Feather Touch Nib with Serial Number

[njoyingaz]

This subject may have been addressed before but I have searched the archives and can't find the answer.

 

I have a Sheaffer Ebonized Pearl Senior Balance Vac-Fil (1936-39) with a Feather Touch #5 two-tone nib. It also has a serial number like a Lifetime nib. I can't find any reference in the well-known reference pages online to Feather Touch nibs with serial numbers, only Lifetime nibs.

 

Does anyone know the history behind this?

 

Here is a photo.

 

Thanks for any info.

...Lee

[Guest PeteWK]

  njoyingaz said:

This subject may have been addressed before but I have searched the archives and can't find the answer.

 

I have a Sheaffer Ebonized Pearl Senior Balance Vac-Fil (1936-39) with a Feather Touch #5 two-tone nib. It also has a serial number like a Lifetime nib. I can't find any reference in the well-known reference pages online to Feather Touch nibs with serial numbers, only Lifetime nibs.

 

Does anyone know the history behind this?

 

Here is a photo.

 

Thanks for any info.

...Lee

 

 

Hi Lee. Your nib not only has a serial number but it has one at the top. Thats very unusual and is generally dated to about 1940. Let's call it 1939-1941 for the sake of discussion. I've had a few (currently one, I think) and always on a pen I would put right aroung 1940-41. But I've never had one that was a Feather Touch, though I tend to collect white dot pens unless I get them in an auction lot. I'm sure some Feather Touch collector can shed some more light.

 

PeteWK

Edited May 13, 2007 by PeteWK

[Roger W.]

Lee;

 

Since you asked...

 

I'd love to add some deep explaination, however, there isn't one, at least not from me. Serial numbers are sketchy enough on lifetime stuff. The number on the nib aught to match the number on your certificate. When certain ranges of numbers ran is anyones guess. Serialized feathertouch nibs occur with about the same rationale. Maybe if we get a crack at the archives there will survive a memo but shy of that I don't know. Daniel may have more of a helpful thought.

 

Roger W.

[kirchh]

  PeteWK said:

Hi Lee. Your nib not only has a serial number but it has one at the top. Thats very unusual and is generally dated to about 1940.

PeteWK

By whom is this feature "generally dated to about 1940" (or 1939-1941)? I don't recall seeing this stated previously, and I am interested in examining the basis for this assertion so that any information posted here is traceable to a reference.

 

I would also point out that this feature is not "very unusual", in my experience. I'm sure if I rummaged around I could dig up a half-dozen examples of top-numbered nibs.

 

--Daniel

[Guest PeteWK]

  kirchh said:

  PeteWK said:

Hi Lee. Your nib not only has a serial number but it has one at the top. Thats very unusual and is generally dated to about 1940.

PeteWK

By whom is this feature "generally dated to about 1940" (or 1939-1941)? I don't recall seeing this stated previously, and I am interested in examining the basis for this assertion so that any information posted here is traceable to a reference.

 

I would also point out that this feature is not "very unusual", in my experience. I'm sure if I rummaged around I could dig up a half-dozen examples of top-numbered nibs.

 

--Daniel

 

 

 

Well, my examples have all come on the nibs of 1940 or 1941 Tuckaways, the exception being on a Balance with an inscription dated 1940. I currently have two nibs with the serial number like that and both from the early Tuckaway pens. I also have pens that would be dated in periods just before and just after that time frame, all with serial numbers where one would normally expect.

 

PeteWK

[kirchh]

  PeteWK said:

  kirchh said:

  PeteWK said:

Hi Lee. Your nib not only has a serial number but it has one at the top. Thats very unusual and is generally dated to about 1940.

PeteWK

By whom is this feature "generally dated to about 1940" (or 1939-1941)? I don't recall seeing this stated previously, and I am interested in examining the basis for this assertion so that any information posted here is traceable to a reference.

 

I would also point out that this feature is not "very unusual", in my experience. I'm sure if I rummaged around I could dig up a half-dozen examples of top-numbered nibs.

 

--Daniel

Well, my examples have all come on the nibs of 1940 or 1941 Tuckaways, the exception being on a Balance with an inscription dated 1940. I currently have two nibs with the serial number like that and both from the early Tuckaway pens. I also have pens that would be dated in periods just before and just after that time frame, all with serial numbers where one would normally expect.

 

PeteWK

Ah, but the fallacy at work here is the implicit assumption that the top-numbered nibs were not fitted to pens during part of the same period when bottom-numbered nibs were also being fitted. Given the many examples of feature overlap, I don't see a basis for this assumption, and thus the reasoning that arrives at the stated dates does not hold.

 

--Daniel

[Guest PeteWK]

--Daniel

Well, my examples have all come on the nibs of 1940 or 1941 Tuckaways, the exception being on a Balance with an inscription dated 1940. I currently have two nibs with the serial number like that and both from the early Tuckaway pens. I also have pens that would be dated in periods just before and just after that time frame, all with serial numbers where one would normally expect.

 

PeteWK

Ah, but the fallacy at work here is the implicit assumption that the top-numbered nibs were not fitted to pens during part of the same period when bottom-numbered nibs were also being fitted. Given the many examples of feature overlap, I don't see a basis for this assumption, and thus the reasoning that arrives at the stated dates does not hold.

 

--Daniel

 

 

 

 

As usual, that's utter BS. Daniel, why is it that you make a constant stream of SWAGs yourself (Scientific Wild A$$ Guess) but always demand some documentation signed by W.A. or Craig Sheaffer himself when someone else makes a comment? Your own knowledge seems limited to a steady stream of constant contrarianism. Maybe they did make serial numbers during that time as well, but that's irrelevant here. What is important is the fact that there's no evidence that the ones with the serial number on top were made AT ANY OTHER TIME.

 

Please stay on topic. I know its hard for you that there are people who know things you don't.

[kirchh]

  PeteWK said:

  Quote

Well, my examples have all come on the nibs of 1940 or 1941 Tuckaways, the exception being on a Balance with an inscription dated 1940. I currently have two nibs with the serial number like that and both from the early Tuckaway pens. I also have pens that would be dated in periods just before and just after that time frame, all with serial numbers where one would normally expect.

 

PeteWK

 

  Quote

Ah, but the fallacy at work here is the implicit assumption that the top-numbered nibs were not fitted to pens during part of the same period when bottom-numbered nibs were also being fitted. Given the many examples of feature overlap, I don't see a basis for this assumption, and thus the reasoning that arrives at the stated dates does not hold.

 

--Daniel

As usual, that's utter BS. Daniel, why is it that you make a constant stream of SWAGs yourself (Scientific Wild A$$ Guess)...

Perhaps you have me confused with another poster. I don't post SWAGs, much less a constant stream of them. However, as with all matters, I am open-minded, and I look forward to examining the specific evidence of this claim.

 

  Quote

but always demand some documentation signed by W.A. or Craig Sheaffer himself when someone else makes a comment?

Again, this assertion is easily tested; all that is needed is an example of such a demand by me, which I'm sure you can produce, as it would be deeply irresponsible to issue a public characterization of this sort without any basis whatsoever.

 

  Quote

Your own knowledge seems limited to a steady stream of constant contrarianism.

It has become apparent that it is difficult to predict how things "seem" to you, but that is really for you to sort out.

 

  Quote

Maybe they did make serial numbers during that time as well, but that's irrelevant here.

You've mis-read my post. Your assumption, offered without support, is that Sheaffer did not fit top-numbered nibs on pens during the periods before and after the timeframe you have cited. You specifically narrowed the time window to exclude the earlier (and later) production because, in your words, "I also have pens that would be dated in periods just before and just after that time frame, all with serial numbers where one would normally expect." As I clearly pointed out, you assume that Sheaffer didn't also produce top-numbered pens at the same time as those bottom-numbered pens. As you now explicitly acknowledge, Sheaffer may indeed have made both styles at the same time.

 

  Quote

What is important is the fact that there's no evidence that the ones with the serial number on top were made AT ANY OTHER TIME.

What a curious statement. I can only imagine that what you actually meant is that you haven't had pens with this feature that are datable to other times. I'm sure you recognize that, especially given your limited exposure to pens of this variety, it would be completely unwarranted to consider your experience to be exhaustive and thus deserving of the declaration that "there's no evidence that the ones with the serial number on top were made AT ANY OTHER TIME." The fact that you haven't yet seen evidence, of course, does not mean that there is no evidence, I hope you recognize.

 

  Quote

Please stay on topic. I know its hard for you that there are people who know things you don't.

A strange state to be in, I think; to "know" something that is not so.

 

As I'm sure you're interested in critically examining the issue under discussion, let's ask that folks post details about Sheaffers that they own that bear top-numbered nibs. That may help in refining our knowledge about the time period during which these items were produced.

 

I gather that when you stated that such nibs are "generally dated to about 1940", you meant that you have assigned that date based on the examples you've had, not that this date was generally accepted within the hobby. That's an important clarification.

 

--Daniel

P.S. I hope you don't mind that I cleaned up the quotes at the top; some formatting directives must have gotten lost along the way.

[PenHero]

Let's try and keep the discussion to the main point, which was, "Does anyone know the history behind this?"

 

A fair question.

 

Let's move to examples, and away from ad homenums and lingual jousting.

 

Let's offer specific information and the source material so all of us can benefit.

 

Thanks!

 

Cheers,

 

Jim Mamoulides

www.PenHero.com

 

[kirchh]

  PenHero said:

Let's try and keep the discussion to the main point, which was, "Does anyone know the history behind this?"

 

A fair question.

 

Let's move to examples, and away from ad homenums and lingual jousting.

 

Let's offer specific information and the source material so all of us can benefit.

 

Thanks!

 

Cheers,

 

Jim Mamoulides

www.PenHero.com

I agree, and I've solicited data from readers in my post above. I'll dig around in my stuff to see what I can contribute; my memory is that I've seen top-numbered nibs on items likely datable to earlier than 1940, but I will see what hard data I can produce.

 

--Daniel

P.S. Lingual jousting? Ew.

[Univer]

Hi,

 

A quick hunt through my cabinet turned up three top-numbered Feather Touch nibs, all No. 5s, and all in standard-size pens: two in Roseglow Balances and one in an Ebonized Pearl Balance. Since both colors, per Richard's site, were discontinued around 1939, maybe these specimens have some evidentiary value.

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

Edited May 21, 2007 by Univer

[njoyingaz]

For clarification on the postulated date of the pen in question in the original post, I used the information from Richard Binder's reference pages to arrive at the date of the pen. The dates are consistent with some similar information on David Nishimura's site and penhero.com. The material is Ebonized Pearl (1934-39), a vac-filler (1935-49), and a streamlined clip (1936-45). The overlapping years are 1936-1939, so that was my estimate of timeframe of the pen itself. I have no knowledge of whether the nib is original, though.

 

...Lee

[Univer]

  njoyingaz said:

For clarification on the postulated date of the pen in question in the original post, I used the information from Richard Binder's reference pages to arrive at the date of the pen. The dates are consistent with some similar information on David Nishimura's site and penhero.com. The material is Ebonized Pearl (1934-39), a vac-filler (1935-49), and a streamlined clip (1936-45). The overlapping years are 1936-1939, so that was my estimate of timeframe of the pen itself. I have no knowledge of whether the nib is original, though.

 

...Lee

 

Oops, thank you for reminding me: my Ebonized Pearl, like yours, is a vac-filler...the Roseglows are lever-fillers.

 

My impression is that when it comes to non-lifetime pens, there may be some "elasticity" in terms of dating by clip design. That is to say, the start and ending years may be accurate for Lifetimes, but not necessarily for non-Lifetimes.

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

 

[kirchh]

  njoyingaz said:

For clarification on the postulated date of the pen in question in the original post, I used the information from Richard Binder's reference pages to arrive at the date of the pen. The dates are consistent with some similar information on David Nishimura's site and penhero.com. The material is Ebonized Pearl (1934-39), a vac-filler (1935-49), and a streamlined clip (1936-45). The overlapping years are 1936-1939, so that was my estimate of timeframe of the pen itself. I have no knowledge of whether the nib is original, though.

 

...Lee

Note that the streamlined 'radius' clip appeared by mid-1935.

 

--Daniel

[Johnny Appleseed]

Checked my collection - 2 Feathertouch nibs with serial numbers on the top, both vac-fillers, one in Ebonized Pearl (1934-1939, according to Mr. Binder), one in Grey Pearl (1934-1936). Both came unrestored off of ebay.

 

I am seeing a lot of mention of Ebonized Pearl pens with the top-serial FT5 nibs.

 

John

[kirchh]

So far I've turned up eight Sheaffers with top-numbered nibs; six Lifetime Feathertouch examples and two Feathertouch items. Earliest item is likely a Gray Pearl pen datable to mid-1935 to mid-'36 based on catalogs.

 

--Daniel

[njoyingaz]

  kirchh said:

So far I've turned up eight Sheaffers with top-numbered nibs; six Lifetime Feathertouch examples and two Feathertouch items. Earliest item is likely a Gray Pearl pen datable to mid-1935 to mid-'36 based on catalogs.

 

--Daniel

 

Daniel,

 

The terminology is a little confusing to a neophyte. I was thinking Lifetime and Feathertouch would not apply to the same pen. On some web sites it seems to call Feathertouch = non-Lifetime, a no warranty, lower cost pen, but I also saw some Sheaffer ads that referred to Lifetime Feathertouch Tuckaways. Does that mean the pen itself can be called a Lifetime pen due to its white dot but the nib could be stamped "Feathertouch"? Is that what you refer to as Lifetime Feathertouch in your message above? When you say two Feathertouch items, these are non-lifetime (no white dot) pens with the same type of Feathertouch nib?

 

If you can shed any additional light or straigten out my misunderstanding, it would be helpful.

 

Thanks.

...Lee

[kirchh]

  njoyingaz said:

  kirchh said:

So far I've turned up eight Sheaffers with top-numbered nibs; six Lifetime Feathertouch examples and two Feathertouch items. Earliest item is likely a Gray Pearl pen datable to mid-1935 to mid-'36 based on catalogs.

 

--Daniel

 

Daniel,

 

The terminology is a little confusing to a neophyte. I was thinking Lifetime and Feathertouch would not apply to the same pen. On some web sites it seems to call Feathertouch = non-Lifetime, a no warranty, lower cost pen, but I also saw some Sheaffer ads that referred to Lifetime Feathertouch Tuckaways. Does that mean the pen itself can be called a Lifetime pen due to its white dot but the nib could be stamped "Feathertouch"? Is that what you refer to as Lifetime Feathertouch in your message above? When you say two Feathertouch items, these are non-lifetime (no white dot) pens with the same type of Feathertouch nib?

 

If you can shed any additional light or straigten out my misunderstanding, it would be helpful.

 

Thanks.

...Lee

Feathertouch refers to the Sheaffer nib design with a white metal plated forepart, and Lifetime is the name of the top line of pens that carried a lifetime guarantee. Some Lifetime pens' nibs are Feathertouch nibs, though they only say 'LIFETIME', not 'Feathertouch'; some non-Lifetime pens' nibs are Feathertouch nibs, and most (but not all) of those are marked 'Feathertouch'.

 

--Daniel

 

[Guest PeteWK]

  kirchh said:

  njoyingaz said:

For clarification on the postulated date of the pen in question in the original post, I used the information from Richard Binder's reference pages to arrive at the date of the pen. The dates are consistent with some similar information on David Nishimura's site and penhero.com. The material is Ebonized Pearl (1934-39), a vac-filler (1935-49), and a streamlined clip (1936-45). The overlapping years are 1936-1939, so that was my estimate of timeframe of the pen itself. I have no knowledge of whether the nib is original, though.

 

...Lee

Note that the streamlined 'radius' clip appeared by mid-1935.

 

--Daniel

 

 

(Back from Vegas, I am)

Daniel, I'm amazed to see postulating the age of anything based on the clip design given your many posts debunking that as a dating method. Or does it only work when you use it? Certainly a fair question.

 

As for my own examples, I also have and have had a couple of the gold filled Tuckaway pens with Vac-Fil that didn't have the numbering on top. Pretty sure the Vac-Fil models came out after the levers though they were certainly sold side by side.

 

PeteWK

Edited May 31, 2007 by PeteWK

[Guest PeteWK]

  njoyingaz said:

  kirchh said:

So far I've turned up eight Sheaffers with top-numbered nibs; six Lifetime Feathertouch examples and two Feathertouch items. Earliest item is likely a Gray Pearl pen datable to mid-1935 to mid-'36 based on catalogs.

 

--Daniel

 

Daniel,

 

The terminology is a little confusing to a neophyte. I was thinking Lifetime and Feathertouch would not apply to the same pen. On some web sites it seems to call Feathertouch = non-Lifetime, a no warranty, lower cost pen, but I also saw some Sheaffer ads that referred to Lifetime Feathertouch Tuckaways. Does that mean the pen itself can be called a Lifetime pen due to its white dot but the nib could be stamped "Feathertouch"? Is that what you refer to as Lifetime Feathertouch in your message above? When you say two Feathertouch items, these are non-lifetime (no white dot) pens with the same type of Feathertouch nib?

 

If you can shed any additional light or straigten out my misunderstanding, it would be helpful.

 

Thanks.

...Lee

 

 

 

 

Daniel is referring to the 1937 catalog as seen below. Neither the 35, 36 or 37 catalogs show any serial number anywhere but that was typical for Sheaffer. They generally didn't illustrate serial numbers in their catalogs.

 

Edit here - Lee, it also seems that Sheaffer thought it was confusing as they dropped the combined terms shortly thereafter.

Edited May 31, 2007 by PeteWK