What is on your bench?

[GlenV]

Nice job on the inner cap!  I just did this pen it’s a Servo pen although it has a standard lever instead of the backwards one. Welty pen made by Moore in Boston. I like this one although it is a common style of CBHR pen from the 20’s. 

[InkyProf]

Thanks, Glen, and what a nice Welty! That chasing pattern might be familiar, but it’s for a good reason: it’s really attractive!

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Does anyone know what the standard capacity for a "fat" Sheaffer touchdown is? I just restored one and the water expelled while emptying the pen feels... anemic. I don't have a scale or a graduated cylinder but I tried emptying a full fill of water into a glass and sucking it up with a blunt syringe with measurements on it. I got around 0.85ml into the syringe, maybe a hair less.

 

I was able to shake a bit more water out of the pen that wasn't coming out from just using the touchdown mechanism so I think the true capacity is a bit more, maybe 1ml or a bit more. Does this sound about right? I undercut the sac by maybe 1mm so I could be getting slightly less capacity.

 

Also, I am still amazed at how putting new o-rings into these pens is always either really easy or really difficult. I got it in on the first try on this pen, on others it's taken me as long as 10-15 minutes.

[VacNut]

1 hour ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

Does anyone know what the standard capacity for a "fat" Sheaffer touchdown is? I just restored one and the water expelled while emptying the pen feels... anemic. I don't have a scale or a graduated cylinder but I tried emptying a full fill of water into a glass and sucking it up with a blunt syringe with measurements on it. I got around 0.85ml into the syringe, maybe a hair less.

 

I was able to shake a bit more water out of the pen that wasn't coming out from just using the touchdown mechanism so I think the true capacity is a bit more, maybe 1ml or a bit more. Does this sound about right? I undercut the sac by maybe 1mm so I could be getting slightly less capacity.

 

Also, I am still amazed at how putting new o-rings into these pens is always either really easy or really difficult. I got it in on the first try on this pen, on others it's taken me as long as 10-15 minutes.

It doesn’t seem like the pen is filling completely. Could there be an air leak somewhere when it is being filled?

Is this the repair process:

 

https://vintagepens.com/FAQrepair/Sheaffer_Touchdown_repair.shtml

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

8 hours ago, VacNut said:

It doesn’t seem like the pen is filling completely. Could there be an air leak somewhere when it is being filled?

 

 

Do you know what the expected capacity is? If it's really getting 1ml that seems decent? I wasn't sure if that's the full capacity though.

 

I can't really tell what could be wrong. I replaced the o-ring and sac. I purposefully tried filling the pen with water with the threaded joint in the water to see if any air was getting in and I don't think it is?

 

The only thing I'm not sure about is that sometimes these have a little black spacer (NOT the o-ring) in the blindcap that the screw goes into but I can't tell if this one had it. In my experience a lot of the "fat" touchdown models don't have them. In any case, I tested the suction on my lip and it was very strong so I don't think that's the issue.

[VacNut]

Just doing a quick search I am coming up with 1.6 to 2 ml capacity for a Parker 51 and vac. Less than 1 seems low.

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

17 minutes ago, VacNut said:

Just doing a quick search I am coming up with 1.6 to 2 ml capacity for a Parker 51 and vac. Less than 1 seems low.

 

I thought around 1.6ml is standard for a Parker 51 vac? Never heard of any with a whopping 2ml capacity.

 

Regardless though... it's a different pen with a different filling system. Snorkels hold 0.6-0.7ml from what I could find but the fat Touchdowns use a size 17 sac vs. a size 14 in a Snorkel so it should be a bit more.

 

I found a crack in the cap, kind of sad. This is one of the best medium vintage nibs I've used, very smooth, great flow. The early touchdown pens are made with such low quality plastic. I had another "fat" Touchdown with a Triumph nib that wouldn't work because the barrel shrunk so much the touchdown tube couldn't move up/down at all.

[InkyProf]

11 minutes ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

The early touchdown pens are made with such low quality plastic. I had another "fat" Touchdown with a Triumph nib that wouldn't work because the barrel shrunk so much the touchdown tube couldn't move up/down at all.

Disappointing to hear that. I've been keeping my eyes open for a "fat" Touchdown, but maybe I shouldn't be bothering. Is there a documented change in materials in the transition to the TM, or is this what you've experienced?

 

(Assuming equal sac lengths, shouldn't a 17 hold 121% of a 14, in which case 0.7ml x 1.21 = .847ml? You might be doing pretty well by that standard.)

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

26 minutes ago, InkyProf said:

Disappointing to hear that. I've been keeping my eyes open for a "fat" Touchdown, but maybe I shouldn't be bothering. Is there a documented change in materials in the transition to the TM, or is this what you've experienced?

 

(Assuming equal sac lengths, shouldn't a 17 hold 121% of a 14, in which case 0.7ml x 1.21 = .847ml? You might be doing pretty well by that standard.)

 

I think I was going by what Ron Z told me here (ignore the TM model in the post title, it was a "fat" model, I was confused): 

 His theory (unless it changed in the past two years) is that they used thinner plastic for the fat models than the TM ones, which made them more prone to shrinking.

 

I think I have three "fat" Touchdowns other than this pen. One of them has that shrinkage issue where it is not usable, the other two work fine. I also have a Tuckaway Touchdown which was more or less a model of the "fat" Touchdown, they didn't make them in the skinny variety, and that one is also functional. 

 

I will say the caps most often have distortion. This is the first one I've come across with a crack in it, but they have a metal liner (the threads) that goes up about 1/3 of the way from the bottom of the cap and you can see plastic shrinking above that, it's a little unsightly IMO. I'd recommend getting one of the metal cap models (Sentinel or Crest) since those don't have the issue.

 

IMO, don't let it stop you for going for one, but if you buy it as is make sure that there's a picture of the touchdown tube pulled out (or if you buy it at show, check that the tube moves freely).

 

 

[InkyProf]

2 minutes ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

IMO, don't let it stop you for going for one, but if you buy it as is make sure that there's a picture of the touchdown tube pulled out (or if you buy it at show, check that the tube moves freely).

 

Thanks, that's really helpful. And, yeah, I've been looking for a Sentinel specifically...

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Ah, those are my favorites. One of my dream "user" pens would be a touchdown Sentinel Tuckaway. I am not sure if they exist in that configuration, I think they should? But touchdown Tuckaways are fairly uncommon in any style already.

[FarmBoy]

What is the current question?  
 

perhaps starting new topics for specific issues is warranted?

 

 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

4 minutes ago, FarmBoy said:

What is the current question?  
 

perhaps starting new topics for specific issues is warranted?

 

 

 

Not really an issue, just curious what the expected capacity is for a "fat" Sheaffer Touchdown. I'm not finding much when doing a search since they're a little uncommon. Would it be a bad assumption that they have about the same capacity as a PFM since the sac size is the same?

[FarmBoy]

Sounds like a fair assumption.  None of those Sheaffer's hold much ink and they never fill fully.

 

 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Ah, that's a bummer. These are some of my favorites to restore. Basically foolproof to use too. I guess the only problem this pen has (fingers crossed) is the cracked cap, can't do much about that. It's still usable, just dries out a little bit after a few hours. Will see how it goes overnight.

[Mountain Man]

Here’s a thought about how to test the filling ability of a touchdown.  After installing the sac, and before putting the sac guard on, fill the pen by squeezing the sac.  Compare the amount you get that way with the amount you get when the pen is fully assembled. 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

I am not sure it would give an accurate number because it seems like the touchdown system isn't completely effective. I've done that with lever filler pens and even with those, you can get a better fill squeezing with your fingers than using the lever most of the time.

[VacNut]

The amount of ink seems a bit like an academic exercise for a 80 year old pen. 
The amount of fill depends on the elasticity of the latex, which may change depending on the age of the latex, thickness of the walls, latex formulation , …

I am glad the pen fills. Enjoy using it.

 

[FarmBoy]

5 hours ago, VacNut said:

The amount of ink seems a bit like an academic exercise for a 80 year old pen. 
The amount of fill depends on the elasticity of the latex, which may change depending on the age of the latex, thickness of the walls, latex formulation , …

I am glad the pen fills. Enjoy using it.

 

They never filled well.  Someone should start a thread about Sheaffer Snorkel and PFM and TD filling.

[VacNut]

10 minutes ago, FarmBoy said:

They never filled well.  Someone should start a thread about Sheaffer Snorkel and PFM and TD filling.

To tell people they don’t fill well, buy more Parker Pens?😂😂😂