can you help me identify the pen and tell me if I got a good deal at $60?

 

Thanks!

post-115758-0-65284400-1539056949.jpg

post-115758-0-59419900-1539056966_thumb.jpg

post-115758-0-25475500-1539056985_thumb.jpg

post-115758-0-95332300-1539057003_thumb.jpg

post-115758-0-28291900-1539057019_thumb.jpg

post-115758-0-86992800-1539057040_thumb.jpg

post-115758-0-27831300-1539057055_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 12
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • gammada

    3

  • Vintage_FPens

    3

  • BaronWulfraed

    3

  • Penman222

    2

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The Snorkel has a thin tube extends through the feed and moves forward when you unscrew the plunger. If there is no such tube, it is perhaps Sheaffer Thin Model (ТМ) Touchdown Pen but not a Snorkel. I don't see this tube in your pen.

post-138052-0-01283600-1539061122_thumb.jpg

Edited by LokiOS

My best regards
Oleg (Loki.OS)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not enough contrast of the feed to tell if a snorkel is there... If not, the odds are good it is a Statesman TM Touchdown (white dot, open nib -- the models above it have a Triumph nib, and the ones below it don't have the white dot).

 

Suction filler is also a bit of a misnomer -- since every self-filling pen relies on suction at some point. The Touchdown filler, in a way, relies upon pressure. Pull the tube up, insert nib into ink (if a snorkel, only the snorkel needs to be in ink), then rapidly/firmly push the tube back into the body. This uses air pressure to compress the sac, when it hits the bottom of the stroke, a vent lets the air out, and the expanding sac draws in the ink.

Edited by BaronWulfraed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not enough contrast of the feed to tell if a snorkel is there...

 

There is no the tube in the feed. Here is the edited image

 

post-138052-0-25106700-1539098874_thumb.jpg

My best regards
Oleg (Loki.OS)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great deal at $60. It is touchdown obviously, but is it a fat TD or a TM TD? The fat ones were made in '49-50 and the TM in '50-51 right before the start of the snorkel line. I have attached a picture of my 1950 Valiant TD TM as an example.

post-30197-0-39855700-1539102928_thumb.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, agree with everyone else -- looks like a Touchdown (although I'm not up on all the different models and sizes of those). And definitely NOT a Snorkel. Even if it was missing the tube, there would still be the hole in the feed for one (saw one like that just the other day when I went antiquing up in Franklin, PA).

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

"It's very nice, but frankly, when I signed that list for a P-51, what I had in mind was a fountain pen."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... is it a fat TD or a TM TD?

If I'm not mistaken, the early Touchdowns (1949-1950) had a Visulated Section. But how it seems to me in this pen the section is not Visulated.

My best regards
Oleg (Loki.OS)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm not mistaken, the early Touchdowns (1949-1950) had a Visulated Section. But how it seems to me in this pen the section is not Visulated.

Great call! They are, as you can maybe see in my picture. Snorkel are not tho...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure my Valiant is a TM as it matches the later Snorkel in diameter (and I even swapped the caps as a test).

 

I had to hold it up to a bright light to reveal that the quarter inch nearest the cap-threads was translucent (think it is ink-stained, and will never go really clear).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great deal at $60. It is touchdown obviously, but is it a fat TD or a TM TD? The fat ones were made in '49-50 and the TM in '50-51 right before the start of the snorkel line. I have attached a picture of my 1950 Valiant TD TM as an example.

 

 

Not sure. It is about the same diameter as my Parker 51 pens. Any idea what could it be?

 

Also, while flushing the pen I came across a tutorial for disassembling the pen and turns out the sac was replaced recently!

 

The pen is in great condition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm not mistaken, the early Touchdowns (1949-1950) had a Visulated Section. But how it seems to me in this pen the section is not Visulated.

Do you refer to the see-thru plastic just below the metal ring?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, while flushing the pen I came across a tutorial for disassembling the pen and turns out the sac was replaced recently!

 

The pen is in great condition.

 

Hope those instructions also told how to re-seal the pen, since an air-leak at the section/body interface will prevent filling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like a wonderful pen. I like touchdowns just as much as snorkels.

Rationalizing pen and ink purchases since 1967.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Most Contributions

    1. amberleadavis
      amberleadavis
      43972
    2. PAKMAN
      PAKMAN
      35351
    3. inkstainedruth
      inkstainedruth
      30441
    4. Ghost Plane
      Ghost Plane
      28220
    5. Bo Bo Olson
      Bo Bo Olson
      27744
  • Upcoming Events

  • Blog Comments

    • inkstainedruth
      Thanks for the info (I only used B&W film and learned to process that).   Boy -- the stuff I learn here!  Just continually astounded at the depth and breadth of knowledge in this community! Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth 
    • Ceilidh
    • Ceilidh
      >Well, I knew people who were photography majors in college, and I'm pretty sure that at least some of them were doing photos in color,<   I'm sure they were, and my answer assumes that. It just wasn't likely to have been Kodachrome.  It would have been the films I referred to as "other color films." (Kodachrome is not a generic term for color film. It is a specific film that produces transparencies, or slides, by a process not used for any other film. There are other color trans
    • inkstainedruth
      @Ceilidh -- Well, I knew people who were photography majors in college, and I'm pretty sure that at least some of them were doing photos in color, not just B&W like I learned to process.  Whether they were doing the processing of the film themselves in one of the darkrooms, or sending their stuff out to be processed commercially?  That I don't actually know, but had always assumed that they were processing their own film. Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth   ETA: And of course
    • jmccarty3
      Kodachrome 25 was the most accurate film for clinical photography and was used by dermatologists everywhere. I got magnificent results with a Nikon F2 and a MicroNikkor 60 mm lens, using a manually calibrated small flash on a bracket. I wish there were a filter called "Kodachrome 25 color balance" on my iPhone camera.
  • Chatbox

    You don't have permission to chat.
    Load More
  • Files






×
×
  • Create New...