A Sheaffer "University"

[kirchh]

QUOTE (PeteWK @ Feb 18 2007, 04:36 AM)

Its in the typical gray and pearl with red veins Sheaffer type plastic.

Note that the material of your pen is not at all the typical red-veined gray pearl material seen in Sheaffer-branded items; it has flecks of red, not veins, and it is helically wrapped rather than bored from solid stock or straight-seamed.

 

--Daniel

[Guest PeteWK]

QUOTE (kirchh @ Feb 20 2007, 01:53 AM)

QUOTE (PeteWK @ Feb 18 2007, 04:36 AM) Its in the typical gray and pearl with red veins Sheaffer type plastic. Note that the material of your pen is not at all the typical red-veined gray pearl material seen in Sheaffer-branded items; it has flecks of red, not veins, and it is helically wrapped rather than bored from solid stock or straight-seamed.   --Daniel But then it's not a Sheaffer branded pen. And when the sub-brands are placed next to their Sheaffer brander brethern, their colors are generally only similar. I would guess that Sheaffer wanted it that way.   My point was that the plastic has deep translusence or depth to it. Its not just some color placed on the surface of the plastic.

[Univer]

Hi All,

 

OK, jumping back a couple of posts: absolutely, I'll be happy to post photos of my "Prosperity" sections and feeds. It may take a day or so, however.

 

I don't want to get too deeply into any sort of controversy about the origins of Pete's interesting gray/red pen. To my eyes, the non-Sheaffer styling cues are the pseudo-Balance cap (it resembles the caps of several third-tier pens in my collection, and I can't quite see Sheaffer "stealing" from itself that way); the detailing at the very top of the clip (similar, again, to third-tier styling, and not seen, to my knowledge, on any other Sheaffer product); the double cap bands (I haven't encountered a sub-brand pen with this feature); the right-angle-squared-off end of the filler lever (the Prosperity in my photo actually features a lever with a slightly rounded end); and a general feeling of "non-Sheaffer-ness" about the nib and its engraving.

 

Then, too, this pen appears to be a little too high-quality; let's say, at least, that it seems altogether too nice - too distinctively styled, too elaborately detailed, and much too 14K - to be a Sheaffer Prosperity. The ones I've handled seem like true entry-level pens: a notch lower than the WASPs, Vacuum-Fils and Univers; and they've all had tipped steel nibs. They seem fully to live up (down?) to the Depression-era austerity implied by the brand name.

 

That said, I readily acknowledge that the barrel end of Pete's pen strongly resembles the barrel end of the Univer he points out in my photo. And I certainly wouldn't want to lean too heavily on my personal "feeling" about the nib; until this week, when a Prosperity so equipped came and went on eBay, I had never encountered a Sheaffer Prosperity with an actual "Prosperity" engraved nib. So who can really say?

 

As for the difference between the the Prosperity's gray/red and the "standard" Sheaffer gray/red: yes, I do see a difference. But Sheaffer obviously sourced, for its sub-brands, patterns of celluloid never seen in its main-line offerings. There are no Sheaffer pens in the Waterman Onyx pattern, but there are Univers in that pattern; and the blue-and-bronze Univer in my photo is a dead ringer for Waterman Turquoise. And there are Univers in unusual marbled shades of teal/black, kelly green/black and rose/black - none of them a Sheaffer pattern. So a difference in celluloid patterning, as Pete says, may not negate the possibility of a Sheaffer connection.

 

To underscore that point (and, just maybe, to add a bit more confusion): I own a Univer made from a gray/red celluloid that differs from both the orthodox Sheaffer pattern and the pattern of Pete's pen. In the case of that pen, Sheaffer paternity can't be denied; but the patterns are clearly different. When I post the additional images of the Prosperity sections/feeds, I'll add a photo of that Univer as well.

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

Edited February 20, 2007 by Univer

[Guest PeteWK]

Thanks for the extra info, Jon. I'll wait and see what your section and feed look like. Also, if you're going to be at the L.A. show this weekend let me know. I'll bring the pen. I'm local so no big deal.

 

Regards,

 

PeteWK

[Univer]

Hi Pete,

 

I wish! I'll be at home here on the Right Coast. Enjoy the show.

 

In the meantime, I'll get those photos posted as soon as I can.

 

Best,

 

Jon

[Univer]

Hi All,

 

As requested: a photo of the feed fins and sections of the two Prosperity pens in my collection (upper image). The two on top are Prosperity pens; their feeds are similar, but not identical (at least to my eyes). And they do look similar, if memory serves, to feeds I've seen in Sheaffers (and Sheaffer Jrs) from the same time period.

 

The pen below them is a really lovely (and roughly contemporaneous) Vacuum-Fil in the very cool spiral pattern. It's there just to show that sometimes the sub-brand feeds don't have any fins at all!

 

The lower image shows a Univer in a gray/red vein pattern that is very different from the standard Sheaffer pattern (and from the pattern of Pete's pen, too). Note the large amount of black, not seen in the Sheaffer gray/red vein (there's usually a fair amount of black, though, in the "plain" gray pearl without the red). The red, too, is different: it seems to occur as both veins and flecks, and it has a pinker cast than the red in the mainline Sheaffers. Finally - while the gray marbling certainly has some depth and luster - it's noticeably less pearlescent than the Sheaffer gray. In any case: a Sheaffer product in a non-Sheaffer gray/red vein pattern.

 

Not sure if any of that is enlightening, but there it is. I've found, when trying to figure out the finer points of Sheaffer sub-brands, that a bottle of Excedrin is a welcome companion.

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

Edited February 22, 2007 by Univer

[Guest PeteWK]

This would be the feed and section on mine.

 

PeteWK

[kirchh]

QUOTE (PeteWK @ Feb 20 2007, 10:11 AM)

QUOTE (kirchh @ Feb 20 2007, 01:53 AM) QUOTE (PeteWK @ Feb 18 2007, 04:36 AM) Its in the typical gray and pearl with red veins Sheaffer type plastic. Note that the material of your pen is not at all the typical red-veined gray pearl material seen in Sheaffer-branded items; it has flecks of red, not veins, and it is helically wrapped rather than bored from solid stock or straight-seamed.   --Daniel But then it's not a Sheaffer branded pen. And when the sub-brands are placed next to their Sheaffer brander brethern, their colors are generally only similar. I would guess that Sheaffer wanted it that way. I think there's a misunderstanding at work here. You had stated that the pen had "typical gray and pearl with red veins Sheaffer type plastic," the implication being that this supported a Sheaffer origin. I pointed out that (as we all seem to agree now) the material is not the typical Sheaffer red-veined plastic, so the implication is unsupported by the physical evidence.   The fact that the material was not used on Sheaffer-branded pens provides no evidence one way or the other; it is essentially neutral. That is, it cannot logically be argued that because the material was not used on Sheaffer-branded (or known Sheaffer) products, it therefore supports a Sheaffer origin, only that it is not inconsistent with such an origin -- an important distinction.   --Daniel

[Univer]

Hi Pete,

 

Interesting! Am I seeing the metal of the nib showing through the side cuts? Seems to me I've got a few no-name or "third-tier" pens with feeds like that. The side cuts go all the way through, resulting in a narrow longitudinal central section with transverse "cross-members"...almost like vertebrae. (And I've got a few more extreme examples, where the central "spine" is really narrow and the cross-members are few in number - the overall effect is like an old-fashioned telephone pole with a couple of cross-pieces.)

 

I don't recall, offhand, seeing a Sheaffer product with a feed like that; then again, the sub-brand feeds are all over the lot. If the side cuts didn't go all the way through, I would say that your feed was a close cousin of the topmost feed in my photo.

 

There's a story, maybe apocryphal, that some of the Univer pens were assembled by Sheaffer workers at home, in their free time, out of available bits. Against that kind of background, is it reasonable to expect any real consistency among products?

 

I will say this: the section doesn't have a Sheaffer look about it, at least to my eyes. To me it has an almost Wahl-ish character.

 

Still...it's entirely possible that yours is a Sheaffer product. I do wish there existed a reliable taxonomy of the sub-brands. I occasionally kill a few spare moments at work by sketching out a rough chart of Univer models and patterns, but it's frustrating: a lot of the cells are filled with guesses. It's almost like an evolutionary chart based on an incomplete fossil record; you look at the creatures on either side of the empty slot, and you try to make an informed conjecture about what the in-between creature would have looked like.

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

[kirchh]

QUOTE (Univer @ Feb 23 2007, 12:22 PM)

Interesting! Am I seeing the metal of the nib showing through the side cuts? Seems to me I've got a few no-name or "third-tier" pens with feeds like that. The side cuts go all the way through, resulting in a narrow longitudinal central section with transverse "cross-members"...almost like vertebrae. (And I've got a few more extreme examples, where the central "spine" is really narrow and the cross-members are few in number - the overall effect is like an old-fashioned telephone pole with a couple of cross-pieces.) I don't recall, offhand, seeing a Sheaffer product with a feed like that

Typical Sheaffer flat-bottomed feeds' side cuts go all the way through.

 

QUOTE

If the side cuts didn't go all the way through, I would say that your feed was a close cousin of the topmost feed in my photo.

The side cuts in the topmost feed in your photo likely go all the way through.

 

The side cuts must communicate with the underside of the nib to function.

 

--Daniel

[Univer]

I have a Harris "University". It is a lever-filler, and the imprint, which is one the cap, reads:

 

"University"

Harris & Co, NJ

Trade - Mark

 

(quotes in original)

 

It also has a very different type-face. I will try to post a pic. Compare the type-face on yours with that on a Craig - I think they are similar, but I sold my only Craig.

 

John

 

Hello John,

 

I ran across this Harris University in a recent eBay listing, and it put me in mind of this thread. I thought I'd post the image.

 

Based on the description, the imprint sounds identical to your pen's. Whatever the pen in my original post may be (and I guess I do think it's the Sheaffer), it certainly isn't a Harris.

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

 

[kudzu]

This may be totally unrelated, but I have a University pen that doesn't look anything like the others posted.

Nib reads "FLEXIBLE’’/IRIDIUM/TIP/U.S.A.

 

[Univer]

Hi kudzu,

 

That's an interesting finish; the striations almost make the pen look textured (maybe it is?).

 

To my way of thinking, your pen - which has a 1930s/40s look - illustrates one of the reasons Sheaffer might have abandoned the sub-brand. "University" is just too common a name: there were "University" competitors back around 1915-20, and, as your pen shows, the name was still being used decades later. Maybe Sheaffer was asked by a competitor to quit using the name; or maybe they simply decided not to continue using a name that might risk confusion with other products.

 

So: not a Sheaffer pen, but one that might tend to support a theory.

 

Thanks for sharing the photo!

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

Edited June 25, 2007 by Univer

[ebrian]

http://showcase.netins.net/web/dytis/Prosperity.jpg

PeteWK’s Prosperity pen is interesting, but I agree that it’s unclear if the pen was made by Sheaffer. There are 6 Prosperity pens pictured, along with 3 similar Vacuum Fill pens. Although there is some variation, in general the design of these pens is similar. If imprinted, they are marked “Prosperity Pen” not “Prosperity Pens” as with PeteWK’s pen. None have the nib as pictured on PeteWK’s pen. The pen looks more like an Arnold or similar low cost pen. But of course none of this proves anything. The Prosperity pens that I have all have a clip marked Prosperity that is pointed on the top and mounted closed to the top of the cap than the similar Vacuum Fill pens. Maybe there are some Vacuum Fill pens that have a clip with a point top like the Prosperity, but I didn’t find any in the Vacuum Fill pens I have. The two clip designs are the same length, but the difference reminds one of the short/long humped clips on Sheaffer pens where the long humped clips were round on top, and the short pointed on top. The colors of the Prosperity produces also seems different than other Sheaffer products. Although the levers differ in the Prosperity pens I have, they are all snap ring. I would be interested in hearing opinions about when snap ring levers came into use in Sheaffer products.

#318 – Red pink marble plastic. Lever is very similar to a Craig lever, although it is a snap ring. No barrel imprint. Nib is marked “Univer Pen Co Made in Canada”.

#479 – Brown bronze plastic. Very similar to #318, but slightly shorter. Ring on end of barrel appears to be a clutch ring from some other pen – I’m fairly sure that it’s not original as there is no groove cut into the barrel to retain the ring – it’s just friction fit onto the end of the barrel. However, from the amount of wear under the ring, it looks like it’s been there for a long while. No barrel imprint and a similar Univer Made in Canada nib as #318.

#454 – Gray black marbled plastic – maybe a bit oxidized toward greenish. Lever is a crude snap ring version. Barrel is hot stamped “Prosperity Pen Made by Sheaffer”. Nib is alloy stamped “Propserity Pen Iridium Tipped Fine”. The cap on this pen (and subsequent pens) is slightly more pointy than the first 2 pens.

#478 – Green marble plastic. Slightly shorter than #454 but otherwise a duplicate with same lever, barrel imprint and nib.

#466 – Green marble plastic like #478 – slightly brighter but could be variation due to aging. This pen has a larger diameter than the other pens but otherwise is like #454, #478 with barrel stamp, lever and nib.

#319 – Burgundy brown (maybe blue) marble plastic. Like #454 with barrel stamp and lever, but this pen has an alloy nib marked “Sheaffer Clipper Iridium Tipped Medium” – could be a replacement, though. This pen seems to have seen heavy use.

The last 3 pens (#320, 223, and 321) are Vacuum Fill pens for comparison

It is interesting to note that although Prosperity pens seem to originate in Canada, the only Canadian marking is on the Univer nibs of the 1st two pens. I’m not sure how much else we can know until someone discovers some literature on these pens.

 

Eddie Brian

 

[Univer]

Hello there Eddie,

 

After a quick check, I can confirm that my Prosperity clips are identical to yours. They sure do look like the short humped Sheaffer ball clip with the pointed top; maybe that clip was popular in Canada, because it seems to have stayed in use there after it was phased out in the U.S. For example, I've got a Canadian Gray Pearl Striated Balance with that clip, even though that clip style was supposedly discontinued (in the U.S.) prior to the introduction of the striated pens.

 

I've got the twin of your #479, minus the suspect trim ring, and the nib has the same markings. And I've got the twin of your #319 (don't see any blue in there myself), and the nib, again, has markings identical to the nib on your pen. So if the nib's a replacement, it was fitted to two identical pens; unlikely, I suppose. And you really have to love Sheaffer nomenclature: a sub-brand pen fitted with a nib that bears the parent brand (Sheaffer) along with a model designation (Clipper) more typically associated, at that point, with an entirely different sub-brand (WASP).

 

Thanks for the post and for the photo. Very interesting stuff!

 

Cheers,

 

Jon

[ebrian]

And you really have to love Sheaffer nomenclature: a sub-brand pen fitted with a nib that bears the parent brand (Sheaffer) along with a model designation (Clipper) more typically associated, at that point, with an entirely different sub-brand (WASP).

 

I've always thought that Sheaffer sent left over parts to Canada to be used on pens - thus the strange combination of seemingly mismatched parts.

[kirchh]

PeteWK’s Prosperity pen is interesting, but I agree that it’s unclear if the pen was made by Sheaffer....

For those interested in this subject, I would like to mention that I have a "Cryptopenology" article appearing in the forthcoming issue of the Journal of the Writing Equipment Society (my columns have left The Pennant) that will shed some light on the matter. I believe that there is still time to subscribe to the Journal and to receive the issue with my artcile.

 

Writing Equipment Society

 

--Daniel