Parker 51 — what is the appeal?

[corniche]

57 minutes ago, es9 said:

 

I get the particles, etc.  But wouldn't a 51 vac with a gold nib be great for IG (assuming appropriate maintenance).  I mean, I thought they were designed for use with Super Chrome... 

 

 

Hi ES9, et al,

 

Super Chrome inks were a different animal. They were a menace because they were high alkaline and high alcohol based inks.  Iron gall is a strong acid - and let the record show - Super Chrome inks were taken off the market because they were ruining 51s. (51s originally came with silver feeder tubes; which had to be changed to plastic - and even then, they had problems).

 

It's TRUE what gyasko said, the 51 wasn't designed for nano particle permanent fountain inks - those inks didn't even exist at the time - the technology for "nano particles" didn't yet exist... and Parkers are known for their feeds and collectors which trap and hold a gallon of ink.

 

- Sean 

[shostakovich]

19 minutes ago, gyasko said:

 

No, because the iron can and will fall out of suspension and clog the collector.  

 

There are plenty of pens that work great with IG ink.  Piston fillers, eyedroppers, BCHR lever fillers...  Why use one that doesn’t?  

Of course I have decent pens that are fine with nano particle inks, and I use those. So if the old outdated technology of a P51 means they can't be used, then I must ditch the pen. 

 

Would the "new" P51 be OK with these inks? Not that I'm contemplating buying one. But if they are not, then Parker may be making a big mistake ...

[corniche]

28 minutes ago, shostakovich said:

Would the "new" P51 be OK with these inks? Not that I'm contemplating buying one. But if they are not, then Parker may be making a big mistake ...

 

Hi shostakovich,

 

I still would not recommend it, but being a c/c pen; it would be more tolerant of those types of inks than a sealed Aerometric or Vacumatic. 

 

That said, I would recommend a Noodlers or TWSBI pen that's designed to be completely disassembled for thorough flushing and cleaning. 

 

- Sean 

[gyasko]

2 minutes ago, shostakovich said:

Of course I have decent pens that are fine with nano particle inks, and I use those. So if the old outdated technology of a P51 means they can't be used, then I must ditch the pen. 

 

Would the "new" P51 be OK with these inks? Not that I'm contemplating buying one. But if they are not, then Parker may be making a big mistake ...

 

Again, this amounts to blaming the pen for not doing something it wasn’t designed for and for maintenance that hasn’t been adequate for that use.  Did you remove the hood and clean the collector thoroughly?  It’s a pain, yes, but necessary in this case.  

 

I don’t know what ink you’re using, but no ink is 100% risk free in any pen.  If you’re going to use particle ink, that will come with greater maintenance requirements, no matter what the ad copy says.  

 

I doubt the 51 reissue has a collector because that was expensive & difficult to make.  That may be a plus in your case.

[mizgeorge]

 

3 hours ago, shostakovich said:

Of course I have decent pens that are fine with nano particle inks, and I use those. So if the old outdated technology of a P51 means they can't be used, then I must ditch the pen. 

Always happy to provide a loving home to a 51...

[shostakovich]

8 hours ago, mizgeorge said:

 

Always happy to provide a loving home to a 51...

When I say "ditch" I really meant  "just put away for a few years." Bad phraseology on my part. But I do find it hard to understand the passion for the P51 as I have much better pens and other than slight sentimental reasons I can't see what all the fuss is about. It's just another not particularly good pen - and just a pen after all. Perhaps I should put all my pens away and give up on this obsessive hobby? I value other things much more highly than pens, such as my dog, my wife and children and most other things.

[inkstainedruth]

Well, what is your definition of "better pens"?  Larger/heavier pens?  Different fill system?  (I do really like piston fillers, as well (my really expensive pens are nearly all Pelikans) and also really enjoy writing with my two Decimos).  More detailing (because, okay, 51s *are* really understated looking) such as the barrel materials or more elaborate trims? (I won't say "more gaudy" because some celluloids are really beautiful, and I do admire the artistry of maki-e pens, even though I can't afford/use them).

Not being snarky, just actually curious.  

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[shostakovich]

1 hour ago, inkstainedruth said:

Well, what is your definition of "better pens"?  Larger/heavier pens?  Different fill system?  (I do really like piston fillers, as well (my really expensive pens are nearly all Pelikans) and also really enjoy writing with my two Decimos).  More detailing (because, okay, 51s *are* really understated looking) such as the barrel materials or more elaborate trims? (I won't say "more gaudy" because some celluloids are really beautiful, and I do admire the artistry of maki-e pens, even though I can't afford/use them).

Not being snarky, just actually curious.  

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

Hi Ruth. It's just my opinion, but I love Pelikans and I have a lovely Cleo Skribant Classic. I also have one Waterman Preface that I love. Outside of those pens I have one or two that are OK but not spectacular. I like pens that are fairly simple but have a classic look, and are not too heavy. I have a Pel 800 which is nice but a little on the heavy side and the f nib is a bit wide. I like the M400's and M200's the best. I have a few "old" pens some of which are over 70 years old and they are OK but I rarely use them. Thos is partly due to the filling systems rather than the nibs - I think lever fill pens with their sacs are a real pain in the  **** and Snorkels are the same, and the Pilot VP's are OK but hold minuscule amounts of ink (mine is a squeeze filler and I don't use the plastic thingies - maybe I should get some and give it a go, but then there are none for Pilot that have permanent document inks so no point). Piston fillers are great and my oldest Pelikan M200 dates from 1987 and I've only had to lubricate it once quite recently, and I think it cost about £25 new in 1987, some 34 years ago. I bought "old" pens shortly after that and they were more expensive and I never use them.

 

I use pens for writing rather than collecting and if they are not used then they are just expensive junk as far as I'm concerned. That's why I do not think I will ever buy the "new" Parker 51 because if I do not use it then it is just so much junk, in my humble opinion. And if a pen won't write well with the type of ink I want to use, then it's just expensive junk and taking up space. This is just my personal opinion, and I appreciate that other people think and act differently, and that's fine.

[Aysedasi]

I think you're perfectly entitled to your opinion, however to describe the 51 as '...just another not particularly good pen' is a little difficult for some to accept.  What I would accept however is 'just another not particularly good pen as a result of the ink I choose to put in it....'   

[shostakovich]

4 minutes ago, Aysedasi said:

I think you're perfectly entitled to your opinion, however to describe the 51 as '...just another not particularly good pen' is a little difficult for some to accept.  What I would accept however is 'just another not particularly good pen as a result of the ink I choose to put in it....'   

It's obviously a good pen for some people, and a very good one for others, and it depends how you rate a pen. The fact that it limits my ink use makes it not a particularly good pen, whereas for others who adjust the ink to the pen, it may be fine. I just happen to have pens that I rate highly, and some like the P51 I rate much lower. It's a matter of horses for courses, and the course I run on is unsuitable for a P51. Therefore I have other pens which I rate much more highly.  So the P51 has to be put out to grass. But for others the P51 is obviously a stunning pen. But not for me.

[Estycollector]

There is no real value or necessity for defending the Parker 51. It's contextual  history and success speaks for itself. For me the value, at least in the two early models I own, is immediate readiness to write.

[Paganini]

1 hour ago, Estycollector said:

There is no real value or necessity for defending the Parker 51. It's contextual  history and success speaks for itself. For me the value, at least in the two early models I own, is immediate readiness to write.

 

This is something that people have alluded to in this context multiple times in this thread and related ones. I'm a little confused by it. I have roughly 15 pens inked up on my table at the moment, and there's not one of them that won't write immediately when uncapped. (These are not expensive pens; the cheapest is an eyedroppered Preppy I got free with a bottle of Noodlers years ago, and the most expensive is probably either the Parker Urban or the Wing Sung 601 all steel flighter.) If a pen doesn't write without coaxing, my attitude is that there is something wrong with that pen, and I'd better look into it. 

 

Is it something that makes sense in the context of *vintage* pens? As in, many or most vintage pens are reluctant writers, but the P51 stands out in the field of historical pens by being always willing and able? 

[SamChevre]

48 minutes ago, Paganini said:

Is it something that makes sense in the context of *vintage* pens? As in, many or most vintage pens are reluctant writers, but the P51 stands out in the field of historical pens by being always willing and able? 

For me, it's not the "uncap it and it writes" that is unusual, but the "leave it uncapped and it writes".  I frequently use my pens for taking notes in meeting--and the P51 is the only pen I have that I can leave lying uncapped on my notepad while presenting, and pick it up and it reliably writes immediately (especially now, with the very dry air.)

[Paganini]

Ahhh, that makes sense. I got my girlfriend some some inexpensive 51 knockoffs to do crosswords with, for that very reason. 

[Estycollector]

7 hours ago, Paganini said:

 

This is something that people have alluded to in this context multiple times in this thread and related ones. I'm a little confused by it. I have roughly 15 pens inked up on my table at the moment, and there's not one of them that won't write immediately when uncapped. (These are not expensive pens; the cheapest is an eyedroppered Preppy I got free with a bottle of Noodlers years ago, and the most expensive is probably either the Parker Urban or the Wing Sung 601 all steel flighter.) If a pen doesn't write without coaxing, my attitude is that there is something wrong with that pen, and I'd better look into it. 

 

Is it something that makes sense in the context of *vintage* pens? As in, many or most vintage pens are reluctant writers, but the P51 stands out in the field of historical pens by being always willing and able? 

My life is in transition in that I go to my retirement home on the weekends where my beloved stuff exits. So, after being away from Monday through Friday pm, my 51's performs. 

[shostakovich]

I've made a new post today, 21/02/2021, in "Parker 51 comeback" thread about my mistake regarding P51 and nano particle inks, and have had a rethink about my expectations. Worth a read. I have listened to the experts!

[Estycollector]

55 minutes ago, shostakovich said:

I've made a new post today, 21/02/2021, in "Parker 51 comeback" thread about my mistake regarding P51 and nano particle inks, and have had a rethink about my expectations. Worth a read. I have listened to the experts!

I did read what you posted and appreciate you taking the time to say what you wrote. 

 

As much as I appreciate the P 51, the simplicity of the Esterbrook pens from the 1930's through 1955 are my favorite because of the various nib choices, how bomb proof they are, and how easily they can be restored. 

[bunnspecial]

I'm someone who goes back and forth on 51s, but will never be without at least one.

 

I love the appearance of them. I love the engineering. When I hold them right, I love how they feel in my hand. There are two "sins" for me, though, that make me dislike them in actual use. One of those is that I like a bit of flex and the hooded tubular nib effectively doesn't allow for that-I realize for many even when it was current that was a plus. The other is that I tend to rotate the pen enough in use that it's easy for me to get out of the sweet spot when I can't see the nib. I'm fine with a semi-hooded nib like on a Lamy 2000 or a Montblanc 14/24(the 14 in particular is a real favorite of mine) but the P51 just hoods it too much for me.

 

On the other hand, in meetings, I did always appreciate how discreet it was and that it would write forever uncapped.

 

I just sold a nice user Vac that I kind of hated to get rid of it-it was dove gray with a sterling/gold filled cap and I'd just had the vac system sorted so it worked perfectly. The problem was it was the finest nib I've ever owned. It was finer than my Vanishing Point EF, and I'd guess it was an accountant point if not finer. A vac with that fine of a nib should write for days, which was good, but it was too scratching and just didn't suit my writing that well.

 

One of the "never get rid of" pens I have is a broad nib C/C 61 that I bought new in box from England not too long ago. I'd really love to have a 51 in at least medium if not broad, but it's a lower priority now.

[Wilbur]

This is an interesting discussion.  I have a lovely refurbished maroon 51 vacumatic that writes too wet when using Levenger or Noodler's inks.  I read somewhere that the 51 writes wet with some inks and writes dryer with others.  They suggested to use Pelican ink, which is considered quick-drying.  I haven't tried Pelican inks yet, are all Pelican inks quick to dry?  Is Quink a good ink to use in a 51?  Scrip?  I can get in the car and go buy those today.  Is modern ink choice even an issue? 

 

After reading much of this thread, it's clear that I have to do more testing!

[Carguy]

1 hour ago, Wilbur said:

This is an interesting discussion.  I have a lovely refurbished maroon 51 vacumatic that writes too wet when using Levenger or Noodler's inks.  I read somewhere that the 51 writes wet with some inks and writes dryer with others.  They suggested to use Pelican ink, which is considered quick-drying.  I haven't tried Pelican inks yet, are all Pelican inks quick to dry?  Is Quink a good ink to use in a 51?  Scrip?  I can get in the car and go buy those today.  Is modern ink choice even an issue? 

 

After reading much of this thread, it's clear that I have to do more testing!

I think it is more a matter of personal preference. I use Diamine inks in all of my 51’s, and occasionally Aurora blue.

 

Good inks to check out if you haven’t already.