What Liquefied This Sac?

[mrcharlie]

As a restorer, I specifically declined to use the sacs from one well known maker because I knew of quality problems with them. I am not saying that every sac from that maker is defective, but again, the taint is there.

When I first looked into getting some sacs for the one and only lever pen I've restored, I was given impression that all the latex sacs on the market were from a single company. I've since learned that is not correct, and of course differences between sac manufacturers products would make the problem more difficult to diagnose.

 

However, I think I understand that most pros are all using the same single supplier now, and it is their sacs we are talking about.

 

You reduce your risks. We all do. It's human nature.

I agree. I will likely limit my sac pens to using the major manufacturer/old-brand inks (most of my bottled ink is 1980s and older Skrip) I have due to all of this. I have plenty of non-sac pens for the Noodler's bottled ink and the Ink Drop samples; they are what I use the most anyway.

 

There have been some people in this thread who've claimed to have goo sacs that haven't been inked, or have used only non-boutique inks, but you seem to disregard this.

Not at all. I specifically mentioned the gooey sac problem that is known to have occurred with the sacs of the maker I mentioned above.

FWIW, this was not stated well, and I meant the pros who have responded in this thread in aggregate, not just you specifically when I said "you seem to disregard this". Also, that disregard was quite earlier in the thread, and not so much the past day or two.

 

I did not realize all of those un-inked goo sacs were from the other manufacturer. I am under the impression that is difficult to know if all the sacs made without the metal inhibitor ingredient are out of the market yet or not, further complicating the issue, although maybe enough time has elapsed that most think they are gone?

 

Please try to keep up. We have already agreed that we do not know the whole story.

Sure thing; I agree completely with this characterization of the thread. I did not word some of my post well enough to make that clear; mea culpa.

 

But bear in mind that Baystate Blue is known to destroy the feeds in Lamy and Pilot pens and the barrel walls of some piston-filling pens.

There are at least of handful of Noodler's inks that I personally think should carry a warning about ph or staining issues (an idea that I believe Nathan has scoffed at). I've stained a (1950s or early 60s Waterman C/F) pen with a sample of Rome Burning when I did not realize that was a possibility. I've seen pictures of a feed all melty after using BB that wasn't one of the brands you just mentioned. I'll probably never use Noodler's in a sac pen or any pen with an inlaid or hooded nib ever again, and I'm not going to use BB or the related colors ever. I've had more flow issues and clogging issues (temporary, flushable clogging; not permanently ruined by pigment ink type clogging) with various Noodler's samples than all other brands put together, although I love the color and flow characteristics of many Noodler's inks I've tried. Just in case you were confusing me with a Noodler's enthusiast/apologist.

 

And do please note, since you have called business ethics into question, [...]

I did not mean to call anyone's ethics into question, actually. I meant to point out that it would be the natural inclination of any human in the pen repair business to tend to see the problem as due to the ink. It is inherent in human psychology that it would be so, just as it is inherent that someone with a large investment ($$ and psychological) in ink would not want it to be the ink, and would likely interpret the data that way. In both cases, the incentives work on your thought processes at a less than conscious level; there is no evil intent in either case. The trap of "confirmation bias" is also something that works against a true understanding of what is going on at a less than conscious level, regardless of which side of this (or any) argument you are on; it is well documented human nature to remember the "hits" and forget the "misses". Things like random sampling and double blind studies exist in science precisely because our brains have these characteristics.

 

I have no reason to believe you, Ron, or any other pro who has responded in this thread are unethical or intentionally deceptive on this issue. I've spent money with at least three including you, and am happy with my goods and/or services in each case (including the purchase of pen sacs and other rubber bits in one case), and I hope to purchase goods and services from several of you in the future.

 

Ethics aside, you might speculate that I'd like to see Noodler's go down for some personal reason.

I don't think I did speculate that; I certainly did not intend to. I don't know a lot about it, but I think I know enough about you and Nathan and the history of people in the FP business from my readings over the past year or so to not think that.

[FarmBoy]

I heard back from Noodler's; here is a copy of the email they sent me. I guess that's really all they can say.

 

 

Hi Matthew,

 

I am going to speak with Nathan about this and get back to you. However, Noodler’s Black will not react with rubber in that manner. So I suspect that the culprit is something else, but we will let you know.

 

Best Regards,

 

Dick

Matthew,

 

Any updates from Dick?

 

 

If you put that ink in a pen that is similar to the one that failed and have problems I'll repair it at no cost.

Anything that narrows down the cause is a worthwhile effort.

[mhosea]

Let me get this straight. We have a sac in a Snorkel. It is inked a couple of times with Skrip Blue but otherwise sits unused for an unspecified period. Then the pen is sold. The new owner inks it with Platinum Aurora Blue and observes that it writes well. An unspecified amount of time passes. Then the new owner flushes the pen with water (could he have left the nib in the water during up strokes of the piston and dawn water into the body of the pen?). Then he fills the pen with Noodler's Black. In the amount of time it took for him to write a few sentences the pen stops writing. Then an unspecified amount of time follows before the sac is observed to be melted. From these facts the only possibility that we seriously consider is that Noodler's Black melted the sac. Now that would be possible if Noodler's Black reacted profoundly with latex, but at least without some catalyst, it appears not to react observably over several days. At this point the thread seems to me like seeing a man fall through a deck, observing after this that the deck is rotten, and then trying to figure out exactly how he managed to rot the deck so quickly. When Noodler's Black failed to react at all with latex, I just figured this was probably not an example of what repairmen have been seeing, generally.

[Ernst Bitterman]

I don't know if this is going to help the discussion at all, but let me add an item of anecdotal evidence and a hypothesis drawn from it.

 

A few years ago I had a 1942 Sac Duofold which I have just stuck a fresh sac in. I filled it with Noodler's Couleur Royale, and abuot two days later the sac was in much the same state as the one at the start of this thread. This was just after the initial BSB furore had developed, and I was a little concerned that perhaps whatever was giving grief in that ink had gotten into others. To examine the problem, I took another sac out of my supply, half-filled it via syringe, folded it over at the top with and clamped it with a bulldog clip. That was put into a cup on a shelf, and left to its own devices for a week, and then a couple of weeks, and eventually two months. At the end of the experiment, the sac remained sound and the ink was only slightly thicker through the small water migration possible though "seal" and sac walls.

 

Hypothesis, which I've not the resources to test nor the smarts to devise the probative experiment: the small-producer inks are inconsistent in formulation, whether through conscious amendment from one batch to the next or through the relatively small batch sizes amplifying the effect of minor variations of proportion in the ingredients (if 1.01g of something rather than 1g is used, a 100 liter batch will take more notice of it than a 10,000 liter batch, right?). Likewise, the sac producers are but human, and their batches will also have slight variations. Sometimes these variations are instantly noticable (I recall a plague of goo-sac about... ten? year ago), and occasionally the interplay of ink and sac variation produces ugly results.

 

With the inclusion of Skrip in the preceding installments, we see that the major producers also have some stumbles. My experimental sac came from the same supplier as its gooey predecessor, but I can't know if it came from the same lot of latex, and since the reaction didn't occur, I suspect not. None of this does much to take the unhappy sense of Russian roulette out of resacking, but one can at least hope for a greater incidence of empty chambers than 1 in 6.

 

...and I'm still risk-accepting enough to carry on using standard Noodler's inks when I like the colour, the same as I do Diamine, Private Reserve, Quink, Skrip, Pelikan, Sailor, Pilot, Waterman, Herbin and a couple others I'm forgetting.

Edited April 2, 2013 by Ernst Bitterman

[mhosea]

Hypothesis, which I've not the resources to test nor the smarts to devise the probative experiment: the small-producer inks are inconsistent in formulation, whether through conscious amendment from one batch to the next or through the relatively small batch sizes amplifying the effect of minor variations of proportion in the ingredients (if 1.01g of something rather than 1g is used, a 100 liter batch will take more notice of it than a 10,000 liter batch, right?). Likewise, the sac producers are but human, and their batches will also have slight variations. Sometimes these variations are instantly noticable (I recall a plague of goo-sac about... ten? year ago), and occasionally the interplay of ink and sac variation produces ugly results.

 

I would find it easier to believe that certain Noodler's colors do not play well with latex if given enough time and that sacs, like virtually any other product, are subject at least to a random sprinkling of quality issues despite the best laid schemes of mice and men. There certainly are a lot of Noodler's colors, hence a lot of different ingredients. I don't know what Nathan does to lower the freezing point of the Polar inks, for example, and what is it that makes Eel inks "lubricate" pistons? Are either of these things good for latex sacs? And of course there are dyes that have never seen use in latex sacs before, these being combined with buffers, surfactants, and biocides. Since Nathan reports the use of latex in his operation, it is not so likely that you will see latex melted in a poof!, but perhaps long exposure, partial dry-out leading to higher concentrations, and the occasional heating to 98 degrees or so from pen being in the pocket make the difference. I'm assuming Nathan doesn't mix his inks in 98 degree heat in Massachusetts, or else maybe it's Nathan's sweat that melts the sacs.

 

As far as inks go, I'm disappointed that the Platinum ink gets a complete pass. The OP said he was going to dump out Noodler's Black, which I thought ironic. I wonder if the lack of suspicion leveled at the Platinum ink reflects a misapprehension that Platinum (Mix-Free) Aurora Blue is the same as Aurora Blue. These are completely different. As a pH-balanced ink, Platinum Mix-Free Aurora Blue might have a thing or two in common with some Noodler's Inks that Waterman, Pelikan, and Quink don't.

Edited April 2, 2013 by mhosea

[Vintagepens]

If it adds anything to the discussion, Peter Amis at the Pen Sac Company is as concerned as anyone about premature sac failure -- and as frustrated by the ambiguity of the evidence.

 

Although some have speculated about inconsistency in sac material formulation, Peter has told me that he has seen no discernible pattern by production batch in reported premature sac failures. And if some batches had been more vulnerable to failure, he certainly would have found out in a hurry.

[79spitfire]

As far as inks go, I'm disappointed that the Platinum ink gets a complete pass. The OP said he was going to dump out Noodler's Black, which I thought ironic. I wonder if the lack of suspicion leveled at the Platinum ink reflects a misapprehension that Platinum (Mix-Free) Aurora Blue is the same as Aurora Blue. These are completely different. As a pH-balanced ink, Platinum Mix-Free Aurora Blue might have a thing or two in common with some Noodler's Inks that Waterman, Pelikan, and Quink don't.

 

I wondered at this as well. The one Platinum ink I have seems well behaved, but it's not Mix-Free Aurora Blue, it's Silky Purple (I have a thing for purple inks, even though I'm a guy). This is part of what fed my irritation. The 'all other inks are ok, except Noodler's' trend in many posts.

 

I've had several bits of latex sacs sitting here in vials for some days now, and so far none of the vials, sacs or anything has turned to goo!

 

The samples include: perfumed talc, Diamine ink, denatured alcohol, a chlorine based cleaner, wrapped about a steel screwdriver and ammonia from the store!

 

(For those who haven't read to this point, I tried Noodler's Black first, then doctored with a bit of JB's pen flush, same story nothing happened :bonk: )

 

Here's one conclusion that I am sure of:

 

Sac filling pens could and did fail randomly in the 'classic' age of pens. Perhaps, this is why Piston filling pens were invented? My advice until I see differently for myself, use whatever ink you like in your user pens. If the sac fails, splits, randomly turns to tar, or flies out the end and tries to strangle you, smile, fix it or send it out to your favorite repair person and let him handle it.

 

The world is not a perfect place, the creator reserved that for himself, smile and roll with it.

 

:ltcapd:

 

Oh, and if a pen is to precious to use, just stick it in a case (after removing all the latex scraps) and admire it.

[Ernst Bitterman]

If it adds anything to the discussion, Peter Amis at the Pen Sac Company is as concerned as anyone about premature sac failure -- and as frustrated by the ambiguity of the evidence.

 

Although some have speculated about inconsistency in sac material formulation, Peter has told me that he has seen no discernible pattern by production batch in reported premature sac failures. And if some batches had been more vulnerable to failure, he certainly would have found out in a hurry.

 

Perhaps there's some kind of eddy in the mixing tub where the ingredients don't quite swirl together properly? This might cause a small pocket of failure-prone sacs in any given batch.

 

...and I will freely admit my ignorance of the details of rubber production, to save others the effort of pointing it out. I speculate timidly here, I do not suggest.

[mhosea]

Ernst, I just wanted to say that after I responded, I realized that I may have interpreted your suggestion differently. I thought you were suggesting that a reaction would only occur if the proportions were just so, but you might have been suggesting that the capability of the sac to resist falls along a continuum and the challenge of each ink falls along a continuum, so a sac that is "good enough" for Quink might not be good enough for Noodler's. Some sacs might be good enough for any reasonable ink, and some might not be good enough for air.

 

As I was having a badly-done crown redone today followed by a root canal, I didn't have a lot to do in the chair. As it happens I remembered something about the OP's photograph of the melted sac. Notice how it is melted at the end away from the feed. In fact it looks comparatively intact near the feed and totally melted at the opposite end. In a Touchdown system this seems consistent with the metal inhibitor failing. Once the far end became gummy, it might have been in continuous contact with the sac protector. Obviously the feed end is secured against the sac protector plug and doesn't contact the sac protector as much.

 

Playing devil's advocate, the pen might have been stored nib up or nib down, either of which might have made the end away from the feed preferentially affected by the ink for one reason the other. Also, it is possible that it wouldn't have happened if some ink had not done something to the sac first. I suppose the sac has been or will be discarded, but the part of it above the shellac could be tested.

[Dr.Grace]

One thing to note is that the concentrations of ink components will increase as water evaporates over time. So, storing bits of latex in sealed containers full of ink won't replicate the conditions in a drying-out pen.

 

Another anecdote: Some time ago, three of my vacs developed gooey diaphragms. They failed just after I flushed them with Rapido-Eze, which prompted me to ask here on FPN whether that ink cleaner was safe for diaphragms. The knowledgeable people on this forum assured me that it's fine, but that left me puzzled about the cause of the diaphragm failure. Perhaps the diaphragms were already on the point of failure and held together only by deposits of dried ink?

 

Anyway, I've now learned how to replace vacumatic diaphragms, thanks to all the helpful methods that you all have published on the web.

[Ernst Bitterman]

Ernst, I just wanted to say that after I responded, I realized that I may have interpreted your suggestion differently. I thought you were suggesting that a reaction would only occur if the proportions were just so, but you might have been suggesting that the capability of the sac to resist falls along a continuum and the challenge of each ink falls along a continuum,....

 

Y'know, what I meant to say was that the specific interaction of ingredients that causes goo might not always appear in a given ink/sac interaction, looking at it in an active sense. However, that more passive approach to the question, an absence rather than a presence, is probably a better way of thinking on the sac side of the equation.

 

Having said that, I think I'm going to bow to Spitfire's attitude on the question; since (barring breakthrough by the chemists amongst us) there's no way of telling before failure where failure will occur, and since it's not VERY frequent, fretting too much is a maladaptive response.

[Paddler]

I know that pen! It was in perfect condition when Matt received it. Ron Zorn had done a thorough restoration including a new sac. I had inked it only a few times, with Sheaffer Skrip (blue) and it wrote flawlessly. Its hard to avoid concluding that Noodlers ink is at fault, particularly when others here on FPN have reported similar incidents with Noodlers in the past. :hmm1:

I had the same thing happen to my Touchdown filler desk pen, only it had had nothing but Pelikan 4001 Brilliant Green ink in it, from the day I put the sac in it. The top of the sac, where the bubble stays in a desk pen was OK. The bottom part of the sac (closest to the section), where the ink stays all the time had turned to goo.

[79spitfire]

One thing to note is that the concentrations of ink components will increase as water evaporates over time. So, storing bits of latex in sealed containers full of ink won't replicate the conditions in a drying-out pen.

 

Another anecdote: Some time ago, three of my vacs developed gooey diaphragms. They failed just after I flushed them with Rapido-Eze, which prompted me to ask here on FPN whether that ink cleaner was safe for diaphragms. The knowledgeable people on this forum assured me that it's fine, but that left me puzzled about the cause of the diaphragm failure. Perhaps the diaphragms were already on the point of failure and held together only by deposits of dried ink?

 

Anyway, I've now learned how to replace vacumatic diaphragms, thanks to all the helpful methods that you all have published on the web.

That's a good point, now that nothing has turned to goo in sealed containers, I'll drain the fluids out, and leave the vials sit in a holder overnight.

[Dr.Grace]

One thing to note is that the concentrations of ink components will increase as water evaporates over time. So, storing bits of latex in sealed containers full of ink won't replicate the conditions in a drying-out pen.

 

Another anecdote: Some time ago, three of my vacs developed gooey diaphragms. They failed just after I flushed them with Rapido-Eze, which prompted me to ask here on FPN whether that ink cleaner was safe for diaphragms. The knowledgeable people on this forum assured me that it's fine, but that left me puzzled about the cause of the diaphragm failure. Perhaps the diaphragms were already on the point of failure and held together only by deposits of dried ink?

 

Anyway, I've now learned how to replace vacumatic diaphragms, thanks to all the helpful methods that you all have published on the web.

That's a good point, now that nothing has turned to goo in sealed containers, I'll drain the fluids out, and leave the vials sit in a holder overnight.

Actually, I think you'd have to let the ink or other liquid slowly evaporate, not drain it.

[mirosc]

So, does anyone dare to elaborate which these problematic "boutique ink manufacturers" are?

So far I can guess: Noodler's, Private Reserve. Anything else?

Diamine has been mentioned in this thread and Quink - but I doubt that these could be categorized as "boutique" in the mentioned sense.

[79spitfire]

One thing to note is that the concentrations of ink components will increase as water evaporates over time. So, storing bits of latex in sealed containers full of ink won't replicate the conditions in a drying-out pen.

 

Another anecdote: Some time ago, three of my vacs developed gooey diaphragms. They failed just after I flushed them with Rapido-Eze, which prompted me to ask here on FPN whether that ink cleaner was safe for diaphragms. The knowledgeable people on this forum assured me that it's fine, but that left me puzzled about the cause of the diaphragm failure. Perhaps the diaphragms were already on the point of failure and held together only by deposits of dried ink?

 

Anyway, I've now learned how to replace vacumatic diaphragms, thanks to all the helpful methods that you all have published on the web.

That's a good point, now that nothing has turned to goo in sealed containers, I'll drain the fluids out, and leave the vials sit in a holder overnight.

Actually, I think you'd have to let the ink or other liquid slowly evaporate, not drain it.

I drained it down to where there was minimal amounts of the liquid in question, and then rinsed it (as if it were being flushed) and let them sit out. I was trying to duplicate pen maintenance, I try to let the pen dry a bit before re-inking.

 

And once again, so far nothing...

[Ron Z]

Their point is that you also have to have the effect of concentration of the liquid by evaporation. Don't forget to add rotating the material or container so that the sample is randomly immersed and then exposed to air, and then add random changes in temperature from 98 F in a pocket to room temperature with various ranges of temperature in between to simulate being held in the hand.

[mhosea]

I've often thought that concentration due to evaporation could be a factor in feed damage seen with Baystate Blue, but that ink is supposed to be alkaline. For the more general issue vis-a-viz sac failure, we should consider heat, oxygen, and higher concentrations of the ink (even to the point of dry out), try all those things. If the goal is to simulate premature ossification, then simulating the varying conditions of use would make a lot of sense, but for melting a more logical next step would be to move on to large scale testing with many sacs because there are some assumptions about sacs underlying perceptions of what is happening in the field. Something might be done with the hundreds and thousands of clippings that no doubt are discarded. A professional restorer could bag them and donate them to somebody willing to conduct experiments. If sac makers generate trimmings, they could confidently sort them by batches. Even something as simple as pouring a bottle of ink into a jar of clippings might reveal that it isn't as hard as we think to generate the conditions that lead to sac failure if only some small percentage of clippings react. If not, well par for the course. Time to try heat, higher concentrations, etc., but on larger samples.

[MKeith]

Please no one take this wrong. I have no evidence to refute Ron and Richard but rather a question. Am I wrong that the Everflo Inks sold by Gateway Pens produced by Noodlers. If so, what made the formulation safer, as it has shown to be. The purple Everflo (can't remember it's name) has apparently not caused any problems. Is the Noodlers problem due to ingredients or PH or what? I've used several Noodlers inks, in several Pilot Con-20 convertors, which have a metal hoop in direct contact with the sac for over a year and noticed nothing awry. Just curious and confused.

Edited April 4, 2013 by MKeith

[Richard]

Please no one take this wrong. I have no evidence to refute Ron and Richard but rather a question. Am I wrong that the Everflo Inks sold by Gateway Pens produced by Noodlers. If so, what made the formulation safer, as it has shown to be.

EVERFLO does not behave like Noodler's because Nathan, at our request, produced a completely different formula for us. We gave him specifications for what we wanted from the ink, and he followed them.