Montblanc 149 Review - 2021

[NickUK]

Hey everyone,

 

I appreciate this is a topic that has been done to absolute death...... But I thought I'd chart my progression when looking to buy a Montblanc 149  in 2021, in the hope that others in the near future can draw some parallels to my experience/thought process.

 

I'll split this into 2 (as it's quite long). So this part will be pre arrival of the 149!

 

Bit of background to me (just in case it helps give some context).

 

• Fountain pen user as a school kid (late mid 90's onwards) - In other words, I can hold a fountain pen properly!
• Very little care or thought about pens between school and 2015 ish.
• Interest peaked over the last few years, although actual use for them still somewhat forced (making myself take written notes at work, rather than digital for example).

 

Prior to the MB 149, the 2 "premium" pens I'd had experience with is a Lamy 2000 Medium (I did try the fine but found it really too thin), and a Pelikan M805 Fine, which is a lovely writer, but again, on the fine side.

 

Having written with these pens for the past few years, I’m finding myself wanting a slightly broader nib (I thought the Lamy 2000 Medium would be broad enough, but it definitely could be bigger for me).

 

Also used a host of other cheaper options, from Moonman's to Safaris and Jinhaos.

 

I wanted to highlight a few points with buying a MB 149, that aren't offend discussed.

 

#Buying New

 

Disclaimer: Due to a combination of offers, I managed to buy it brand new from Montblanc directly for £568 (RRP currently £720) - This also included a bottle of ink, which Montblanc don't offer as standard anymore. That being said, you can often find them with 10% off various authorised dealers, so I'd recommend shopping around.

 

I'm sure you've read by now "absolutely not worth the money to buy it brand new" - I read that so much, you'd be hard pushed to imagine MB have sold a new 149 at all in the past 20 years.

 

At some point (likely around the cost of the Lamy 2000 at £130) nothing more than that is "worth the money". However, I have some counter arguments to this.

 

1. Personally speaking, I value knowing exactly where the pen has been. I've seen too many "vintage" pens with an unknown history, unknown date of purchase or manufacturer and unknown ownership - If you don't mind any of this, you can stop reading and likely save a good few £100 by buying second hand.

 

2. Quality of materials...... This is a tricky one, and will undoubtedly be rebuffed by others here, but from speaking with Montblanc, they feel the overall QC has improved over time (of course they would say that, but unless there is evidence to the contrary, it would make sense). Unless you have tried a particular model previously, I'd forget what you have read about resin, ebonite, 14K/14C etc etc.

 

My main take outs from extensive research is...... Unless you are buying a Pre 1960's model for the extra flexibility of the nib, you might as well buy as new as you can (unless you are really sensitive to the small differences, but if you are, you don't need any of this advice and know what you want anyway).

 

I've read..... 18K and 14K write virtually identical (in my sad, simple mind, the 18K just sounds better).

 

The plastic feed vs split ebonite and ebonite feed is very hard to differentiate. You will read how some people put the split ebonite feed on some mythical pedestal, but having spoken to many many people who have used both, they have said it's virtually impossible to tell.

 

Brass vs plastic threads on the piston........ My preference is brass, from the simple point of view that it looks nicer, adds a little weight to the pen (which is very light considering it's size) and to me, it just finishes off what is a very expensive pen, in a nicer way.

 

Arguments can be had over whether they moved from plastic to brass to save costs..... But all I see is a more premium, consistent material that is going to be much easier to service in future.

 

3. Buying to use or buying to sell - If you are buying to potentially flip in the future, getting a used one is probably a good call - From my research, the pens lose about 30-60% of their value in the first 5 seconds of ownership (from new), but then they just hold at that price for the next 100 years (give or take )

 

You could pick up a used one for £350, use it, keep it in good condition, and sell it 3 years later for £350 - Certainly an option if you are unsure on how much you'll love the pen.

 

However, if you plan to keep it forever (or pass down to future generations), I'd buy new. The extra cost is nothing over the lifetime of the pen, and you'll be buying something 20 years younger at least (usually).

 

In conclusion, if you don't mind the uncertainty of where a second hand pen has been, or the potential issue with old parts needing replacing - Buying second hand can certainly save you a few £100 initially.

 

But don't be put off with buying brand new. The experience, the choice of nibs, the warranty, the fact you are the first owner, and the peace of mind is all worth the extra cost for me.

#Nib Size

 

This will be a short one.

 

It's impossible to tell unless you can actually write with it.

 

You'll see Broads that are Mediums or Double broads. Fines that are thicker than Broads..... It's impossible to really judge what you'll get.

 

Generally speaking..... The MB nibs are on the slightly chunkier end of the Western spectrum, but they are true to Western size.

 

So if you love a Lamy Medium, you'll probably want to go for a MB medium.

 

If you prefer a Sailor Fine, you'll want to look for a MB Extra Fine (which will likely need to be sent off for a nib swap if buying new).

 

Now, contrary to what I often see on here, I don't think many people are near a Montblanc boutique, which makes this decision much harder.

 

I've looked through 100's of images (my decision was between Medium and Broad), and realised it's a lottery until you get the pen.

 

The advantage of buying it new is that you can get the nib swapped if you don't like it.

 

For what it's worth, I've gone for Broad, as I have a Lamy 2000 in medium which I feel is on the thin side, and a Pelikan m805 fine. 

 

#Is the 149 too big?

 

Although I've seen a few comments buried deep in threads, I don't feel anyone has really hammered home this point.....

 

Buy a Jinhao 159 (they cost £7 in the UK).

 

If size is a concern, you can effectively write with the same size pen as a MB 149, for as long as you need (with the Jinhao 159). The overall experience won't be the same, but you can quickly work out if the size is OK for you (and actually, they are fantastic pens for the price).

 

I see a huge amount of comments about the 149 being too big, but I LOVE the Jinhao 159's size - But you really need to try it first.

 

#Still to come....

 

The pen is being shipped on Monday, so I'll have it early next week and will continue the review then.

 

If anyone has any questions at all, please let me know and I'll do everything I can to help (although I'm sure there are plenty of others who can offer fantastic advice as well!)

 

Thanks,

 

Nick

[hari317]

Congratulations ! I hope your new pen is as good as you expect it to be. 

[gyasko]

I prefer vintage MBs, but the modern ones are some of the better pens made today. Ultimately, you do what makes you comfortable. If that's buying new, fine, you don't need to rationalize it to us or anyone else -- maybe yourself, though.

I say that partly because i disagree with several of these points. For instance, additional weight is a minus in my book, and many of the changes MB has made over the years were for cost-cutting rather than a move to superior materials. I agree that the modern plastic feeds are decent. I still prefer the old ebonite feeds.

All that aside, the B nib is a great choice. It will give you some line variation, which makes things a bit more interesting. It really isn't that broad if you're worried about that.

Have fun.

[bunnspecial]

Thanks for the review and the sort of "outsiders perspective." I don't have the MB experience that many here do(albeit didn't buy my first 149 until last year) but have been writing with MBs as my main pens for several years.

 

A new 149 is likely in my near future, mostly because O3B seems elusive in the secondary market. With that said, one of mine is an OB that I bought inked once/not used since and the warranty book indicates a 2019 sales date. It's a fine pen, and in a blind test I doubt I'd be able to tell it apart from say my late 70s one that also has a similar overall weight/balance.

 

I know that in Barry Gabay's somewhat definitive 149 evolution article, he speaks glowingly of the modern plastic feed. I'm rather fond of split ebonite, although truth be told I don't actually have one on a 149(I jump from solid ebonite to plastic, an omission I need to fix). I love the look of tri-tone nibs and care moreso about that than I do them being 14K to 18K. With that said, I think the gems of the bunch are the 14K(or rather 14C) tri-tones of the 1960s, which are decently flexible although I've only written with and not owned one. The 18C tri-tone 60s nib I have is on the stiff side. I think my best overall writing nib of the ones I have is a 70s two-tone 14C B nib.

 

On construction quality-like a lot of people I prefer the look of the two-piece barrel but one has to be very careful to watch for cracks in them.

As to your comment on nib sizes-there's a photo floating around ehre, but basically MB nibs are "sized" based on how the nib is ground more so than the absolute line width. Bs in particular have a very distinctive flat and what I'd call pseudo-stub grind that gives a distinct look to the written line. BB and larger are more true stubs. If you look closely at other sizes, Ms tend to have a spherical "swell" of tipping around the nib, while Fs are still mostly spherical but if this makes sense the tipping sort of follows the lines of the tines rather than going past them. EFs have a "wedge" grind that has an architect-like character(wider side to side than top to bottom).

 

In practice, I don't see a lot of difference in writing/appearance between M and F other than, obviously, Ms being generally wider than Fs. All the other sizes, though, have some characteristics beyond absolute line width that I can see.

[NickUK]

28 minutes ago, gyasko said:

Ultimately, you do what makes you comfortable. If that's buying new, fine, you don't need to rationalize it to us or anyone else -- maybe yourself, though.

It’s not a case of rationalising to myself. I’ve done that internally, and content with my decision. 
 

That being said, I did want to get a post out there giving my reasons, so others who may follow in similar footsteps have some reference point (if that matters to them). 
 

From reading a lot of comments through the years, it comes across that you are crazy/stupid to buy a new one, and you need to be buying “vintage” to get the experience. 
 

I just wanted to add an alternative view, in the hope it can help or assist someone in future. 

31 minutes ago, gyasko said:

I say that partly because i disagree with several of these points. For instance, additional weight is a minus in my book, and many of the changes MB has made over the years were for cost-cutting rather than a move to superior materials.

Disagreeing with any/all of the points is absolutely fine. Certainly on the subjective issues like weight and feel (but this post wasn’t really aimed at existing users as such, so I didn’t really take that into consideration). 
 

I’d love to see evidence of the “cost cutting” measures you talk of. I see it mentioned a few times in a very matter of fact way, with no actual evidence or knowledge. 
 

A hunch at best, but often it feels like people are adding more prestige to “their vintage pen” for their own personal satisfaction, rather than having any actual evidence. 
 

That’s not to say MB did, or did not cut costs at any point - But until there is evidence, it’ll just be speculation by a few people online. 
 

As for the ebonite vs plastic thing - Again, if you can tell/feel the difference, you weren’t the target for the post (although I do really appreciate you reading and commenting).

 

Existing users clearly have their favourites, be that nib sizes, feeds, materials…… I’m sure some will be placebo, and others might genuinely feel a difference. 
 

Part of the 149 is clearly the experience, both in buying and owning/writing with it. 
 

So as long as that ticks the boxes, it’s a win win!

 

11 minutes ago, bunnspecial said:

 

In practice, I don't see a lot of difference in writing/appearance between M and F other than, obviously, Ms being generally wider than Fs. All the other sizes, though, have some characteristics beyond absolute line width that I can see.

 

I think the italic mediums look best for most occasions - But I don’t want to compromise on the smoothness, and I’m hoping the Broad has just enough line variation to stand out! 

[gyasko]

The most obvious cost-cutting measure are the cut-outs in the nib. Another one is the injection molded plastic feed, which is cheaper to make than the ebonite feed. Precious resin itself was a cost-cutting move from celluloid, and the current piston mechanism is far cheaper to make than the original telescoping piston.

[Tom Kellie]

~ @NickUK:

 

Thank you for the superb review of your 2021 Montblanc Meisterstück 149 purchasing experience.

 

Your careful consideration of various aspects means much to me.

 

A Broad nib? Lovely!

 

May your 149 bring you years of deeply fulfilling writing pleasure.

 

      Tom K.

 

[NickUK]

25 minutes ago, gyasko said:

The most obvious cost-cutting measure are the cut-outs in the nib. Another one is the injection molded plastic feed, which is cheaper to make than the ebonite feed. Precious resin itself was a cost-cutting move from celluloid, and the current piston mechanism is far cheaper to make than the original telescoping piston.

I think this possibly highlights the issues I’ve found when researching, and that’s a lot of the opinion references things that happened over 50 years ago, or at the very least, 30 years ago (for things like the feeds). 
 

I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I don’t think it is representative of the company and product to reference “cost cutting” measures, which often imply something that has happened recently, when in fact, it’s simply a change in design/material. 
 

Completely appreciate your points of course, and I’m not arguing the merits of a 50’s celluloid pen vs a 2021 resin (plastic) pen. 
 

Just a different angle/perspective to the collectors and historians of the pen. 
 

26 minutes ago, Tom Kellie said:

Thank you for the superb review of your 2021 Montblanc Meisterstück 149 purchasing experience.

 

Your careful consideration of various aspects means much to me.

 

A Broad nib? Lovely!

 

May your 149 bring you years of deeply fulfilling writing pleasure.

Thanks Tom. I’ve lost count of how many of your replies I’ve read!

 

All carefully thought out and very helpful!

 

Nick

[bunnspecial]

2 hours ago, NickUK said:

 

I think the italic mediums look best for most occasions - But I don’t want to compromise on the smoothness, and I’m hoping the Broad has just enough line variation to stand out! 

 

I write regularly with 149 Bs and OBs, and even my sloppy handwriting often gets comments on how nice it looks. The broads do generally force me to write larger, which increases legibility, but certain letters like Ts do stand out, as do periods and other punctuation.

[NickUK]

12 minutes ago, bunnspecial said:

I write regularly with 149 Bs and OBs, and even my sloppy handwriting often gets comments on how nice it looks. The broads do generally force me to write larger, which increases legibility, but certain letters like Ts do stand out, as do periods and other punctuation

That’s what I’m hoping. It’s a strange one, sometimes I look at really nice uniformed cursive writing with a medium/fine and think it looks amazing. 
 

Then I see a broader line and you get the extra emphasis and ink variations. 
 

As long as the broad is still legible when I write, I’ll be over the moon I think. 

[NoType]

NickUK, like you I have read countless contributions from Tom Kellie, both starting-thread posts (viz., his ink test-writing sample combos are must-reads, as just one example) and replies, and they are all without exception the epitome of kindness, civility, and warmth, the benchmark for friendliness on this forum.

 

So it is not without some pleasure and respect that I find myself seconding Tom Kellie’s reply with a very enthusiastic +1!  
 

May I also congratulate you on starting this thread with what I consider to be a remarkable sense of adventure, fun, and inordinate courage (for a recent poster but doubtless long-term reader of this forum) in providing an alternative view from that of collectors and historians, of the 149?  I assure you that this perspective is more valuable than most can imagine, and your analysis of the rarity of a different viewpoint concerning the iconic 149 is spot-on.

 

Thank you very much for this thread!  It has already netted some food-for-thought responses from venerable members as well as your considered replies, providing new members like myself with some precious information, and the review proper hasn’t even begun (to which I eagerly look forward).

[bunnspecial]

17 minutes ago, NickUK said:

Then I see a broader line and you get the extra emphasis and ink variations. 

 

One of the real joys for me is loading up a 149 B with an interesting ink. The wet nibs on good paper tend to show off a lot of shading, and can also get some nice sheen from inks so capable.

 

I'll even break out some Penman Sapphire for a special occasion, and on Tomoe River paper it's breathtaking.

[arcfide]

I really enjoy my 149 that I have, and I find myself wanting something along the lines of a 149 Broad as well! I hope yours is as good as it can be. 

[arcfide]

8 hours ago, gyasko said:

The most obvious cost-cutting measure are the cut-outs in the nib. Another one is the injection molded plastic feed, which is cheaper to make than the ebonite feed. Precious resin itself was a cost-cutting move from celluloid, and the current piston mechanism is far cheaper to make than the original telescoping piston.

 

I think it's important, though, when talking about changes in design to not just focus on cost. I think a lot of people associate something that is more costly to make as being objective better, but that's just not true except in the nostalgic or romantic sense of manual labor and the like. Just because something costs less to make doesn't mean that it's actually inferior. In fact, the normal trend is that, on the whole, things get both cheaper and higher in quality over time. 

 

I think the above are good examples of this. There are people who say that ebonite is a better feed material, but I'm not totally convinced. It has some advantages in terms of manual tweaking, but from a pure quality control standpoint, it has, according to manufacture's I've heard talk about it, an exceptionally high rate of wasted material, is very hard to produce with a high degree of consistency, often requires in accurate and higher variation tuning, and can limit a number of options in design because of the limitations of the material. On the other hand, modern understandings of fluid dynamics is a lot higher, and our ability to control plastic parts production to very high rates of precision is quite good, and the range of possibilities is also very high, with less manual labor (meaning that tolerances are more consistent and less variable). Because of this, Montblanc can design a feed that is more suited to the types of things they want, and they are able to gain more control over their process and their inks in combination with feeds and the like, which *can* enable better overall systems quality compared to the alternatives. Whether they take advantage of this or not is a secret they will have to reveal, but they have at least noted in one public presentation on the topic that the switch to plastic feeds enabled them to gain much higher and better control over the flow characteristics in the feeds and get better and more consistent results than they were able to achieve with the ebonite ones. Of course, that could all be marketing-speech, but it's also at least not an outright lie. 

 

Likewise with the move to resin. The resin materials are generally more stable and resistant to solvents and materials than the celluloid is. In particular, we can find lots of examples of inconsistency in celluloid over time even from quality manufacturers, and there are cases where celluloid is potentially damaged by a higher proportion of inks that are available today than resin pens. Thus, celluloid is both more expensive and also potentially less robust than resin. That doesn't mean it's not a neat, high quality material, but resin itself isn't an inherently inferior material, either. 

 

And I think I recall many of the pistons of old (in general, not specific to MB), were produced with things like cork seals and the like that have a tendency to wear out and require more maintenance than some of the more stable and durable plastic or rubber-based ones. Yes, the new ones might be cheaper, but in many ways, they could also be fundamentally better and more functional, too. 

 

So, if the goal is to get a high-quality, reliable, quality-assured sort of pen from Montblanc, I see no reason why the modern versions would be inherently inferior to the previous models based purely on their materials and designs, but obviously, if having more precious and rare/difficult to work with materials is a part of the luxury package for the buyer (which is obviously is for many people), then I can see the argument for some older materials, but not an argument based on "they changed design just to save money." Doing anything with automated machinery is also a cost cutting measure. Should they stop doing any automated production of their nibs because that reduces costs? Arguably one of the most variable parts of the Montblanc production is the fact that they still do so much of their nib grinding by hand, en masse, which leads to higher variability than some other makers. For me, this hand-work is a part of the romance, but I certainly appreciate that they've increased consistency and quality of some other elements while reducing costs for other parts, and I'm under no illusions that the nibs I get from Montblanc are inherently superior functionally just because they are ground in a way that makes them more expensive because of the handwork done to them.

[Frank C]

I just happen to have a few Montblanc 149s on my computer desk. I compared my first one, purchased in about 1984; with a newer one, purchased two or three years ago. The old one has the plastic piston mechanism; it has a mass of 29 grams on my kitchen scale. The newer one has the brass mechanism; it tipped the scales at 30 grams. I couldn't really discern any difference in mass. I shook each of them by the cap; I could feel the greater inertia of heavier pen. But I usually don't shake my pens by the caps. 

 

I find the mechanism made of brass to feel sturdier. I can feeel the plastic parts flexing when I fill the older pen. I'm sure that, over time, the flexing will leading to breakage. 

 

Another factor is that Montblanc will repair broken pens, but it isn't inexpensive. As I recall, it starts at about $100 USD and goes up from there. If there is something seriously wrong with your used pen, it could easily end up costing more than a new pen. 

 

I have purchased my Montblanc pens new or very slightly used from reputable dealers. As such, I have had very few problems with them. My Hemingway did make a trip to Germany a few years ago because of a stuck piston. I just consider that to have been the result of fair wear and tear on a 25-year-old fountain pen. 

 

One warning though, as you may have inferred from reading on FPN, your first MB 149 may not be your last. If you like the size and shape of the pen, more will probably be coming in the future. They are really great fountain pens. I hope you enjoy yours as much as I enjoy mine. Please post photos and a writing sample when yours arrives. 

[a student]

56 minutes ago, arcfide said:

 

I think it's important, though, when talking about changes in design to not just focus on cost. I think a lot of people associate something that is more costly to make as being objective better, but that's just not true except in the nostalgic or romantic sense of manual labor and the like. Just because something costs less to make doesn't mean that it's actually inferior. In fact, the normal trend is that, on the whole, things get both cheaper and higher in quality over time. 

 

I think the above are good examples of this. There are people who say that ebonite is a better feed material, but I'm not totally convinced. It has some advantages in terms of manual tweaking, but from a pure quality control standpoint, it has, according to manufacture's I've heard talk about it, an exceptionally high rate of wasted material, is very hard to produce with a high degree of consistency, often requires in accurate and higher variation tuning, and can limit a number of options in design because of the limitations of the material. On the other hand, modern understandings of fluid dynamics is a lot higher, and our ability to control plastic parts production to very high rates of precision is quite good, and the range of possibilities is also very high, with less manual labor (meaning that tolerances are more consistent and less variable). Because of this, Montblanc can design a feed that is more suited to the types of things they want, and they are able to gain more control over their process and their inks in combination with feeds and the like, which *can* enable better overall systems quality compared to the alternatives. Whether they take advantage of this or not is a secret they will have to reveal, but they have at least noted in one public presentation on the topic that the switch to plastic feeds enabled them to gain much higher and better control over the flow characteristics in the feeds and get better and more consistent results than they were able to achieve with the ebonite ones. Of course, that could all be marketing-speech, but it's also at least not an outright lie. 

 

Likewise with the move to resin. The resin materials are generally more stable and resistant to solvents and materials than the celluloid is. In particular, we can find lots of examples of inconsistency in celluloid over time even from quality manufacturers, and there are cases where celluloid is potentially damaged by a higher proportion of inks that are available today than resin pens. Thus, celluloid is both more expensive and also potentially less robust than resin. That doesn't mean it's not a neat, high quality material, but resin itself isn't an inherently inferior material, either. 

 

And I think I recall many of the pistons of old (in general, not specific to MB), were produced with things like cork seals and the like that have a tendency to wear out and require more maintenance than some of the more stable and durable plastic or rubber-based ones. Yes, the new ones might be cheaper, but in many ways, they could also be fundamentally better and more functional, too. 

 

So, if the goal is to get a high-quality, reliable, quality-assured sort of pen from Montblanc, I see no reason why the modern versions would be inherently inferior to the previous models based purely on their materials and designs, but obviously, if having more precious and rare/difficult to work with materials is a part of the luxury package for the buyer (which is obviously is for many people), then I can see the argument for some older materials, but not an argument based on "they changed design just to save money." Doing anything with automated machinery is also a cost cutting measure. Should they stop doing any automated production of their nibs because that reduces costs? Arguably one of the most variable parts of the Montblanc production is the fact that they still do so much of their nib grinding by hand, en masse, which leads to higher variability than some other makers. For me, this hand-work is a part of the romance, but I certainly appreciate that they've increased consistency and quality of some other elements while reducing costs for other parts, and I'm under no illusions that the nibs I get from Montblanc are inherently superior functionally just because they are ground in a way that makes them more expensive because of the handwork done to them.

 

All good points re the quality v cost, celluloid v plastic, ebonite v plastic, handwork v automated machine register. Speaking for myself, I found the post illuminating. 

 

Thank you

 

That said I am reminded of a cartoon from the New Yorker of a guy explaining his vinyl record collection: 

 

Edited July 25, 2021 by newstudent
adding source of cartoon

[Frank C]

11 minutes ago, newstudent said:

 

 

[arcfide]

2 hours ago, newstudent said:

That said I am reminded of a cartoon from the New Yorker of a guy explaining his vinyl record collection: 

 

 

And no doubt, there are a lot of things I enjoy in life precisely because they are a little expensive and sometimes a lot more inconvenient! 

[NickUK]

11 hours ago, NoType said:

Thank you very much for this thread!  It has already netted some food-for-thought responses from venerable members as well as your considered replies, providing new members like myself with some precious information, and the review proper hasn’t even begun (to which I eagerly look forward).

Thank you for your kind words! If this thread can be helpful to anyone, now, or later, I consider that a win in my book 😃

 

4 hours ago, arcfide said:

I think it's important, though, when talking about changes in design to not just focus on cost. I think a lot of people associate something that is more costly to make as being objective better, but that's just not true except in the nostalgic or romantic sense of manual labor and the like. Just because something costs less to make doesn't mean that it's actually inferior. In fact, the normal trend is that, on the whole, things get both cheaper and higher in quality over time. 

You’ve absolutely articulated so many things that I either hadn’t given as much thought to, or I simply didn’t have the correct understanding to be able to put it into words. 
 

But everything you said rings very true in how I feel about it, so thank you for taking the time to put it down on “paper”!

3 hours ago, Frank C said:

Another factor is that Montblanc will repair broken pens, but it isn't inexpensive. As I recall, it starts at about $100 USD and goes up from there. If there is something seriously wrong with your used pen, it could easily end up costing more than a new pen. 

This is another point I didn’t really articulate very well, but one that was always in the back of my mind. If your goal is purely to save money, you can still get some “recently” serviced pens, which are effectively given a full bill of health by Montblanc directly, for a few hundred pounds off. 
 

But I’d be more wary of an old pen that hasn’t been serviced. 
 

3 hours ago, Frank C said:

One warning though, as you may have inferred from reading on FPN, your first MB 149 may not be your last. If you like the size and shape of the pen, more will probably be coming in the future. They are really great fountain pens. I hope you enjoy yours as much as I enjoy mine. Please post photos and a writing sample when yours arrives. 

I have an annoying habit of constantly seeking the “one XXX to rule them all”……. Be that pens, knives, or any other hobbies I’m into. 
 

I often try and find the best (for me), and don’t really go looking for a collection. 
 

I’m also really bad at selling or buying second hand, which ends up making the hobbies quite expensive if I decide to get more of whatever it is! 
 

I’ll certainly post a writing sample alongside my Lamy 2000 when it gets here. 

[Detman101]

Hmmm...this is an interesting post...inspiring and also slightly dismaying.
I have two questions.

1. The MB-149...Do you think it will still be sold in the "Calligraphy" version in the upcoming years?

2. The MB-149...is this bigger than the Opus-88 Demo? You referenced the Jinhao-159 and from pictures that pen is HUGE!