Please help identify a Pelikan 400 - is it a 400, a 400n or something in-between?

[oblique]

Hello, I have recently purchased a 400 that appears to be a frankenpelikan: The cap is identical to a 400nn cap.

 

But there is more: The piston knob is definitely more rounded than my other 400 - but less rounded than what a 400n looks like in pictures.

 

Is this (apart from the cap) just a production variation of a 400, or perhaps an in-between type?

 

Any ideas welcome, greetings!

[oblique]

p.s. the nib is an OM and this fits the OM stamp on the piston knob

[joss]

The barrel looks like a genuine 400N to me. I am not inclined to regard the combination as a production variation but just a 400N barrel with a later 400NN cap. The 400N, even with a wrong cap, is a scarce and valuable pen.

[mana]

Barrel could be from a 400 with just someone having rounded the edge of the filling knob?
 

A 400N filling knob profile doesn’t fit the picture (there is a transition to the domed end which would be taller in a real 400N).

 

Cap is from a 400NN.

 

Interesting to see that the nib collar is one of those polystyrene ones, IIRC they were used in the 400NN and 120/140. Never seen one myself though.

[mana]

Barrel could be from a 400 (that said, all 400-series pens used the same barrel design and filling mechanism aside from the different shaped filling knobs) with just someone having rounded the edge of the filling knob?
 

A 400N filling knob profile doesn’t fit the picture (there is a transition to the domed end which would be taller in a real 400N).

 

Cap is from a 400NN.

 

Interesting to see that the nib collar is one of those polystyrene ones, IIRC they were used in the 400NN and 120/140. Never seen one myself though.

[joss]

@oblique: maybe you have to provide a few more pictures from different angles of the barrel top. This can rule out whether the twist knob has the slightly tapered design of the 400N.

[Bo Bo Olson]

I have a transition 1954 Pelikan 400...it has a marked nib and no marked body.

I was under the impression the 400n, was nib marked.....but could have been both.

[joss]

11 hours ago, Bo Bo Olson said:

I have a transition 1954 Pelikan 400...it has a marked nib and no marked body.

I was under the impression the 400n, was nib marked.....but could have been both.

 

Ah, now that you mention nib size imprints: the marking of the nib size on the twist knob was phased out before the 400N model was introduced. That supports Mana's viewpoint that the pen barrel is a 400 and not 400N.

[Bo Bo Olson]

On 5/25/2023 at 10:12 AM, joss said:

400 and not 400N.

The difference between those two pens as far as i could see was the piston knob being a tad rounder in the N.

It took me a while to realize, I'd not lucked into a 400N tortoise, but a transition.

 

That tortoise along with the 500 got the same wild night*** is much lighter than my 90' 400 tortoise.

Oddly the rolled gold cap of the 500 makes the '90's tortoise look dull. Looks just great in it or the other same shade of tortoise transition 400.

 

**** The money for my grail pen, 111 Extra Sonneecken herringbone, burnt a hole in my pocket after 6 months of waiting. Got the 500 that transition 400, two slightly different marbled green Pelikans, a 381, and a Celebry....and a Pelikan two shafted pen holder with ink bottle.

[stoen]

As far as I know, 400N is not a 400 production variation, but rather a logical step in model evolution, although never having been end-user marketed as a distinct model. All the three (400, 400N, 400NN) have been end-user marketed as Pelikan 400, and so are the cap and barrel imprints.

 

I’ve seen several mint 400N pens with 400 caps, but none with 400NN caps.

 

The barrel in 400N is somewhat likely to also bear a barrel imprint (such as GÜNTHER WAGNER PELIKAN 400 GERMANY). The 400 does almost certainly. The 400NN very rarely.

 

The turning knob in a 400N is unlikely to carry a nib size imprint.

 

The turning knob geometry shown does not really look to me as in 400N.

(For comparison, here’s the knob, and barrel imprint in my 400N.)

 

The nib shown could be of any 400 (N,NN) between 1954 and 1963. The feed fits between 1954 and 1965. The (cracked) polystyrene collar points at a later year (1961-65).

 

Based on this information, I hope one can make own conclusions, @oblique.

I’ve written my remarks to the best of my knowledge.

 

[oblique]

Thank to everyone that responded! I think it remains a mystery what this pen is. While I agree that the 400nn cap isn't original to the pen, the blind cap is exactly in-between the 400 and 400n. I think I can exclude any modifications - the surface is perfect. I am including a photo of my 400 next to the mystery 400 so you can see how different the blind caps are.

 

(The OM marking on the mystery 400 can be seen with a little effort.)

 

[Bo Bo Olson]

Yep, something ya got to look at twice, sharply.

[stoen]

On 6/2/2023 at 9:44 AM, oblique said:

I think I can exclude any modifications - the surface is perfect.

This is only true for inexpert modifications. An expert could easily make a perfect finish with right tools and know how.

The more interesting question would be why would someone make a 400 knob look like halfway between 400 and 400N.

[oblique]

yes but why would anyone do it?

[joss]

1 hour ago, oblique said:

yes but why would anyone do it?

 

maybe to correct the looks of the pen if there was a tiny chip on the knob top?

[stoen]

8 hours ago, oblique said:

yes but why would anyone do it?

 

19 hours ago, stoen said:

why would someone make a 400 knob look like halfway between 400 and 400N.

 

7 hours ago, joss said:

maybe to correct the looks of the pen if there was a tiny chip on the knob top?

 

I’ve found this to be a frequent practice in lack of original or NOS spare parts …

[oblique]

ok point taken, could be! thanks!