Sheaffer Snorkel Repair Assistance

[IThinkIHaveAProblem]

 that’s a good looking pen  

(i have a soft spot for snorkels, “51”s, Balances and Vacumatics)

 congrats on getting it up and running! snorkels are pretty complicated

 

 I’ve found a lot of my Mediums seem to run on the fine side 

and most of mine are moderate for wetness. I suspect that back in the day, pens ran on the drier side so the ink would dry faster. 

 

 what ink is that? it would look great in my aqua sentinel!

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

23 minutes ago, IThinkIHaveAProblem said:

 that’s a good looking pen  

(i have a soft spot for snorkels, “51”s, Balances and Vacumatics)

 congrats on getting it up and running! snorkels are pretty complicated

 

 I’ve found a lot of my Mediums seem to run on the fine side 

and most of mine are moderate for wetness. I suspect that back in the day, pens ran on the drier side so the ink would dry faster. 

 

 what ink is that? it would look great in my aqua sentinel!

 

I suspect they just had a different classification for nib points back then. I have a Sheaffer Craftsman that I got a little while back that had its original sticker on it that said it was a "medium" but writes like an extra fine by modern standards. Not a bad writer but boy was that sticker wrong.

 

Oh wow, that's a gorgeous pen. The ink is Pilot Iroshizuku Ama-Iro, it's a really nice bright blue, one of my favorite lighter blues. It would indeed be a great match for that pen. I hear there's mixed opinion on whether it's safe to use Pilot inks in sac pens but I figure I replaced the sac once, I'll replace it again if the need comes. It's a great ink.

[IThinkIHaveAProblem]

19 minutes ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

 

Oh wow, that's a gorgeous pen. The ink is Pilot Iroshizuku Ama-Iro, it's a really nice bright blue, one of my favorite lighter blues. It would indeed be a great match for that pen. I hear there's mixed opinion on whether it's safe to use Pilot inks in sac pens but I figure I replaced the sac once, I'll replace it again if the need comes. It's a great ink.

Thanks! I really like the aqua coloured snorkels. 

It’s a gorgeous ink. I think the iroshizuku line are known to be especially alkaline. And iirc that has the effect of ossifying sacs faster. Yeah, i can replace the sac again later, but I’d like to try and avoid having to! 

[es9]

@LoveBigPensAndCannotLie The shellac looks fine. In one of your pictures, it looks like the rubber plug might be a little loose/not secured into the sac protector. Check out this thread for advice: 

 

In terms of the nib, it’s hard to tell from the pictures. I have personally always liked the triumph nibs on the snorkels. I can’t recall having a flow problem that the normal techniques didn’t solve, but maybe I’ve been lucky. Have you tried making sure the feed is properly set and that the tines are correctly spaced? 

Re inks, I think snorkels are the poster child for the advice about using conventional, safe inks—especially if the replacement sac is latex. Exotic inks risk accelerating sac failure. Even if you catch it before a leak causes the spring to rust, you now know that changing the sac is a pain. 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

15 minutes ago, es9 said:

@LoveBigPensAndCannotLie The shellac looks fine. In one of your pictures, it looks like the rubber plug might be a little loose/not secured into the sac protector. Check out this thread for advice: 

 

In terms of the nib, it’s hard to tell from the pictures. I have personally always liked the triumph nibs on the snorkels. I can’t recall having a flow problem that the normal techniques didn’t solve, but maybe I’ve been lucky. Have you tried making sure the feed is properly set and that the tines are correctly spaced? 

Re inks, I think snorkels are the poster child for the advice about using conventional, safe inks—especially if the replacement sac is latex. Exotic inks risk accelerating sac failure. Even if you catch it before a leak causes the spring to rust, you now know that changing the sac is a pain. 

 

If it goes it goes. Replacement springs can be bought, no? 

 

When I got into vintage fountain pens, I used only Waterman inks, was super careful with them, etc etc etc., and you know what? I'm a little tired of it. These were built to be tools, not fragile collection pieces. If it breaks again, I'll fix it. If it's past the point of fixing, I'll salvage it for parts. And if it's past the point of salvage, well, at the end of the day, it's just a pen, no big loss. I have no desire to baby these pens - and especially not a Snorkel, I don't believe these are particularly rare.

 

Also, to be honest, I just ran out of Waterman ink. I'll get some more but I'm sure this pen will survive two or three fills of "alternative" inks.

[es9]

Totally fair — your pen, your decision. I find Diamine inks inspiring enough, but that’s just me. 
 

I think it’s worth keeping in mind that the risks are often not really about the pen — it’s about the inks and latex. Granted, I would not use a highly saturated/pigmented ink in a Parker 51 for fear of clogging the collector. But the risk is usually just early sac failure because those inks may not play nice with latex. I’m particularly cautions with snorkels because of how involved changing a sac is and how quickly the spring can rust. I haven’t had to use a replacement yet, but I’ve heard they’re not quite as good as the originals — no idea why. A rusted spring can, however, take a barrel and/or the little retaining collar on the sac protector down with it. 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Well, there's probably not much fear of the sac deteriorating much, I really don't like how this pen writes so it'll be cleaned out after this fill and go into my collection to be inked very sparingly. In general I have a bit of a love-hate relationship with Sheaffer pens.

 

I love their design pretty much the most of all vintage pens (well, everything pre-1950's, everything after that isn't my cup of tea) but I don't like their nibs. Maybe hate is too strong of a word, but I seriously dislike them. In my experience, they're always very stiff, very dry, and feedbacky. And this one skips on top of that...

[IThinkIHaveAProblem]

4 hours ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

Well, there's probably not much fear of the sac deteriorating much, I really don't like how this pen writes so it'll be cleaned out after this fill and go into my collection to be inked very sparingly. In general I have a bit of a love-hate relationship with Sheaffer pens.

 

I love their design pretty much the most of all vintage pens (well, everything pre-1950's, everything after that isn't my cup of tea) but I don't like their nibs. Maybe hate is too strong of a word, but I seriously dislike them. In my experience, they're always very stiff, very dry, and feedbacky. And this one skips on top of that...

My first Sheaffer was a 5-30 Balance my mom found in an antique shop.

The sac worked!  i Inked it… And hated it. I put it in the drawer and left it for over two years. 

Then i decided to catalog it (Andrea the rest of my pens). But then the sac was dead. So i put a sac in it. 
And i REALLY like it now. Yes it’s very stiff and has feedback. But now i find i really enjoy that as part of this pen. Just saying, you may not like it right now. But try it again in a few months or years. Your preferences may have changed by then. 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Alright, I will concede maybe it was a mistake to think I could leave the old seals in. I put some new seals in and silicone greased everything generously but carefully and it fills better than before. Mind you, it filled decently before too and didn't leak at all, but it's better now.

 

I will say I still I think I was right about the old gasket being okay. I compared the old one to the new one and they were similar levels of springiness and had a very similar design. I'd venture to guess that it was replaced in the last two decades or so. I probably would have been fine leaving it in but I put the new one in because it's trivial enough.

 

Now, the o-ring on the other hand... after wrestling with it for 30 min to get the new one in (also scratched up the inside a bit), it sucks in air much better even just with the barrel (i.e., with nib/section out) and shoots ink out with more force as well. The old o-ring wasn't in terrible condition but it was just a little stiff. Might also be the silicone grease.

 

This kind of brings me to a question, how often do these need to be maintained? My impression from looking at this pen is that the seals must have been replaced relatively recently, no way the original o-ring and gasket were so functional. If these need the seals replaced (or at least the o-ring) every decade or two, that seems like a raw deal. 

 

Well, at least I can now say I've done a full Snorkel refit. I couldn't really say that 100% before since I didn't replace the seals. Minor badge of honor for myself.

[IThinkIHaveAProblem]

I don’t know how long they last. But I’ve had pens that I’m pretty sure were the Original seals and o-ring that still worked. And they are all from the 50’s. 
 

Hopefully some ones will chime in here. 

 

but i mean, expected lifetime of a sac is something like a decade isn’t it?… So if you’re already doing the sac anyways… then doing the seals and o-ring isn’t that big of a deal…

 

congrats on the completed project

most people don’t even seem to attempt it, many seem to scared to even try!

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Hmm, maybe they were the original seals after all. The pen has some scratches on the outside, especially some particularly deep ones from posting but it was curiously completely clean when I got it. Not a speck of ink on the feed, the nib, or in the snorkel tube. So it was probably not used much if at all and that would explain the condition of the seals.

 

For the sacs, is it really just a decade? I've gotten some used Wearevers and Esterbrooks from the 50's that still have perfectly pliable sacs. I guess maybe they were not used that often.

 

I don't mind the gasket replacement because it takes two seconds and there's no way getting around replacing the sac, but I have to say putting in the new o-ring was not fun. I figured I'd get some practice though, I've got a touchdown filler coming soon and that will most likely need a new O-ring too... it's like fighting a slippery eel or squid (credit to http://dirck.delint.ca/beta/?page_id=709 for the analogy).

[es9]

Glad it’s working better! Do you have pictures of the old seals/gaskets? The ones sheaffer made are pretty easy to distinguish—the o-rings were gray and the point gaskets had a circular channel. They could still be replacements, but at least it’ll tell you if what you had was a more recent replacement. 
 

I think the new materials should last quite a long time; they might need some additional silicone grease, but I wouldn’t expect them to need to be replaced anytime soon.

 

I am sure someone around here knows far more than I do, but I would expect 10 years to be optimistic. I think original Esterbrook sacs have a reputation for being especially durable. 
 

Seating the o-ring can indeed be a pain. Dale over at Pentooling sells a reproduction of the tool Sheaffer made for this purpose. I’ve also used a pencil before. 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

10 minutes ago, es9 said:

Glad it’s working better! Do you have pictures of the old seals/gaskets? The ones sheaffer made are pretty easy to distinguish—the o-rings were gray and the point gaskets had a circular channel. They could still be replacements, but at least it’ll tell you if what you had was a more recent replacement. 
 

I think the new materials should last quite a long time; they might need some additional silicone grease, but I wouldn’t expect them to need to be replaced anytime soon.

 

I am sure someone around here knows far more than I do, but I would expect 10 years to be optimistic. I think original Esterbrook sacs have a reputation for being especially durable. 
 

Seating the o-ring can indeed be a pain. Dale over at Pentooling sells a reproduction of the tool Sheaffer made for this purpose. I’ve also used a pencil before. 

 

This is both sides of the old gasket:

 

 

Not sure where the o-ring went, I might have thrown it away but it was black. Looked very similar to the replacement one but was stiffer and felt a little thinner? 

 

And yup, I used a pencil, it worked okay but it still took forever. Hope the touchdown pen ends up being quicker!

[IThinkIHaveAProblem]

Ive found using the touchdown tube to seat the o-ring is helpful. 
 

 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Oh I tried that but for some reason I ended up not using it, might give that a shot for the next one. I just got my Sheaffer Touchdown, it's almost a twin for the Snorkel except with a steel cap. Surprisingly this time it took me only like 2-3 min to get the o-ring in. But getting the old one out took probably 10+ minutes and I scratched up the blindcap threads more than I would have liked to.

 

This nib looks like the other one's as well but the flow is much much better. Are Snorkels known for being drier? Might also be that the tipping is wonky, kind of looks like a novice tried opening the tines and the spacing between the tipping looks like a tiny V (i.e., space between the tipping is wider than the rest of the slit, opposite of what it should be). Not a bad writer though!

 

Goes to show you, don't judge a book by its cover. When I got this pen I looked at the tipping and was instantly disappointed because I figured it wouldn't write. I restored it anyways because I figure why not, and it's a lot better than I expected. 

[es9]

22 minutes ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

Are Snorkels known for being drier?

Not in my experience. Sounds like the nib on your snorkel might have some issues. I guess you need more snorkels! 
 

I had a similar experience re the o-ring on the first few I did. You eventually get the hang of it. Now it’s really only a pain when the o-ring has petrified. 

[IThinkIHaveAProblem]

Glad the touchdown is not to your liking!