What is on your bench?

[Armo]

I have seen those 'hanging J bars' referred to and sold as 'A' bars

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Speaking of breather tubes, I've always been skeptical of the ones in Skylines but I might have to admit I was wrong. I recently restored a Skyline-adjacent pen (one of the many Symphony models) with a breather tube and the capacity was higher than I expected. I got 1.15ml on a size 16 sac which seems very good.

 

I will say though, they are harder to fill than standard lever fillers. I can get a full fill on an Esterbrook J with one fill of the lever and get probably around 1ml. The first time I filled the Eversharp (did two "presses" of the lever) I got something like .60ml out of it. Getting a full fill took a lot longer than with a standard breather tube-less lever filler. Not sure the added effort is worth the slight increase in capacity. And I'm not about to take my vintage pens on a plane to test if it really helps with equalizing pressure.

[GlenV]

Just finished up this early Commando, not too much other than making the end part, came with a box, showing the good end, partial, and cool instructions.

(it looks like I need to straighten the nib a tad, I took the feed nib out a few times to spin the barrel and section on the lathe for the end...)

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Does anyone know the proper sac size for a Parker VS? The aluminum button ones. I just restored one with a size 15 sac since that seemed about right but I'm getting .5ml at the very best which feels wrong. The pressure bar is in good condition with no rust and the button moves up and down freely as it should. Not sure why it's filling so poorly.

 

The pen has the tiniest breather tube I've ever seen, I'm not sure if this is just cosmetic like on the Parker Challengers, etc.

 

Edit: I took it apart and realized I lost the breather tube at some point between now and when I initially got the pen in April. I cannibalized a breather tube from a non-working Parker 51 Demi Vac that was the same size and also put in a size 16 sac that is just a touch longer. Will see what the capacity looks like after everything dries.

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Ah... getting about .85ml now, which isn't really too far off what I would expect from a size 16 sac, I'm satisfied with that.

 

It's almost double what I was getting with an average fill before, which was like .43ml. I guess the breather tube really does matter for these! I can't imagine switching out a size 15 for a size 16 would account for that much difference in capacity.

[VacNut]

On the first test there wasn’t a breather tube?

 

I have never taken apart a VS, but I am reading the tube is essential to fill the pen fully. It’s a bit odd that a push button filler uses a breather tube. 

I started playing with Soenneckens and I find they used a similar tube in the Rheingold to maximize ink capacity.

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

I didn't have it in there on the first try. I have no clue if it's the original feed or not so that might explain the filler tube. It's the one I posted about like a half year ago with the vacumatic nib with a "50" code on it instead of the standard plain VS nib.

[FarmBoy]

19 minutes ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

I didn't have it in there on the first try. I have no clue if it's the original feed or not so that might explain the filler tube. It's the one I posted about like a half year ago with the vacumatic nib with a "50" code on it instead of the standard plain VS nib.

I recall an article on the VS appeared in the Pennant recently and another article appeared in Pen World a few years ago.  

[cat74]

Actually need a little help figuring what's on my bench. A Sheaffer Craftsman and a Sheafffer?? Is it a first year touchdown?

133.4 mm long and 11.5mm barrel with a thicker sac protector compared to the Craftsman (blue) 129.5mm long with 11mm barrel.

Got these apart just looking to get the propper kits

thanks in advance for any input!

 

 

actually...a day later and I think I figured it - I believe I do have a first year so a little thicker - just ordered a bunch of parts (bars, sacs etc.) to finish off some pens 

 

 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Anyone see a Waterman feed like this? This came out of a Waterman 3 I restored. The feed was unusually gunked up so I knocked it out, rarely do that these days.

 

 

I think Waterman had a proprietary name for these feeds, I've only seen them on Waterman pens from the mid 1930's. I don't think they were too popular because they went back to using the good old Waterman spoon(ish) feeds afterwards.

 

I thought it was kind of interesting, the black bit on top acts almost like an overfeed, it covers the ink channel almost all the way up until the end.

[InkyProf]

On 11/29/2025 at 11:29 PM, cat74 said:

I believe I do have a first year so a little thicker

 

Nice. I really like the feel of those pens. The way I confirmed I had one was by trying to put a Thin Model Snorkel cap on it, per Jim Mamoulides: "The cap on a TM pen won't even come up to the section threads on these pens."

[cat74]

On 12/1/2025 at 3:30 PM, InkyProf said:

 

Nice. I really like the feel of those pens. The way I confirmed I had one was by trying to put a Thin Model Snorkel cap on it, per Jim Mamoulides: "The cap on a TM pen won't even come up to the section threads on these pens."

just tried that as a double check - same thing -  the cap on the TM does not come to the threads of the other!

[Nethermark]

On 11/11/2025 at 5:24 AM, GlenV said:

Just finished up this early Commando

Nice job! I feel Commando's are rather underrated

[VacNut]

27 minutes ago, Glenn-SC said:

That is a gorgeous pen!!

I have a buckskin beige set just like that. 

 

On 11/10/2025 at 8:24 PM, GlenV said:

Just finished up this early Commando, not too much other than making the end part, came with a box, showing the good end, partial, and cool instructions.

(it looks like I need to straighten the nib a tad, I took the feed nib out a few times to spin the barrel and section on the lathe for the end...)

How difficult is it to find a Commando with an original tip?

[GlenV]

On 12/1/2025 at 11:56 AM, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

Anyone see a Waterman feed like this? This came out of a Waterman 3 I restored. The feed was unusually gunked up so I knocked it out, rarely do that these days.

 

 

I think Waterman had a proprietary name for these feeds, I've only seen them on Waterman pens from the mid 1930's. I don't think they were too popular because they went back to using the good old Waterman spoon(ish) feeds afterwards.

 

I thought it was kind of interesting, the black bit on top acts almost like an overfeed, it covers the ink channel almost all the way up until the end.

I have a couple pens with this feed a 3 and a 94 although not sure the 94 is original feed as the nib has been changed. It’s alot larger than the 3 though so think it is. 

[GlenV]

On 12/8/2025 at 1:33 AM, Nethermark said:

Nice job! I feel Commando's are rather underrated

Thank you:) I agree they are nice pens. I have not seen one with the end intact myself. ( that hadn’t been worked on)

Some lack the celluloid end part and have a regular barrel it seems. 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

I am going to present a controversial opinion. Vacumatic Parker 51s are easier to fix than aerometric ones. I've had really bad luck with the past two I've gotten a hold of. Both have had the dreaded sac nipple deterioration.

 

The one I opened today was the worst I've seen yet, it was as soft as putty. Yes, I know this is an "EASY" fix if you have a lathe, I don't have room for one. For me this issue means I need to source a completely new section, and it's always a gamble whether they'll have the same issue. I guess at least I got a nib, collector, cap, and pen body out of this.

 

[FarmBoy]

3 hours ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

I am going to present a controversial opinion. Vacumatic Parker 51s are easier to fix than aerometric ones. I've had really bad luck with the past two I've gotten a hold of. Both have had the dreaded sac nipple deterioration.

 

The one I opened today was the worst I've seen yet, it was as soft as putty. Yes, I know this is an "EASY" fix if you have a lathe, I don't have room for one. For me this issue means I need to source a completely new section, and it's always a gamble whether they'll have the same issue. I guess at least I got a nib, collector, cap, and pen body out of this.

 

When I get around to it, I'll list some connectors.

 

In the interim, contact repairs at parker 51 dot com

[VacNut]

Sorry, what is “sac nipple deterioration?” This is in reference to an Aerometric? 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

1 hour ago, VacNut said:

Sorry, what is “sac nipple deterioration?” This is in reference to an Aerometric? 

 

Yeah, the PVC sacs release plasticizers over time, and the plastic that Parker used for the section (most importantly the sac nipple) is very sensitive to it. What ends up happening is the plastic becomes all soft and gooey, and that's not what you want (unless you want a leaky pen).

 

It's kind of one of those issues where if you don't take off the sac, it might not cause any problems. But with this pen the sac came off while I was trying to get the hood off, and there's no way to attach a new one because the sac nipple is so deteriorated. It's literally as soft as the sac itself.

 

Edit: While I'm here, anyone have tips for easily unscrewing hoods for the aerometrics? I have such a hard time getting a grip on anything with these. The vacumatics are usually much easier because you can hold the barrel and it doesn't screw off.