Waterman 100 Yr Pen Identification

[cuteline]

I just got this set from ebay (haven't got the shipment yet)-- looks like in a nice condition. But the cap looks like the first-year one, whereas the barrel is 2nd-year. On the other hand, the pencil and pen set, as well as the inscriptions, make this look original. Could any waterman expert chime in to provide some advice? Thanks.

 

 

Edited July 24, 2008 by cuteline

[Richard]

I don't think it's a mismatch. The banding on the barrel is clearly first year despite the shape of the barrel's crown. I don't have an explanation for the crown shape.

[cuteline]

I don't think it's a mismatch. The banding on the barrel is clearly first year despite the shape of the barrel's crown. I don't have an explanation for the crown shape.

 

Thanks a lot for your expert advice. Jun

[PAKMAN]

Beautiful set!! Could the barrel end be a replacement?

[cuteline]

Beautiful set!! Could the barrel end be a replacement?

 

Good question. I don't know and it was not said in the ebay listing.

[Richard]

Beautiful set!! Could the barrel end be a replacement?

I seriously doubt it. This is a Lucite^® pen, and Lucite doesn't crumble. It's only the celluloid Hundred Year Pens that have that problem.

[repairperson]

How do you tell the difference between lucite and celluloid. Except when the celluloid is crumbled off?

 

[Richard]

How do you tell the difference between lucite and celluloid. Except when the celluloid is crumbled off?

You recognize that Waterman made Lucite pens for only two years, beginning in 1939. These pens are distinctive in appearance, and once you know what they look like you're home free. Check out my profile of the Hundred Year Pen. it explains and illustrates the differences.

[david i]

I don't think it's a mismatch. The banding on the barrel is clearly first year despite the shape of the barrel's crown. I don't have an explanation for the crown shape.

 

 

Not sure on that, though i might be missing your point. Do you reference the metal bands or the plastic ribs, when you cite "banding"?

 

best regards

 

david

[Richard]

Do you reference the metal bands or the plastic ribs, when you cite "banding"?

Bands are metal. Grooves are plastic.

[cuteline]

Do you reference the metal bands or the plastic ribs, when you cite "banding"?

Bands are metal. Grooves are plastic.

 

I saw a picture in "Fountain Pens & Pencils - The Golden Age" by Fischler & Schneider that shows a very similarly banded barrel (and the squared end) with a cap that is a bit flatter at the top (which I thought should be the correct cap)... so I am not sure what is special about the banding of this red pen. Thanks for all the insights.

 

Jun

Edited July 26, 2008 by cuteline

[david i]

Do you reference the metal bands or the plastic ribs, when you cite "banding"?

Bands are metal. Grooves are plastic.

 

Do not second style pens have similar barrel bands?

 

 

 

d

Edited July 26, 2008 by david i

[david i]

Do you reference the metal bands or the plastic ribs, when you cite "banding"?

Bands are metal. Grooves are plastic.

 

I saw a picture in "Fountain Pens & Pencils - The Golden Age" by Fischler & Schneider that shows a very similarly banded barrel (and the squared end) with a cap that is a bit flatter at the top (which I thought should be the correct cap)... so I am not sure what is special about the banding of this red pen. Thanks for all the insights.

 

Jun

 

The pen to me does look like a second style barrel with first style cap. They do fit together.

-d

[Richard]

The barrel end does say second version, but the barrel bands are wrong for the second version. Here's a second-version Standard pen (same size as OP's pen):

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/hundred_year_40_red_capped.jpg

 

And here's a first-version Standard pen, to show the banding. This is what I see on the OP's pen:

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/hundred_year_1939_capped.jpg

Edited July 26, 2008 by Richard

[david i]

The barrel end does say second version, but the barrel bands are wrong for the second version. Here's a second-version Standard pen (same size as OP's pen):

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/hundred_year_40_red_capped.jpg

 

And here's a first-version Standard pen, to show the banding. This is what I see on the OP's pen:

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/hundred_year_1939_capped.jpg

 

Agreed. Including the extra bottom band.

 

So something funny then about the butt. Heaven forbid anyone invoke "transitional"

d

[Rick Krantz]

The barrel end does say second version, but the barrel bands are wrong for the second version. Here's a second-version Standard pen (same size as OP's pen):

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/hundred_year_40_red_capped.jpg

 

And here's a first-version Standard pen, to show the banding. This is what I see on the OP's pen:

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/hundred_year_1939_capped.jpg

 

Agreed. Including the extra bottom band.

 

So something funny then about the butt. Heaven forbid anyone invoke "transitional"

d

 

I was thinking that, or even a factory repair, seems the pencil is first style, but that barrel, on the pen, seems to have different barrel band thicknesses, from pen to pencil. cap is first style, barrel seems a bit odd, for what seems to be "accepted" but as we know in pen collecting, nothing is exact. Nice set, FWIW.

[Vintagepens]

Note too that the lever is a globe-ended model, so things are somewhat complex here.

 

I do believe one occasionally runs across second-model pens with the extra band near the barrel end, but even if one hypothesizes that this is a transitional set mixing elements of first- and second-model pens, the lever makes sense only as a later repair -- which then leads one to question that the barrel too is original to the cap.

 

 

[AllWriteNow]

These types of mysteries are what I enjoy most in vintage pens!

 

Cuteline... It's a downright gorgeous set! Congrats!

 

Steve

Edited July 26, 2008 by luckygrandson

[cuteline]

These types of mysteries are what I enjoy most in vintage pens!

 

Cuteline... It's a downright gorgeous set! Congrats!

 

Steve

 

Thanks. I did not realize that my original question was not that obvious. I still have not gotten the set. When i do, I'll take and upload more pictures to clarify certain points. But that will be a month's time since I am traveling.

Thanks all for the very interesting dicussions.

Jun

 

[cuteline]

The barrel end does say second version, but the barrel bands are wrong for the second version. Here's a second-version Standard pen (same size as OP's pen):

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/hundred_year_40_red_capped.jpg

 

And here's a first-version Standard pen, to show the banding. This is what I see on the OP's pen:

 

http://www.richardspens.com/images/collection/zoomed/hundred_year_1939_capped.jpg

 

Agreed. Including the extra bottom band.

 

So something funny then about the butt. Heaven forbid anyone invoke "transitional"

d

 

But the picture I saw from "Fountain Pens & Pencils - The Golden Age" by Fischler & Schneider does have a barrel with the extra metal ring like in the first-style (and the squared end). Maybe it is for oversized (different width)? Also, the withd of the gold bands are slightly different?

Here is a link to another 100 yr pen that is on sale from a UK site:

http://www.vintagewatermanpens.co.uk/ProdDesc.asp?id=w5181

 

The globe lever noticed by David is interesting. I'll have to examine it carefully when I get hold of the set.

Jun

Edited July 27, 2008 by cuteline