Franken-aerometric?

[InkyProf]

I have a "51" Flighter, with the gold cap band and a barrel date 2nd quarter 1951. However: the sac guard is what I understand to be a later style ("press 4 times," without the plastic end cap). However however: the breather tube is short and looks like a celluloid Vacumatic-era one (it's ambered, neither silver nor rigid black plastic). I assume the sac guard is a later replacement (correct me if I'm wrong). Is there any possibility that the tube/feed combo are original to this pen, or is this likely also a later retrofit? (I've consulted the usual online sources, which for me are parker51.com, the parkercollector penography and RB's 51 page.)

 

Nothing much hangs on this other than my desire to understand what kind of beast this is; I suppose I could get bigger fills by swapping out the feed/tube for a stainless one, but I'm not sure that matters enough to me to bother (not to mention that the hood might be glued on, though I need several more days of soaking and heating to arrive at that conclusion).

 

Thanks!

[FarmBoy]

How about some pictures to aid in sussing out the subtleties. 

[InkyProf]

Sure: here are two. If you want information about something not shown here, let me know. The full text on the sac guard reads: Parker "51" To fill press ribbed bar firmly 4 times holding pen point down, wipe with soft tissue. Use Parker ink. The Parker Pen Company Made in U.S.A."

 

[samba]

16 hours ago, InkyProf said:

Sure: here are two. If you want information about something not shown here, let me know. The full text on the sac guard reads: Parker "51" To fill press ribbed bar firmly 4 times holding pen point down, wipe with soft tissue. Use Parker ink. The Parker Pen Company Made in U.S.A."

 

I believe that following the restoration, the restorer replaced both the sac protector and the breather tube. It is important to mention that certain sac guards from 1951 bear the inscription 'Super chrome ink' instead of 'Parker ink'. And a sac protector without a black plastic end cap belongs to the 1960s. Additionally, the black plastic aerometric breather tube is longer used in full-sized aerometric models. Your item could either originate from a Vacumatic 51 or a Demi 51. I have observed that some Demi 51 models are equipped with this particular type of shorter brownish breather tube.  

[InkyProf]

Thanks, @samba! That's consistent with my intuitions.

 

My only remaining question, I guess, is how much of the internals were later replacements. If Aerometrics were produced from the beginning with the silver breather tube, then at a minimum, the feed must also have been replaced. Or the whole nib-feed-collector-breather assembly could have been swapped out. Once I get the hood off, if I ever do, I'll be able to see whether the collector is the older or newer type, and look for a date code on the nib.

 

[InkyProf]

After five days of repeated cycles of soaking and heating, to no avail, but with the internals no longer seeming to shed ink, I've come to suspect this hood was glued on by a previous "restorer" (and the clutch ring too), so I'm going to put the sac and sac guard back on and try using it as is. If I ever acquire a collet or wrench for the connector-to-barrel threads, maybe I'll try unscrewing it one more time, but for the moment, I think my annoyance is in danger of overwhelming my patience, so I'm done for now.

[USG]

10 hours ago, InkyProf said:

After five days of repeated cycles of soaking and heating, to no avail, but with the internals no longer seeming to shed ink, I've come to suspect this hood was glued on by a previous "restorer" (and the clutch ring too), so I'm going to put the sac and sac guard back on and try using it as is. If I ever acquire a collet or wrench for the connector-to-barrel threads, maybe I'll try unscrewing it one more time, but for the moment, I think my annoyance is in danger of overwhelming my patience, so I'm done for now.

 

I enjoyed following this. 😀👍

[InkyProf]

7 hours ago, USG said:

I enjoyed following this. 😀👍

 

I'm not sure *I* enjoyed it, but I'm glad it was entertaining! 😉 Seriously, though: the good news is that the pen fills surprisingly well given the short breather tube, and writes very nicely, with a narrow fine (but smooth) line, and since the old, completely opaque pli-glass sac came off thanks to all the heat applied, I've replaced it with a new one. With proper maintenance, I shouldn't need to remove the hood. And now I have three different Flighters in my pen tray -- a 61, a 25, and this!

 

[samba]

1 hour ago, InkyProf said:

 

I'm not sure *I* enjoyed it, but I'm glad it was entertaining! 😉 Seriously, though: the good news is that the pen fills surprisingly well given the short breather tube, and writes very nicely, with a narrow fine (but smooth) line, and since the old, completely opaque pli-glass sac came off thanks to all the heat applied, I've replaced it with a new one. With proper maintenance, I shouldn't need to remove the hood. And now I have three different Flighters in my pen tray -- a 61, a 25, and this!

 

That sounds great!🙂

[inkstainedruth]

@InkyProf -- Is the 61 Flighter you're getting one with the capillary filler?  I love mine.  But the nib is a little odd in that it looks sort of like some prior owner tried to turn it into a fude nib at some point.  I was hoping to get it worked on at OPS last weekend, but the person I took it to said "I'd have to take the pen home with me because it looks as if the nib was BENT and I don't have the facilities here at the show to work on it...."  

And of course the pen is inked up at the moment as well....

Sigh.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[InkyProf]

50 minutes ago, inkstainedruth said:

Is the 61 Flighter you're getting one with the capillary filler?

 

The 61 isn't in the future, I've had it for a little while; and yup, it's a capillary filler -- I filled it for the first time a couple of months ago with J. Herbin Vert de Gris and am on my third fill with the same ink. I haven't had any trouble with it so far - I thought it was getting clogged recently, but it was just running dry; left it in the ink for half an hour and now it's flowing well again.

 

I have a weak spot for Flighters, it seems... the one I covet but don't have yet is a 45, preferable the early kind with the black barrel end and the smooth concave cap finial (but I'm not that picky).

[inkstainedruth]

I didn't even realize that 61 fighters existed at first -- someone on FPN tipped me off about them when I was complaining about how pretty much all my other ones had developed cracks (the problem being that Parker used the same grade of plastic on them as on the Parker 21s).  

I do have a 45 Flighter, with a B nib, but haven't used it much.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[InkyProf]

I had read that about the plastic (about it being more prone to crack, though not specifically about it being the same as the material used in the 21). I'm surprised Parker made that decision, since the "61" seems to have been marketed as a premium pen: in the 1956 catalog, it appears first, followed by the "51," then the "41," positioned as a moderate-priced pen ("has many features usually found only in pens costing much more") and then the budget "21" ("superior quality at a modest price"). And ads from the same year seem to show the "61" retailing at $22.50 with a Lustraloy cap; in 1954, that would have gotten you a "51" Custom and five bucks' change.

 

(All of this research also revealed that Parker's New York City office in the 50s was at 61 Broadway, what a coincidence!)

[USG]

9 hours ago, InkyProf said:

 

I'm not sure *I* enjoyed it, but I'm glad it was entertaining! 😉 Seriously, though: the good news is that the pen fills surprisingly well given the short breather tube, and writes very nicely, with a narrow fine (but smooth) line, and since the old, completely opaque pli-glass sac came off thanks to all the heat applied, I've replaced it with a new one. With proper maintenance, I shouldn't need to remove the hood. And now I have three different Flighters in my pen tray -- a 61, a 25, and this!

 

 

Each project is an adventure.  😀👍

[Carguy]

That would have frustrated me, but I have had pens like that! All is well that ends well….or something like that!

[inkstainedruth]

5 hours ago, InkyProf said:

I had read that about the plastic (about it being more prone to crack, though not specifically about it being the same as the material used in the 21). I'm surprised Parker made that decision, since the "61" seems to have been marketed as a premium pen: in the 1956 catalog, it appears first, followed by the "51," then the "41," positioned as a moderate-priced pen ("has many features usually found only in pens costing much more") and then the budget "21" ("superior quality at a modest price"). And ads from the same year seem to show the "61" retailing at $22.50 with a Lustraloy cap; in 1954, that would have gotten you a "51" Custom and five bucks' change.

 

(All of this research also revealed that Parker's New York City office in the 50s was at 61 Broadway, what a coincidence!)

And ironically?  The 41 was made with the same grade of plastic as the 21.  I'm lucky in that the one I found for an insanely good price at an estate sale, digging through a shoebox of mostly ballpoints (I could have bought the entire contents of the box for five bucks US) HASN'T got cracks in it (I don't use it a lot, and sort of baby it -- but it IS a nice writer...).

If they had used a better quality material?  I'd bet the 61s might still be on the market today.  Because the capillary fill system is really cool....  (Unlike the 41s which were priced between the 51s and the 21s and were marketed as "ladies pens" -- and I suspect they didn't sell well because a lot women probably basically said, "Naaaah -- I'll save up and get a demi-sized 51 instead...."  Because I probably would have....

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[Carguy]

3 minutes ago, inkstainedruth said:

And ironically?  The 41 was made with the same grade of plastic as the 21.  I'm lucky in that the one I found for an insanely good price at an estate sale, digging through a shoebox of mostly ballpoints (I could have bought the entire contents of the box for five bucks US) HASN'T got cracks in it (I don't use it a lot, and sort of baby it -- but it IS a nice writer...).

If they had used a better quality material?  I'd bet the 61s might still be on the market today.  Because the capillary fill system is really cool....  (Unlike the 41s which were priced between the 51s and the 21s and were marketed as "ladies pens" -- and I suspect they didn't sell well because a lot women probably basically said, "Naaaah -- I'll save up and get a demi-sized 51 instead...."  Because I probably would have....

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

I sold a beautiful turquoise 41 at the Orlando Pen Show at a loss. It had never been inked but it just FELT fragile. I warned the lady that bought it, but she wanted it so bad, I felt like paying it forward so to speak.

 

What is funny to me is that I have 20+ Parker 61’s and have never had any issues with them, except for a couple of disappearing arrows…

[jchch1950]

11 hours ago, Carguy said:

I

 

What is funny to me is that I have 20+ Parker 61’s and have never had any issues with them, except for a couple of disappearing arrows…

Any solution for the disappearing arrows?

[Carguy]

I know there is one from Ron or someone on here, but I just generally replace the hood when that happens.

[InkyProf]

The most comprehensive thread I could find on the subject is several years old: https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/329492-parker-61-arrow-fixing/#comment-3948776