LEVER FILL SUPERIOR?

[colliewalker1]

I have bougfht a Conway Stewart Executive 60 - lever fill - the first I have bopught with this type of filling system. I have been amazed at the amount of ink that this pen holds - far more thanb non lever systems: was the transition to leverless filling really a step forward - except perhaps simplicity of filling - and cosmetically which I think is marginal anyway?

 

How important is leverless filling to members when choosing a pen??"

 

Denis

 

Cheshire, UK>

[donwinn]

I have pens with probably every filling system except crescent fill and coin fill. The converters, both twist and push-pull, have the smallest ink capacity, followed by lever fill, then piston fill, then a tie betwen Pelikan Level and eye dropper. The converter pens, except for one Maki-E I just got from Japan (seller says manufacturer recommends no converter, cartridge only) also take cartridges, which, depending upon the type of cartridge, have more, or less capacity than the converter (Waterman and Parker hold more, international and Cross hold less).

 

My personal favorite is the piston fill, a la pelikan M100/M200. Clean, neat, large capacity, no leakage problems, no sac to replace, easy to clean and flush. Least favorite is cartridge only, bedause of the difficulty in flushing (have to get a separate ear syringe or equivalent) when changing ink color, some syringe method of refilling cartridges if I don't like the "standard" ink colors.

 

Donnie

[Ernst Bitterman]

It's hard to beat pistons for raw tonnage of ink, but the most fun in filling comes from the touchdowns and snorkels of Sheaffer. Blurp! :roflmho: Whee!

[artaddict]

I love lever fillers! Easy & reliable.

Edited December 10, 2007 by artaddict

[HDoug]

I only have one lever-fill, like you a Conway Stewart but in my case a modern Dandy. It seems as though the current Conway Stewart company is backing away from levers and buttons, which is a shame. It holds more than a converter... I haven't made a comparison with my piston Pelikans. The main reason I like lever-fillers is that extra bit of furniture on the pen! Before I got into fountain pens, I always wondered what that lever thing was about. I guess I need a crescent filler before my time's up. That's TWO more bright, yet functional, bits: the crescent, and the ring.

 

This fountain pen thing is a lot more fun that it seems like it should be...

 

Doug

[daveg]

"Leverless" doesn't matter at all.

 

But I agree with the above comment that my pistons hold more than my levers and all of my pistons have ink windows and that's very rare on lever fillers (and sac-type fillers in general.)

 

For me, there's a trade-off being holding a lot of ink and knowing how much there is which makes cart/converters an interesting trade-off with some other filling systems, but pistons or touchdown/vac fillers with windows or transparent barrels can give me everything I want.

 

[Nick A]

I like pens that are not messy to fill or where I get my fingertips inky from the top of the bottle lip.

 

As far as that goes, I think the Parker 51 aerometric filler is the best filler & pen combination. Easy to work, fast, problem free for me.

 

Of the "standard" style filling systems, converters and cartridges are the WORST filling and ink delivery systems.

 

Levers are ok, but the pressure bars have to be well made or adjusted. Cheap pens with cheap levers stink.

 

Seems like all filling systems have a weakness. Plus there is personal preference. On modern pens, I actually prefer a piston system.

 

I don't think I've ever done enough writing that ink capacity has ever been an issue. I'm truly surprised at how much talk there is about ink capacity. If I know I'll be writing a lot, I refill the pen in the morning - I don't wait for it to go dry before refilling. And what are the chances I only have one pen with me? Pretty slim. I usually have at least one backup. Plus I have ink at home and on my desk at work, so refilling is a cinch. If I run out of ink? Refill with a bit of water... sure the color is a bit weak, but it keeps me going.

Edited December 10, 2007 by Nick A

[Shelley]

I want to try a snorkel-they just sound fun? intriging? different? any one reccomend one?

[DrPJM1]

I bought a Sheaffer Snorkel 3 yrs ago and love it! The filling systen, although complicated, is very easy to use and fills quite a bit. The stock italic nib is a gem.

 

I also like Sheaffer's lever fill Balance pens.

Edited December 10, 2007 by DrPJM1

[telltime]

What. No mention of the Vacumatic? O.K. - I mention it now, but the amount of ink does depend on the size of the Pen.

 

Ex - My Maximas hold a whole bunch (I think that's the technical term ) of ink. The 51s hold lots (again, being technical) but I don't know about the demis, as I don't own any.

[Ray-Vigo]

The lever fill is my pick for the best all-around filling system yet devised. The beauty of the lever fill is the mechanical simplicity combined with holding (assuming we have a standard sized pen like a Waterman 52 or the like) a fair amount of ink. It is also easy to empty and flush lever fills. The only drawback is that I find I do need to use both hands when filling the lever pens (one to hold the pen, the other to steady and work the lever. But other than that I think the lever does everything well. It isn't spectacular in any one category, but it does everything pretty well.

 

I think a piston fill would be right up there too- they hold a lot of ink and are also quite reliable. I can see why many people prefer the piston.

 

I think a non-leaking eyedropper is also near the top. How much simpler does it get? You open it up, drop in the ink, and close it back up. The issue is that they can leak and when they do- it's bad. Of course you get good ink capacity often too. I like them, but leaks can be serious.

 

C/C is good for convenience and adaptability, but I've found they don't hold as much ink. I go through the ink fast in my mediums and wetter writers. I have also had some flow problems with them due to surface tension issues in the carts or converters in some pens.

Edited December 10, 2007 by Ray-Vigo

[Paddler]

I want to try a snorkel-they just sound fun? intriging? different? any one reccomend one?

 

I have three snorkels. They each hold about 1 cc of ink. With a F nib and the way I write, that amounts to about 1800 words or 15 pages of standard college ruled notebook paper, double spaced. I inherited one from my father who bought it in the mid 1950s. It was seldom used. I finally had to re-sac it this year. My mother got one at the same time and used it to grade school papers for 25 years. The cap is missing and the barrel has two cracks in it. I rebuilt it this year also. It works as well as a new one.

 

Yes, I would recommend one. You can get a lever filler or a piston filler with more capacity, but you can't get a pen with a cooler or more reliable filling system. The snorkel keeps the nib ink-free after the fill so you don't have to wipe the excess ink off of the section and nib. I suppose that saves a little ink. It certainly saves a lot of inky fingers. Re-saccing is a bit of a challenge - much more complicated than a lever filler.

 

Third in line after the eyedropper filler and the blow-filler, the lever filler has to be the simplest filling mechanism and the easiest to service. I carry levers all the time and, to me, they are no hardship at all.

 

Paddler

 

[Tberry010]

Well, seems like I am in the minority-again-since in general I prefer C/C pens. I have some esties which I enjoy, a Pel brown transparent with piston which I like OK (they are a little light), but most of my favorites are cartridge. I don't normally carry an ink bottle, don't own one of those cool ink-pot gizmos, but can and do keep a few carts handy. Easy to change, no mess, and some carts, such as Parker and long international style hold a about a half-bunch (trying to be technically corect) or is that a semi-lot of ink. When at home I can rinse and syringe my way into and fairly quickly out of all sorts of shades.

Besides, other than for demo pens or transparent, I really do not like a visual window which cannot help but break the pattern of the pen. Tberry010

[Doug Add]

I have owned several lever fill pens, but not because I sought that fill system. I got them because I liked the pen. I am now down to just one lever fill pen. It is one of my least favorite fill systems. In fact, I have avoided buying pens the past few years that I might otherwise consider had they not been lever fill. I do not find the lever an intuitively ergonomic way to fill a pen.

 

I find the aerometric and button fill to be the best for me, followed closely by piston fill. I also avoid vac fill pens. I have had more trouble with vac and piston fill pens than any other type.

 

All a matter of personal taste.

[JeffTL]

My lever Esterbrooks are indeed quite easy to fill, but then again, so is my piston-filler Pelikan. Aerometrics take some work but are worth it since they're usually 51's.

[Richard]

Lever fillers are less efficient at taking up a full load than is a properly made crescent or cam filler. There's just no way with a lever to ensure that the pressure bar will flatten the sac completely. Possibly the most efficient pressure-bar/sac-filling pens of all time were those made by William Welty with his Wawco cam filler (U.S. Patent No. 834,542).

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/welty_evans.jpg

 

But a pressure bar, no matter how efficient it is, takes up space that were better devoted to a sac. This means that the most space-efficient sac-filling pens of all time were probably Chilton's first model, which used David LaFrance's design (U.S. Patent No. 1,528,379).

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/chilton_1st_jade.jpg

 

Chiltons were also mechanically simpler than lever fillers, and this is another characteristic of "better."

[colliewalker1]

THANKS TO EVERYBODY FOR A VERY INTERESTING SET OF REPLIES, OBVIOUSLY BASED ON EXPERIENCE OF A VARIETY OF FILLING METHODS.

 

MY CONCLUSION IS THAT WHEN BUYING A PEN THE PRESENCE OF LEVER FILL WILL NOT BE A DECIDING FACTOR FOR ME EITHER WAY!

 

REGARDS TO ALL -

 

DENIS

[gregoron]

Personally, I prefer piston fill, then eyedropper, lever, converter, then the rest. Lever fill does have its merits. I like the way it easily flushes the ink from the sac and cleans the nib & feeder with a jet of water. However, I think piston fill has more capacity though (i.e. Pelikan M150 piston fill vs. Esterbrook lever fill).

[Huffward]

I collect vintage British pens in the main, so it's usually lever fill or button fill. Of the two, I prefer button fill, but you have to admit that both systems are efficient. You can hold or even tip the ink bottle with one hand while filling the pen single-handed with the other. This can save a lot of spills. These systems were obviously thought through by the people who invented them, which is more than you can say for some of the others. As for the others:

 

Parker vacumatic: superb.

 

Sheaffer touchdown: fine if it works well and delivers good compression. I have one old Sheaffer that I fill by unscrewing the barrel, holding finger and thumb over the holes at the side of the metal sac sheath, and blowing into the hole at the top. When it works, touchdown is a single-handed system, as the pen fills on the downstroke.

 

Piston fillers: cheap and fiddly. Frankly, if I am going to spend serious money on a new pen, I expect something rather better than the cheap and nasty cartridge / piston filler option.

 

Parker pump filler: even cheaper and nastier. A fine system if you want to deposit the entire contents of you ink bottle all over the floor every time you fill.

 

Cartridges: I'm not going to spend serious money on a pen I have to unscrew and push a cheap little piece of plastic into.

 

Main thrust of argument, an awful lot of makers seem to concentrate on the exterior of the pen while content to put rubbish inside. This in the 21st century. It's time for something better.

 

 

 

 

[HLeopold]

I want to try a snorkel-they just sound fun? intriging? different? any one reccomend one?

 

Heck yes! Any of the Triumph TM snorkels are worth trying out, most have excellent nibs and are extremely smooth. Gold or other metals, it does not seem to matter at all, every Triumph nibbed snorkel that has passed through my hands had a great nib.

 

One of mine needs a new sac and seals, but I keep using it as a dip pen, I have got to send it in to be worked on soon.