A study of ink bottles with low level filling features

[arcfide]

39 minutes ago, Harold said:

That is also my method for filling the cup; I even make sure that the holes aren't lined up with the axis I'm turning the bottle through, in case it would fling out some of the ink.

 

That's weird that you're getting such poor results with the 60ml Platinum bottles, given that I've had nothing but swimming success with them. What are we doing differently? *shrug* Of course, technique dependence is probably a disadvantage for the cups. 

[Harold]

8 minutes ago, arcfide said:

That was why I at first didn't understand how you were getting the ink out of the bottles so well, until I read your description and understood that you were allowing for *any* ink getting into the pen to still count, whereas I would have cut off the measurement the moment that the pen stopped filling cleanly and without sucking in extraordinary amounts of air (that is, more than you would get with a fully submersion). 

Absolutely, I at first tried stopping the moment I heard any air being sucked up(quite audible with a vacuum filler), but this turned out to be so inconsistent that it made the measurements practically meaningless. Basically, if the pen started sucking up air at the start of the filling stroke, it would suck up a milliliter of extra ink along with it when compared to the pen sucking up the air at the end of a filling stroke when the strength of the vacuum is already greatly reduced. I tried getting the ink level right at the point where it would always be biased towards one or the other, but this also proved wildly inconsistent on repeat tests using the same bottle. I could have used a piston filler, but you'll have to forgive me for not wanting to turn a piston knob thousands of times to do the testing. Turns out it's rather hard to judge when the ink level is approaching the crossover, so you end up filling and emptying something like an M800 ten to twenty times before it starts slurping.

[lapis]

Thanks for this study ! Best survey of ink bottles I have ever seen !!  

❣️ ï  That's for this, today, not for Valentine's Day tomorrow !!!

[lgsoltek]

Brilliant work!!!

[AceNinja]

wow this is incredible info, concisely laid out, with great photos!

Are you going to do study for ink without low level filling features?  as demonstrated in your original post, at least 2 of the bottle design WITHOUT low level filling features outperforms many of those with.

 

My suggestion / request:

1. Diamine 30ml

2. Diamine 80ml

3. Platinum 60ml (with internal ink miser)

4. Pilot bottle with internal ink miser (i'm not sure which one as i don't own one)

5. Pelikan Edelstein

6. Lamy Crystal

7. Private Reserve

8. Rohrer and Klingner

9. Parker Quink

[Harold]

8 hours ago, AceNinja said:

as demonstrated in your original post, at least 2 of the bottle design WITHOUT low level filling features outperforms many of those with.

They only outperform them if you hold the bottle in your hand and tilt it while filling. The point of the low level filling features is not so much that they allow you to get more ink out of the bottle; it's that they allow you to have both hands free without having to fiddle around while still getting most of the ink out. It would be pointless to test regular bottles, because as long as the neck is wide enough they will all perform about the same as the Noodler's and Rober Oster bottles if you don't care about having to hold the bottle in your hand while filling, and they will all perform much worse than any of the bottles with low level filling features if you don't want to have to hold the bottle in your hand.

[Harold]

Just to follow up on questions by @arcfide and others about feeds with breather holes near the grip section, I have done some additional quick testing and have found the following.

 

As noted earlier, feeds with external fins will keep drawing up ink regardless of whether or not the breather hole is still submerged in ink, and it is very inconsistent when they start chortling as the ink level gets lower. However, I have found that feeds without external fins stop drawing up ink when no part of the breather hole is in contact with the ink any longer(note that the hole doesn't have to be entirely submerged). My Parker Duofold Centennial fits the bill.

 

To stop me from committing suicide induced by endless turning of a converter knob, I replaced the converter with a bulb syringe, so the pen could act as a giant capacity vacuum filler. I did twenty test runs with each "filling system" to see if the vacuum of the bulb syringe was perhaps too strong and drew up more ink than the converter, but no; both stopped drawing up ink at the exact same ink level every test pass, and both stopped drawing up ink immediately and completely when chortling was heard.

 

There is, however, one problem: I had already refilled 80% of my bottles with ink weeks ago, so I can't do the testing for all the bottles again. I did some quick tests on whatever I had left though, and the results were pretty clear:

• The number one factor for feeds without external fins is how close you can get the breather hole to the bottom of the bottle.
• Wider necks allow you to tilt your pen more, so neck diameter disproportionately affects the filling for these types of feeds.
• The overall size and height of the reservoir become incredibly important for reservoir style bottles. Montblanc would fare better with a higher hump, Akkerman is still fantastic. Ink misers will be highly dependent on how tall of a column of ink you can get in there. Sheaffer still works well, but the ink capacity in the reservoir may be on the edge for pens with ink capacities over 2 to 2½ mL.
• Tilt style bottles become much more effective relative to the others.
• Pocket style bottles become relatively much worse because the pockets aren't very deep, but are still better than nothing.
• Manual tilting of bottles is just as effective relative to externally finned feeds, because you're obviously still bringing the breather hole very close to the bottom of the bottle.
• Bottles without low level filling features become so, so much worse; there is basically an extra ten to fifteen millimeters(about half an inch for our metrically challenged friends) of ink being left behind compared to the externally finned feeds. On some of these bottles you can barely get 20% of the ink out before you have to start decanting or using a syringe to transfer the ink into your pen. Broad, flat bottles with narrow necks are obviously the worst here.

 

[arcfide]

Thanks for the follow up! that's the kind of reporting that we all love to geek out on. 

[Anne-Sophie]

 

Thank you so very much for such a comprehensive review of practical ink bottles.

 

I have used Waterman, Pelikan and Lamy extensively.

 

While I remember using Waterman ink to the last drop, in high school by titling it.

 

I no longer feel comfortable doing that with them and the Pelikan, I fill inside plastic trays.

 

The nicest one is Lamy, very stable, has a miser design and is good looking.  in addition, I saw, a double Lamy logo frosted inkwell that can house 2 bottles. Asked the retailer if I could buy one, they gave me a blank look, I guess it is a question best reserved to Lamy stores.

 

I quite like Herbin bottles, I have pipettes to get the most of their content.

 

Tall bottles like Noodler are housed in wide and low glass jars to insure stability while filling. 

[Shanghai Knife Dude]

An unemployed social science phd

[stephanos]

Thorough, detailed, methodologically interesting and extremely useful. Excellent job: well done, and thank you!

[Sailor Kenshin]

I'm in love.

 

WANT that Bungubox 'shoe.'  For cuteness' sake.  Even though I have Iro, Noodler's Van Dieman, Sheaffer, Waterman, Lamy, and many of your other test bottles.  

 

@Harold, big thanks.

[Harold]

Thank you for the kind words. I will be adding additional suggested bottles and retesting all the current bottles with a pen that has a feed without external fins eventually. It will take a while before all the bottles are empty again though.

[Harold]

13th of February 2025 update

 

- Data table split into two tables: one for pens with finned feeds, one for pens with finless feeds.

- Added some commentary and pictures to the Methodology section(and the odd comment where relevant throughout the article) so you can see why the feed design makes a difference and how much of a difference it actually makes.

- Six new bottles tested: LAMY T53, Namiki, Pelikan Edelstein, Pilot Marmite Jar, Platinum and Rohrer & Klingner with Erka-rapid.

 

 

Since I had a batch of empty ink bottles that needed cleaning, I decided to test the low level filling features to see how effective they are. I also added some extra thoughts that came to me while using the bottles regularly over the past few years, and during the cleaning process. There are two separate data tables: one for pens that have a feed with visible fins and one for the more uncommon pens that have smooth feeds; you can find out why this is relevant in the methodology section at the end of this post.

 

Please click the spoilers to expand the relevant ink bottle sections and click the images or open them in a new tab to see them at their original size; this was done to make the page quicker to scroll through and to reduce browser loading times due to the amount of images. If you know of any other bottles(between 15-150mL) with low level filling features that aren't copies or differently sized versions of the ones in the table below, please post in this thread and I'll see if I can add them to the table in due time, thank you.

 

Summary Tables

 

When using pens with feeds that have visible fins
Name	Style	Volume(mL)	Remnant(mL)	Ratio(%)	Filling	Stability	Mixing	Cleaning
Akkerman Baby Longneck	Reservoir	60	2	97.00%	+	o	-	-
Akkerman Dutch Masters	Reservoir	120	1	99.00%	++	o	-	--
Bungubox Heel	Reservoir	30	3	90.00%	+	o	o	-
Caran d’Ache Chromatics	Tilt	50	5	90.00%	o	+	+	++
Graf von Faber-Castell	N/A	75	8	89.00%	-	+	+	o
LAMY T52	Pocket	50	2	96.00%	+	++	-	-
LAMY T53	N/A	30	4	87.00%	-	+	+	-
Montblanc Shoe	Reservoir	60	3	95.00%	+	+	++	-
Namiki	Reservoir	60	3	95.00%	+	o	-	-
Noodler’s Square	Manual	80	<1	>99½%	--	--	+	+
Pelikan 4001 Large	Tilt	62½	4	94.00%	o	-	+	+
Pelikan 4001 Small	Tilt	30	2	93.00%	o	-	+	+
Pelikan Edelstein	N/A	50	9	82.00%	-	+	+	o
Pilot Iroshizuku	Pocket	50	1	98.00%	+	o	o	-
Pilot Marmite Jar	Reservoir	70	2	97.00%	+	+	-	-
Platinum	Reservoir	60	3	95.00%	+	+	-	o
Robert Oster	Manual	50	<1	>99½%	-	-	+	-
Rohrer & Klingner Erka-rapid	Reservoir	50	<1	>99½%	o	o	-	o
Sheaffer Modern Bird’s Nest	Reservoir	30	1	97.00%	+	+	-	+
S.T. Dupont	N/A	70	13	81.00%	-	+	+	o
Van Dieman’s	Tilt	30	6	80.00%	-	-	o	-
Visconti Hourglass	Reservoir	50	4	92.00%	+	+	--	-
Waterman	Tilt	50	2	96.00%	o	o	+	+
-- worst - weak point o neutral + strong point ++ best

 

When using pens with feeds that do not have visible fins
Name	Style	Volume(mL)	Remnant(mL)	Ratio(%)	Filling	Stability	Mixing	Cleaning
Akkerman Baby Longneck	Reservoir	60	6	90.00%	+	o	-	-
Akkerman Dutch Masters	Reservoir	120	6	95.00%	++	o	-	--
Bungubox Heel	Reservoir	30	11	63.00%	+	o	o	-
Caran d’Ache Chromatics	Tilt	50	13	74.00%	o	+	+	++
Graf von Faber-Castell	N/A	75	23	69.00%	-	+	+	o
LAMY T52	Pocket	50	3	94.00%	+	++	-	-
LAMY T53	N/A	30	12	60.00%	-	+	+	-
Montblanc Shoe	Reservoir	60	25	58.00%	+	+	++	-
Namiki	Reservoir	60	11	82.00%	+	o	-	-
Noodler’s Square	Manual	80	<1	>99½%	--	--	+	+
Pelikan 4001 Large	Tilt	62½	9	86.00%	o	-	+	+
Pelikan 4001 Small	Tilt	30	5	83.00%	o	-	+	+
Pelikan Edelstein	N/A	50	19	62.00%	-	+	+	o
Pilot Iroshizuku	Pocket	50	13	74.00%	+	o	o	-
Pilot Marmite Jar	Reservoir	70	3	96.00%	+	+	-	-
Platinum	Reservoir	60	4	93.00%	+	+	-	o
Robert Oster	Manual	50	<1	>99½%	-	-	+	-
Rohrer & Klingner Erka-rapid	Reservoir	50	1	98.00%	o	o	-	o
Sheaffer Modern Bird’s Nest	Reservoir	30	2	93.00%	+	+	-	+
S.T. Dupont	N/A	70	34	51.00%	-	+	+	o
Van Dieman’s	Tilt	30	9	70.00%	-	-	o	-
Visconti Hourglass	Reservoir	50	7	86.00%	+	+	--	-
Waterman	Tilt	50	5	90.00%	o	o	+	+
-- worst - weak point o neutral + strong point ++ best

 

Bottle Notes

Below is a short explanation of how the low level filling features work and some notes on the more salient aspects of each bottle. There are also pictures of the empty bottle, the low level filling features and the remnants left after filling.

 

Akkerman Baby Longneck

  Hide contents

 

Both Akkerman bottles work by separating the main ink chamber from an antechamber by way of a pinched neck, in which a marble sits. Invert the bottle so the marble drops towards the cap to let ink flow from the main chamber into the antechamber, then flip the bottle back up so the marble falls into the neck to stop the ink from flowing back into the main chamber. There is also a post moulded into the cap(see pictures), which ensures that the marble always reaches the neck before the vast majority of the ink gets a chance to escape the antechamber.

 

+    Ink level is always near the top of the neck, so you can see exactly how far you're dipping your grip into the ink, which makes for a very clean filling experience.
+    You can hold your pen between your thumb and index finger while using the rest of your fingers to grab the neck of the bottle, which frees up your second hand to operate the filling mechanism without your pen wobbling all over the place.
+    Classic shape, like a faceted Art Deco laboratory flask.
+    It's fun and interesting, though that is of course highly subjective.
o    While ink can get stuck around the aforementioned post in the cap, you can easily remove the rubber cap seal to clean everything thoroughly.
o    The bottle is a bit tall and narrow, though most of the weight is at the bottom and shaped like a cone, so I still think you're unlikely to knock it over.
-    While doable, it's a bit of a pain to homogenise the ink because you need to let the ink dribble back down the neck a couple of times to get everything properly mixed, especially with shimmering inks.
-    You're going to need an exceptionally long cotton swab with a hook on the end of it if crusty ink should happen to get stuck on the walls.

Akkerman Dutch Masters(personal favourite to fill from)

  Hide contents

 

Everything that applies to Akkerman's Baby Longneck bottle also applies to its bigger brother. Please note that even though both bottles work identically, I ended up with a smaller remnant in the Dutch Masters bottle because Akkerman seems to have used slightly differently sized marbles over the last decade, and the one in the Dutch Masters bottle happens to fit more snugly against the feed of the pen than the one in the Baby Longneck bottle.

+    Quite simply the only ink bottle with a low level filling feature that will swallow an entire bottle of ink over sixty-five milliliters with grace.
+    Because of the largest volume and the tied smallest remnant, this bottle has the best ratio of accessible ink to total stated volume.
-    Good luck cleaning this one, you're going to need an even longer cotton swab than you'd need for its little brother mentioned above.

Bungubox Heel

  Hide contents

 

This bottle works by pinching the glass to create two ink chambers, one of which is situated below the neck of the bottle. It must be said though, this design would have worked much better and looked much more like a pair of heels if the cap were shifted over to the smaller of the two chambers and the hump was as pronounced as it is on a pair of stiletto shoes.

+    Cute bottle design.
o     Slightly difficult to clean, though the bottle is quite small and the neck is relatively wide in comparison, so your mileage may vary.
o    Seems like it would easily get knocked over because it's relatively narrrow, but it seems to want to spin instead of tipping over.
-    Eye-wateringly expensive for the volume of ink you receive.
-    The low level filling feature is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. It feels like they were just trying to design a pretty bottle and created a low level filling feature by sheer happenstance.
-    And when filling a pen that has no external fins on the feed, the hump may as well not be there, because it doesn't get the ink level anywhere near the breather hole.
-    Small volume.

Caran d’Ache Chromatics

  Hide contents

 

The entire bottle leans to the side, which lets you angle your feed closer to the bottom of the bottle.

+    Particularly easy to clean; there are no sharp corners on the inside and the bottle isn't very deep.
+    It looks like the clear plastic insert in the cap(see pictures) would be difficult to clean, but it is simple to remove and reinstall if you hold the cap upside down. The added benefit is that ink never comes into contact with the cap itself, it only ever touches the insert, so you don't even need to clean the cap itself.
+    Heavy metal cap.
+    Angular Art Deco gravity taunting design.
-    The low level filling feature isn't particularly effective compared to some others, even among tilt-style ones.

Graf von Faber-Castell(personal favourite for aesthetics)

  Hide contents

 

I included this one as a control, it has no low level filling features.

+    Distinguished enough to grace the desk of any head of state.
+    Large ink capacity.
-    No low level filling feature.

LAMY T52

  Hide contents

 

A flying saucer of ink with a dimple in the middle to let your nib sink into, getting your feed closer to the bottom.

+    Tremendous stability; even if you knock it, the ink will just slosh around inside the walls of the bottle.
+    Included miniature bog roll to wipe your grip section with.
+    Nib goes straight down into the ink, no acrobatics needed to use the low level filling feature.
o    Bauhaus design seems to divide people; I personally really like how unique and unassuming this bottle is.
-    Difficult to clean the sides of the bottle because the top and bottom are so close together.
-    Doesn't mix particularly well, because there is almost zero turbulence when turning the bottle.

LAMY T53

Spoiler

 

This was included to see how a small bottle with a wide neck, but without any special filling features would do.

+    Wide neck, so you can angle your pen quite a lot.
+    Very rounded triangle shape; attractive, but subtle.
+    Coloured ring around the base of the cap, nice touch.
-    The cap seal is not removable without breaking it and it's prone to getting ink behind it that doesn't want to seep out if you soak the cap.
-    No low level filling feature.

Montblanc Shoe

  Hide contents

 

Much like Bungubox's Heel, Montblanc's shoe has a hump in the bottle(moulded instead of pinched in this case), dividing it into two chambers. Unlike Bungubox's Heel though, this one actually has the smaller of the two chambers situated underneath the neck, which produces a much more favourable ratio.

+    Homogenisation is very fast, because the hump essentially creates a bunch of turbulence as you slosh the ink back and forth between the two chambers, much like a weir.
+    Three tone cap, very stylish.
+    Unique shape.
+    Low centre of gravity and tends to spin around instead of tipping.
o    The hump could have been a bit higher and a bit further forward, but it still works well enough when using a feed with fins.
-    If you're using a feed without external fins however, it's completely useless because the hump isn't high enough to keep the ink level above the breather hole.
-    Very difficult to clean the main ink chamber thoroughly.

Namiki

Spoiler

 

These types of bottles work by having a little cup/miser in the neck of the bottle with holes in the sides(see pictures) that fits snuggly around your nib and feed. Invert the bottle and ink will run through the holes, into the cup and into the neck of the bottle. When the bottle is turned back up, the ink in the neck should in theory fall into the little cup.

+    Elegant flying saucer shape.
o    Slightly difficult to clean, there are some very tight nooks and crannies in the miser and the bottle might be a bit annoying if you've got thick fingers.
o    It looks like it should be extremely stabile, but it actually sits on a narrow diameter ring, so you could definitely knock it over like a spinning top.
-    The miser isn't very tall, so the ink level doesn't get high enough for longer nibs.
-    Difficult to mix the ink properly before filling.
-    Thin wall diameter on the cap plastic, not one you should crank down.

Noodler’s Square

  Hide contents

 

I decided to include a bog standard square bottle held on its corner with the walls hugging the feed(see pictures), just to check how much ink you can get out of a square bottle if you're willing to get fiddly. Please note that I adjusted the stated volume down to eighty milliliters because Noodler's bottles are filled to the brim, whereas the other bottles are about five milliliters short comparatively. This is a bottle design test after all, not a test to see which manufacturer can fill their bottles the fullest(in which case Noodler's would most definitely take first place).

+    Good value.
+    Space efficient for the volume, even when adjusted for not being filled to the brim.
+    Mixes well.
o    No visual design elements.
-    You have to use one hand to hold the bottle when the ink level gets low, and it will tip immediately if you let go.

Pelikan 4001 Large

  Hide contents

 

Both Pelikan 4001 bottles have flats and extra space either side of the cap, which allows you to rest the bottle on its side, effectively turning the side of the bottle into a narrower bottle, which causes the ink level to rise.

+    Large volume.
+    Who doesn't want a mother and baby pelican moulded into their bottle caps?
-    Somewhat fiddly to get your pen into the right position without sliding the bottle all over your desk like a boat dragging around a waterskier, or accidentally pushing too deeply while filling and knocking it back onto its bottom.
-    While the bottle is easy to clean, There is a post in the centre of the cap(see pictures) around which ink collects; the inside of the hollow post is easy to clean, the outside is not. The cap seal cannot be removed without breaking it, so you're going to need an ultrasonic cleaner to remove every last little bit of ink.

Pelikan 4001 Small

  Hide contents

 

Chick and mother bird function the same way(including the difficult to clean cap), this bottle is just smaller.

o    Stability is a bit better than it is on the larger bottle.
-    Small volume.

Pelikan Edelstein

Spoiler

 

No low level filling features here, but it fits the Rohrer & Klingner Erka-rapid insert, which you can learn more about if you navigate to that bottle's notes. Since this bottle is so popular because of its looks, it's one of the best candidates for a practicality upgrade with the Erka-rapid.

+    Solid, hefty chunk of glass with lots of different shapes: it's essentially rectangular, but the sides of the bottle are slightly bowed and the inside has kind of a saggy, molten shape to it. It does indeed have a gemstone(that's what Edelstein means in German) look to it.
+    Two tone cap with the famous mother and baby pelicans on it.
+    Mixes well.
o    It should be okay for cleaning, but there are some deep, sharp corners at the top.
-    Quite a wide bottle, so there will be a lot of ink left behind.
-    No low level filling feature, unless you add the Erka-rapid.

Pilot Iroshizuku(personal favourite for use with syringes)

  Hide contents

 

Much like LAMY's T51 and T52, this one has a cubby hole in the bottom for your nib to sink down into, getting your feed closer to the bottom. One thing to note is that there is quite a bit of variability in the depth of the hole between bottles, so I selected one of average depth among my Iroshizuku bottles for testing.

+    100% of the ink collects into the point of a cone. Exceptionally efficient for use with syringes.
+    Calm Japanese design. The shape could just as well be Scandinavian in origin if I didn't know better.
+    Dunk your pen in the hole and fill until the bottle is empty, no explanation needed.
o    Tassle(not of the nipple variety) around the neck of the bottle that catches ink. However, I find it extremely bad practice to leave ink on the neck and inside the cap of your bottle before closing it to begin with, because that's how caps get stuck and mould gets started, so this is a neutral point for me.
o    While the bottle has a very heavy base, it is also narrow, so a good knock could see it tip over.
o    Mixes alright, though shimmer will collect in the cone and require some vigorous sloshing to dislodge.
-    Difficult to clean the top corners of the bottle should ink encrust itself up there, but the dimple is easy enough to clean with a standard cotton swab.
-    Cap is not the sturdiest, so best not overtighten.
-    Does relatively poorly with finless feeds, because the pen can only sit vertically, which means you can't get the breather hole very close to the bottom of the bottle.

Pilot Marmite Jar

Spoiler

 

Aside from the Namiki bottle, this is Pilot's other bottle with an internal ink miser. It often comes with the more expensive Pilot pens, and it was available separately in Japan; though you can rarely find it at some stores in the rest of the world if they make a point of stocking it directly from Japan.

+    I've found this to be by far the best bottle with an internal ink miser, because there is plenty of space in the neck of the bottle above the holes in the miser for ink to collect before inverting the bottle, so it's not too hard to get a full cup; even when the ink level starts to get low.
+    The miser fits around most number six nibs quite snuggly and doesn't do too poorly with larger nibs either, so there is usually enough accessible ink to get a full fill.
+    It's quite a stabile bottle and even if you knock it, the miser stops the ink from sloshing out.
o    The bottle is easy enough to clean, but the miser does have four tiny spots that may be hard to rub; pigmented inks in particular like to get stuck there.
-    Like with all ink misers, very difficult to properly homogenise ink and any particles contained in it.
-    Not the strongest cap; don't be an ogre and crack it.

Platinum

Spoiler

 

Yet another bottle with an ink cup, and perhaps the most widely available one internationally, unlike the Namiki and Pilot ones.

+    Understated, classy aesthetic.
+    Both bottle and miser are easy to clean, without any tight corners.
o    Mixes a bit better than the other bottles with misers because there is some extra room and everything is smooth; still not fantastic.
-    The extra room makes the cup a bit wobbly though, it doesn't fit the neck as well as others.
-    Not the biggest volume in the cup, so a nib larger than number six will displace too much ink to get a full fill if the pen has a large ink capacity.

Robert Oster

  Hide contents

 

Like the Noodler's bottle, I decided to include this one to have a standard round bottle in the line-up as a sanity check. Held on its side(see pictures) for low level filling.

+    Unlikely to crack, so this is one you could travel with.
+    Ink mixes quickly if you do it properly like with any regular bottle you've ever used in your life.
o    Plastic fantastic, which does have the benefit of low mass.
o    It's just a plain cylinder.
-    Rolls when on its side, though I guess it does sit nice and flat if you have your hand on it.
-    You have to use one hand to hold the bottle when the ink level gets low.

Rohrer & Klingner Erka-rapid

Spoiler

 

The Erka-rapid is a plastic cup made to very tightly fit the necks of Rohrer & Klingner bottles and enhance them with a low level filling feature. I don't really like testing add-ons that need to be purchased separately, but both Rohrer & Klingner ink bottles and packs of three Erka-rapids are not expensive at all; the product also fits bottles from multiple brands. For an explanation of how it works, you should just read the notes on the original, vintage version of this idea: the Sheaffer bottle directly below. The Erka-rapid does exactly the same thing; it's just not part of the glasswork itself, but a separate plastic insert.

+    Cheap as chips in many markets.
+    Extremely easy to use, it fills perfectly down to the last drop with one tumble of the bottle every single time.
+    Easy to see what you're doing when you're filling.
+    Pry the insert out of the bottle and it's very easy to clean; even if it isn't, you can just replace it as long as Rohrer & Klingner keep selling them.
o    Will stain and may eventually get brittle because it's not glass, but it's inexpensive to replace.
o    Stamped sheet metal cap, so with the added height of the Erka-rapid, you should be careful not to progressively bend the metal threads out of shape.
-    You simply can't wipe down the rim of the cap properly because the edge of the insert overhangs it and traps ink, which may increase the chance of mould forming.
-    There isn't all that much ink in the shelf, so large ink capacities combined with long nibs may be an issue. You can easily reach past the shelf to use a syringe, though.
-    Mixing isn't great, because particulate will settle on the shelf.

Sheaffer Modern Bird’s Nest(personal favourite for use with dip pens)

  Hide contents

 

A little slanted shelf is moulded into the glass that you can tip ink into from the main chamber while the bottle is capped, creating a separate reservoir you can stick your feed into.

+    Intuitive to use.
+    Ink level always stays near the top of the neck, so you can see what you're doing.
+    Fantastic for use with dip pens.
o    Seems difficult to clean, but you can actually reach everything easily. If you have sausage fingers, maybe you'll need a cotton swab for the shelf.
o    It would seem like this cap seal(see pictures) has the same cleaning issues as the Pelikan 4001 cap, but it can actually be removed and reinstalled without breakage by slipping something thin underneath the side of the seal.
-    Ink will not mix that quickly, especially those with shimmer, because you can't really get ink to slosh around in the shelf area very easily.
-    Small volume.

S.T. Dupont

  Hide contents

 

Another control bottle, this time a flat one, no low level filling features.

+    If you'd like to bludgeon someone to death with an ink cap, this should be your weapon of choice. Outside of just being heavy, the cap is also extremely well constructed. They used to infill the capital D on these caps with enamel in the past, which was even more luxurious.
+    Flat and heavy, so you're not knocking this one over.
+    Unique shield shape, reminiscent of heraldry.
+    Generous ink volume.
-    Difficult to get your fingers in around the sides, similar to the LAMY T52.
-    Because it's such a wide bottle, it's that much harder to fill from once the level gets low.

Van Dieman’s

  Hide contents

 

A flat at the front of the bottle allows the bottle to tilt forward, which should in theory allow you to get your feed closer to the bottom of the bottle and the ink to collect into the more constricted wedge shape. In practice, however, the neck of the bottle is too narrow to reach the ink. I've seen these bottles from other manufacturers as well, they don't seem to be unique to Van Dieman's.

+    The only positive thing I can think of is that the grip ridges on the cap make a nine-pointed star shape, which looks quite nice.
-    Oversize pens are not going to fit in the neck.
-    Low level filling feature doesn't work.
-    Easily knocked over while tilted.
-    Small volume, most of which is inaccessible.

Visconti Hourglass

  Hide contents

 

These types of bottles(which are not unique to Visconti; the Japanese manufacturers often use them) work by having a little cup/miser in the neck of the bottle with holes in the sides(see pictures) that fits snuggly around your nib and feed. Invert the bottle and ink will run through the holes in the cup and into the neck of the bottle. When the bottle is turned back up, the ink in the neck should in theory fall into the little cup. In practice, I've found that not much ink falls into the cup and you can only get a partial fill should your pen have a large ink capacity.

+    Nice geometric shape reminiscent of an hourglass or perhaps a cotton bobbin.
+    Coloured cap medallion that reminds me of bakelite items.
+    Cone shape, so no danger of knocking it over.
o    Very simple to fill from in theory, though not in practice.
-    This is an especially poor version of the internal ink miser design, because there isn't a lot of space in the neck of the bottle for ink to collect into, so it's very difficult to get the ink miser filled right up to the holes. The Akkerman bottles should in theory have the same issue, but they compensated for this with a long neck and the additional post moulded into the cap.
-    Keep your shimmer away from this one, it's highly impractical to get particles to dispurse evenly throughout the bottle and back out of the miser once they've settled.
-    Rather narrow neck and very hard to reach corners, difficult to clean.

Waterman(personal favourite for best value)

  Hide contents

 

Another bottle that has flats on its side so you can tip it over and get your feed closer to the bottom of the bottle. This one also has a second set of flats, which allows you to tilt it down even further when you're down to the dregs, but I find it so wobbly and difficult to see what I'm doing that I think this wasn't an intentional design element. I had to use a full bottle for the capped picture because the cap on my empty bottle came broken out of the box.

+    Probably the cheapest and most readily available bottle with a low level filling feature.
+    Cheap, but in no way ugly.
+    Easy to clean, maybe you'll need a cotton swab to get into the bowed corners at the bottom, but I didn't find it necessary.
+    Nowhere for ink to get stuck, homogenises well.
o    Substantially more stabile and less fiddly to fill from than the other bottles that sit on their sides, though it's obviously still balancing on its side.

 

Methodology

 

Each bottle was cleaned and left to dry completely for several weeks, after which each bottle was weighed and exactly thirty milliliters of distilled water and a drop of Diamine Cornflower were added to each. The contents were then immediately homogenised as one would do before opening a bottle to fill from normally. A Pilot Custom 823 and a Parker Duofold Centennial were then used to remove the demonstration fluid until air, and nothing but air, was being sucked in. A second weighing then gave me the difference in mass between the empty bottle and the bottle with the dregs of fluid after filling, from which the remnant of fluid remaining in the bottle and the ratio of accessible ink in regards to the stated total volume on the label were derived. While I did take more accurate readings, I rounded the results in the table to the nearest milliliter and percentage point, because there are so many factors that could affect these measurements that it would be beyond pointless to use a higher number of significands. Apart from the rather large variance between "identical" bottles inherent to the production process, the amount of time you wait to let the ink settle, the adhesion of the specific ink in question to the walls of the bottle and the amount of skill/patience you have with filling can all throw off the results far beyond a singular milliliter or percentage point; let alone a tenth of one. I didn't include low level filling features incorporated into the box designs, because boxes get lost, they tear over time and they get permanently dirty, unlike the bottles.

 

The reason each bottle was tested twice, once with the Custom 823 and once with the Duofold Centennial, is that feeds with external fins can keep sucking ink through the ink channel inside the feed to some degree until the ink level drops below the fins, while feeds that do not have any externally visible fins will stop sucking up ink as soon as the ink level drops below the breather hole, which is usually located right against the grip section. The example pictures below will give you a general idea of the difference this can make, though this obviously means that a bottle with a filling feature that gets the breather hole closer to the bottom of the bottle will do a disproportionately better job when used with a finless feed, and it may even make some filling features completely useless because they don't keep the ink level high enough in the bottle to reach the breather hole(e.g. Montblanc's Shoe and Bungubox's Heel bottles).

 

 

As for the four more subjective aspects listed in the table, these are based both on my experiences using the bottles until they were empty and on my experiences cleaning them afterwards.

• Filling describes how comfortable I found the low level filling features to use.
• Stability is a rough estimation of how easy it would be to knock the bottle over and make ink splash out, specifically while the bottle is placed in its low level filling position.
• Mixing is a measure of both my experience using the bottle and how quickly the drop of Diamine Cornflower homogenised with the distilled water while inverting the bottle, as well as my general experiences of putting shimmering ink in all of the bottles I suspected would be troublesome.
• Cleaning was assessed by asking myself the following questions: "Can I comfortably fit a finger in the bottle and reach every nook and cranny?" and "If I can't, can I reach everything with a standard length cotton swab?". I found that cleaning caps is actually irrelevant(unless otherwise noted in the specific bottle's extended notes), because the ink only gets stuck in places that are outside of the rim of the bottle, so it will never come into contact with the ink inside the bottle if you wipe your cap and neck like the civilised person you undoubtedly are, dear reader.

[Harold]

Alright, I need some feedback from my fellow forum users. Apparently, and I was not aware of this at the time I first posted this thread, posts can no longer be edited a couple of days after the original posting date. This means that I either have to make a new post in this thread every time I update it, as I have done today, or I need to create a new thread and lose all of your comments. Which would you prefer? I'll obviously post the article in its entirety every time I post an update so you don't need to flip between pages for all of the information; the most recent post will always contain all of the information.

 

The only other option would be to link to my own website where I can format the article however I like using full-fat HTML and CSS, but then I would still need to post the thread anew to add the link to the first post so people would actually be aware of it. I also find it important to keep niche, independently hosted forums like these alive by providing quality articles. The Internet has turned into a bunch of tightly controlled media funnels(Reddit being the obvious example of the forum funnel), and I have a very strong philosophical aversion to that fact.

 

P.S. Please excuse some of the terrible pictures added in this update, but my diffuse light crapped out about half-way through the process of photographing the bottles and I didn't know when I'd next have the time to do it, so I just decided to take the pictures and work with what pitiful little daylight I had.

[LizEF]

I say keep it all in this thread.

[Mechanical]

This is a terrific thread and it would be great to keep everything all together. 

[txomsy]

Wow! You really did a lot of work there. Thank you so very much!

[InesF]

Thank you so much for your effort in documenting ink bottle performance so well! 

 

Some time ago I had a similar problem with adding more and more content to a thread - and failed the same way as you.

Do not worry too much. Simply add updates when available into this thread. Only if you are "finished" (can that ever be?), make one more entry that has all data - or, alternatively, make an online-document and post the link here.

 

Good work! Good luck and looking forward!