New Parker 51, cynical marketing ploy by Parker?

[DeusImperator]

I have used Parker 51 pens all throughout by school boy days.  I used to service my dad's and my mom's Parker 51s beginning when I was 6 or 7.  That new pen that Parker is marketing is not a Parker 51.  It looks like an el cheapo Parker Jotter with a ill fitting piece of plastic over the nib.  

 

I was going to purchase 12 of those Parker 51s over at Iguana Sell but something looked off with the nib.  I remember that the 51 nib was a cylindrical nib, this isn't a cylindrical nib.  It looks like a Parker Jotter.  

 

Anyone know what is going on here?  I wrote to Parker asking them if it was a Jotter nib two weeks ago and they have not got back to me.

[Daosus]

I believe on a technical level, you are correct.  The pen is basically a Parker Jotter with a new shell.  Whether it's a cynical cash grab or an attempt to bring back a beloved classic without having to tool up an entire new production line is a matter of opinion.  I happen to agree with you, however.  My vintage 51s will serve me just fine.

[VillersCotterets]

 

[bunnspecial]

I've yet to buy a new 51.

 

I've seen some positive reviews of it, and more than a few from folks who openly admit to never having handled an original 51. Those who go into with that sort of "blank slate" seem to really like it.

 

At the same time, those experienced with original 51s seem to largely not like it.

 

Not too long ago, I a decent sized lot of modern-ish(mostly mid-80s to mid-2000s) Parkers. In there was a pen that seems little known today, but which I really liked-a Parker 100. It honestly looks and feels like a big 51. The nib is fully hooded, and I'm not sure if it's tubular or not but it's every bit as stiff as an original 51. The pen is very well balanced, and even has a slip cap.

 

To me, it's what Parker is capable of making, and I wonder if the pen would have sold better if it had been branded as a successor to the 51. That's honestly what it feels like to me.

[DeusImperator]

Thanks @VillersCotterets for confirming what I suspected. 

 

I loved the P51/61s, it was all I used.  When I ran out of pens due to theft/loss I began using Sheaffers with the inlayed nibs and then Watermans all throughout school and the universities.  I had missed the P51 second editions when they came out and as soon as I received a notification from Iguana Sell I jumped at the chance and I wanted to purchase a few which would keep me going for a few years.  But when I looked I saw the threads on the body and thought it was a little off and then the nib  seemed off and ill fitted to what should have been a slim streamlined pen.  Imagine repackaging a $20 pen and selling it for $80.  

 

 

[DeusImperator]

1 hour ago, bunnspecial said:

 

Not too long ago, I a decent sized lot of modern-ish(mostly mid-80s to mid-2000s) Parkers. In there was a pen that seems little known today, but which I really liked-a Parker 100. It honestly looks and feels like a big 51. The nib is fully hooded, and I'm not sure if it's tubular or not but it's every bit as stiff as an original 51. The pen is very well balanced, and even has a slip cap.

 

I purchased a P100 for my dad from Montgomery pens, Montgomery Pens sold it as a new pen.  But it was already used.  I purchased a Carene as well as a new pen, but that too was used.  My dad did not like the P100 and never used it in the end.  It skipped a lot and was always a hard starter.

[jchch1950]

Some companies use the same nib design-steel or gold- for many models of their pens, Lamy is one example. The new Parker 51 is priced in the same level of similar pens of other brands. Maybe if Parker will name the  new 51 different they will be less negative post about it. It is a new pen build on the financial requirements   of today not the old pen reissue. 

 

i

 

[Mercian]

On 9/13/2021 at 10:10 PM, jchch1950 said:

Some companies use the same nib design-steel or gold- for many models of their pens, Lamy is one example. The new Parker 51 is priced in the same level of similar pens of other brands. Maybe if Parker will name the  new 51 different they will be less negative post about it. It is a new pen build on the financial requirements   of today not the old pen reissue.

 

I also don't actually mind that the new 51 uses the same steel nib as other Parker pens. The gold nib is in any case unique to the 51, because no Jotter has a gold nib.
Nor do I mind that it has a screw cap instead of a slip-cap.
The new 51 differs cosmetically from the classic "51" in a few small ways - it has that screw cap, so its body has a step-down to the grip section from the barrel. It has that purely-cosmetic metal band around the top of the grip-section. Its hood is a slightly different shape to that of the "51".
Its shape is not quite as 'streamlined' or 'elegant' as that of the "51", but that doesn't put me off. There are also minor differences in size.
The biggest difference, of course, is that it is a c/c pen, as opposed to being a pen that has an internal filling mechanism. That doesn't put me off either.

 

None of those things put me off from buying the new 51.
I like Parker.
They were the 'posh' brand when I was at school and, over the years, I have bought over twenty of their 'writing implements'.

 

I was really interested in the new 51 fountain pen when it was announced news of its existence leaked out (when somebody spotted an advertising poster for the new model in China).
I researched it.
But I did get put-off from buying one.

What put me off was not the remarks from early buyers who found that their pen came without any instruction/warranty booklet or a converter - I ascribe the lack of those things to an unfortunate coincidence. The early pens have the date code QIII. That is the first quarter of 2020.
I.e. the pen's launch coincided with the arrival of the Covid-19 pandemic in Europe. I presume that there was either a problem with printing the booklets due to Covid restrictions, or that Parker had to run the operation in Nantes on reduced staff because of the pandemic, and so didn't have enough humans in the factory to be able to add those items added to the pens' packaging.

I was put off from buying a 51 by a combination of the following two things:

1- seeing suspiciously-many reports that the pen's grip-section had been scratched/scored by the inner-cap;

 

2- seeing too-many remarks made by purchasers of the pen that its cap does not seal properly; i.e. that ink was drying-out on the nib/feed.

When news of the pen's creation first broke here (before the pen was launched) I emailed Parker to ask them various questions about it, including one asking why they had chosen to put a screw-cap on the pen. They replied to tell me that they had done that in order to help to prevent nib dry-out.
The user reports of nib dry-out made me look again at the photographs that I had seen of the pen. Its cap looks very similar to the cap of the Sonnet. The Sonnet is notorious for suffering from its cap leaking air to the nib, and thus causing the pen to dry-out.
I therefore suspect that Parker repeated their design/manufacturing method from the Sonnet cap to create the cap of the new 51.

The first factor that put me off from buying the 51 - the inner-cap scoring around the grip section - may be due to an understandable minor glitch that has occurred in the initial manufacture of a new product; one that it might be possible for Parker to solve so that it does not happen on pens made in later production runs.
But the second - the nib dry-out - seems to me to be a problem with the design.
The same problem has persisted in the Sonnet throughout its production run. The Sonnet was first manufactured in Newhaven. In 1993. Twenty eight years ago.
The pen & cap have had several minor cosmetic redesigns since 1993.
And the Newhaven factory has been closed and a whole new production line established in Nantes instead.
Yet the dry-out problem persists.

The design/manufacturing process is one that Parker are clearly 'wedded-to' - i.e. it is (in my opinion) not one that they are ever going to change.
In my opinion there is absolutely no sense in giving the 51 a screw cap "to prevent dry-out", but then repeating the same design/manufacturing error that causes Sonnets to dry-out.

 

The 'USP' of the Parker "51" was that it was the most-reliable pen of its era. Un-cap one; it writes. First time, every time.
I have two "51"s. Both were made in the third quarter of 1954. That's sixty seven years ago. I must admit that I have had the nib of one of them replaced.
My 1954 "51"s are both utterly dependable pens.
Un-cap one; it writes. First time. Every time.
Now, I have seen reports from owners of the gold-nibbed 'Deluxe' version of the new 51 in which they say that their pen writes beautifully. I have also seen reports by owners of the 'regular' steel-nibbed 51 in which they say that their 51 writes beautifully.
But I have also seen remarks by owners who were very disappointed with their 51.
I have read enough reports from people who own new 51s for me to not believe that I would get the same degree of reliability from a new 51. Which is a great pity.
A lack of reliability is a deal-breaker for me.

I sincerely hope that Parker solves the issue with the inner-cap scoring a scratch around the grip-section.
I also hope that they alter the design/manufacture of the cap so that the pens do not dry out.
I would like to buy a steel-capped 51 (I dislike the look of yellow gold).
I would love to be able to buy a Plum 51 that has a silver-coloured cap and trim and a silver-coloured gold nib (a pen that doesn't exist & which I don't expect Parker to make).
But, unless they can solve the problems with the new pen's cap, I will not be buying one.

 

Do any of you think that, if I send the above screed to Parker, they will care enough about the 51 to try to address the issues that I mentioned?

My apologies to you all for my egregious prolixity, and slàinte,
M.

[Mike B]

I think you make some very good points here. The scratching some experience is certainly due to the inner separate metal sleeve of the 51 cap, and so it may fairly be said that both problems (drying and scratching) relate to the design of the inner cap.

 

If the internal setup of the Sonnet cap is the same as that of the new 51 (I lack a Sonnet since I don't care for the way it looks) then the reason for the scratches could possibly be due either to some initial set-up problems or, more likely, to the fact that the grip (the writing end of the 51 pen), when inside the cap, doesn't provide the same sort of continuous, same-diameter resistance at its writing end that would prevent some minor "bending" of the cap relative to the grip when being handled and screwed/unscrewed. The use of non-Lucite "precious plastic" as the grip material makes for a deeper, richer appearance but also a very slightly softer medium which is subject to scratching. So a 51 grip which comes into contact with the inner cap might get scratched while the Sonnet's would not.

 

I suspect the true reason for the screw-in design is that the "precious plastic" being used is not going to be able to come through the clutch of the old '51' model unscratched, and that the 45 cap approach of interior tines applying pressure would result in pushed-in indentations, similar to what the 45s (and the old Hero 100s) experienced.

 

I have looked at the cap of a Wing Sun 601, and in it the internal cap seems to start right at the bottom of the cap, and not 2 centimetres from the end as in the new 51. Coupled with the fact that there is no screwing-in, the only sort of scratching one might expect in a 601 would be length-wise and not horizontally. Mine shows not even a hint of this.

 

Will the scratching experienced by some grow worse? I think not, since there is such minor contact when there are problems.

 

Your last question -- unfortunately we are not the major target audience for the Sonnet and the 51 pens. Re-engineering is very unlikely at this point. And it is probably fair to say that Parker is not building for eternity with these pens --  if the pens last a decade that would be pretty good for planned obsolescence. The scratches are not THAT visible, so unless your target audience IS the OCD-gifted, happy group of campers that makes up FPN and which includes me, our collective distress might not make much of a difference. And similarly for the fact that a pen dries out after a couple of weeks.

 

If you write to the Parker group, they might well express some sympathy with your position. I'd be surprised if they reengineer something selling so well. Perhaps a chemist or an engineer could let us know if Lucite can be simply injection poured and molded or if it requires some grinding and polishing of a special nature -- that might account for the different material.

 

And it would not just be Parker who makes use of economies to produce a pen for a little and charge a lot in comparison. Someone earlier mentioned producing a pen for $20 and selling it for $80 with regard to the new 51. I thought at the time that, if you simply added a zero to both numbers, you would come up with the business plan of some very well-known European manufacturers.

 

But if you do write, please post a copy of the correspondence  here -- you do write a lot, but it is certainly interesting and entertaining!

 

[Michael Jennings]

I have a Parker 51 vacumatic that I've had for decades [ca: 1946] that is one of my favorites and a daily writer. I did decide to buy one of the new 51's but have never been much of a fan of steel nibs [except in my dip pens] so spent the extra $$ for the Deluxe model with the gold nib. I also was a bit disappointed with the "new design" regarding the section to nib gap, I really don't care about the screw on cap or the cartridge/converter fill system.

That said, if I could do a "blind test" on my own I think I'd be hard pressed to feel much, or any, difference between the pens while writing. And the product on the page is identical except for the ink color [ old: Waterman Black, new: Parker Quink Washable blue].
I have written extensively with the new one and have no real complaints. Doing the adjustment for inflation, the costs are pretty similar as well for the Original/Deluxe. Have to admit that I'm more comfortable traveling with the new one.

[InesF]

To add my 2 ç: I own a 2007 Sonnet, a 2016 IM and a new edition 51. All three suffer the same issue: nib drying. All three have widely open ventilation slits at either the finial or at the clip position.

 

For curiosity, I filled these slots at the IM and at the Sonnet with acrylic paint medium (carefully with a syringe and needle). Both still work properly, no ink spilling when slipping their caps. Ink drying is almost fully solved - there is a very slow drying over weeks, maybe now from the remaining small space around the barrel.

Yes, I fully agree with @Mercian and @Mike B: the ventilation slits are a design error.

 

Curing the neo-51 will be next. However, no hurry here because I do not appreciate that pen for other reasons as well.

[DeusImperator]

Just as a follow up, I just received an email from Parker.  As I stated, I has some questions which Parker never bothered answering but they sent this survey my way as if they had answered my questions regarding the new P51.  They never sent me any "information".

 

 

[DeusImperator]

So after I took the survey, they sent me this message

 

あなたのアンケートは送信されました。アンケートにご協力いただき、ありがとうございました。

 

That is survey.newellbrands.com for you.  No idea what that means as the survey was in English.

[georgeb]

You can copy and paste the Japanese into google translate and find out what it says.

[lionelc]

Your survey has been submitted. Thank you for participating in the questionnaire.

[Vladpu]

On 9/14/2021 at 4:20 PM, Mercian said:

Do any of you think that, if I send the above screed to Parker, they will care enough about the 51 to try to address the issues that I mentioned?

My apologies to you all for my egregious prolixity, and slàinte,

Slàinte ar ais chugat.  Been to Blarney Castle recently, have you?

I would hope that Parker would welcome feedback, and maybe even do something about re-establishing a positive image.  I should really do that, too.  I have loved Parkers for too many decades.  It would be sad to see their end.

I have "original" P-51s, and I love them.  Including the "Special Edition" (or Mk IV?).  There have been a series of P-51s, and they are not all First Year Vac.  But still 51s.  I bought the new 202(0 or 1) P-51 "DeLuxe" (18 K nib, GP cap) one because I like 51s, I like writing with 51s, I like the look.  And I very much like the "new" (Mk. V?) one too.  No it is not the same or just an update of the 1940s wonders.  But, at least the one I have, feels good in the hand, it writes well*, and I am not overly worried about it getting used and looking used, since it is not exactly priced like a museum piece, and I can always get a new one if need be, which is not always the case with a 1941 model.  And I very much like the screw cap.  It takes a bit of practice to not try to slide on the cap, but it is a sure-fit.  

*  The nib actually slips out relatively easily.   It is not tubular, but whaddevah.  And I agree the hood looks a bit not-aligned-with-the-nib like a Mk I or II (or even IV).  But it is easily tweaked, and I did just that (pretty much standard practice for me), and it is smooth and the flow is just right- not too wet nor too dry.  I like it.  I use it.  

I also bought a Duofold 100 Year Ann. pen.  Overpriced?  Yes.  Nice?  Yes.  

My advice to the Parker folks:  a)  Better BOXES.  The box with the $1000.+ Duofold is just the same cheap cardboard box as for the new 51, and in both cases it looks cheap.  BAD marketing.  b)  How about some more colour combinations?  Plum is nice, but the old 51s came in a rainbow of colours for a reason - SALES appeal.  And c), yes, for (insert name of preferred deity here)'s sake, make the hood not look like an afterthought.  

[TheRedBeard]

"New P51" is a "lovely" piece of complete rubbish  

It is a shame and insult to all true Parker devotees that this pen is named "Parker 51"... 

On a practical note: read detailed discussions and opinions of FPN members on "NG51" on a few threads in Parker Section of FPN. 

 

[TheRedBeard]

On 9/12/2021 at 6:12 PM, DeusImperator said:

New Parker 51, cynical marketing ploy by Parker?

It is exactly cynical marketing ploy but Newell Rubbishmaid and not by Parker as real glorious Parker Pen Co does no longer exist... 

[austollie]

I'm normally a sucker for retro pens, but I'll be giving the Parker 51 NG a wide berth.  In my view, Parker has missed the mark design wise and the pen is overpriced for what it is (a re-styled jotter).

 

I hope that the people at Parker know better than to use the same formula on some other classics.  

[Vladpu]

I hereby renounce my endorsement of the "Special Edition" from 2001.  I had cause to try to fix a clogged up nib, and discovered 2 things (probably that many of you already knew?!) that the caps are fabulaous, but the pen itself is anything but.  The plastic is very fragile, and cracks or the hood tip breaks off at the slightest bump, and the "nib" is practically a speck of gold foil, entirely unsuited to any sort of intervention (in my case clogged up between the tines.

As much as many seem to hate the "new 2020 51, the "Special Edition" was far worse (except the pretty caps).