Parker 61

[PenHero]

Hi, Folks,

This is a Parker 61 DeLuxe pen and pencil set in Black c1956-1962. Parker made three different versions of the Lustraloy stainless steel cap from 1956-1962, the standard version was polished with chrome plate trim, the Classic was brushed with chrome plate trim and the DeLuxe was brushed with gold plate trim. The 61 introduced Parker's capillary filling system, a passive system that only required unscrewing the barrel and putting the section's capillary capsule into the inkwell and waiting. Inside the capsule is a perforated sheet of plastic that absorbs and holds ink while the outside of the capsule is Teflon coated and repells ink. The nib section can be pulled from the inkwell and put back together with the barrel without wiping. The 61 is about 5 3/8 inches long and replaced the larger 51 as the top of the Parker line for nearly a decade until the 75 was introduced.

http://penhero.com/Temp/Parker61_1280_01.jpg

I think the 61 is underrated. There are a lot of variations out there. How about a new thread on these pens? I can add a few myself.

Thanks!

[BT_Summers]

My father tells the tale that he bought one of the first 61s in the shop. Took it home, the knowledge free assistant had told him that it fills by simply dipping it in ink, which he did, nib first.

 

The pen wrote for 4 lines.

 

Took it back to the shop and said that it was nowhere near as good as his 51. Money back please.

 

 

 

Your 61 set looks superb.

Edited August 27, 2017 by smiffy20000

[PenHero]

  On 8/27/2017 at 7:58 PM, smiffy20000 said:

My father tells the tale that he bought one of the first 61s in the shop. Took it home, the knowledge free assistant had told him that it fills by simply dipping it in ink, which he did, nib first.

 

The pen wrote for 4 lines.

 

Took it back to the shop and said that it was nowhere near as good as his 51. Money back please.

 

 

 

Your 61 set looks superb.

 

What a great story! I bet he wasn't the only one! It's no wonder that the ads for the 61 show people watching the pen in ink bottles with the nib pointing up and out of the bottle.

[inkstainedruth]

I have a couple of 61s (both with the capillary filler). Don't know OH which version they are. I like them a lot, but they have to use inks that are relatively free-flowing, and that I like enough to be able to deal with using for a long long time.... As a result, I go through spells when I'll use them for months on end, followed by putting them aside for long periods once they're finally flushed out (my first one ran for about 4 months strictly on what ink was in the pen and reconstituted -- repeatedly -- with distilled water, until the ink was diluted to the point of illegibility... ).

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

[max dog]

Earlier this summer, I get a phone text message from a friend. He is at an antique store in a small town in rural BC. The message simply says Parker fountain pen. $20. Do you want it? and is accompanied with a grainy/blurry picture of a vintage Parker fountain pen in its original case. Upon quick glance, it looked to me like a lower end Parker 21 or something and thought for $20, even if the pen is in disrepair or completely unusable, I could still get a nice vintage Parker pen case out of this for one of my 51s. So I replied yes please!

 

A couple of weeks later the pen arrives in its nice red vintage Parker pen case, and upon closer look it is a near mint Parker 61!

 

Didnt know a lot about this pen, so quickly went online and learned about the 61 and the unique Capillary filling system. After a good initial hour of flushing and refilling with water to get all the old ink out, I loaded the pen up with ink, and it wrote a nice wet medium line soon as the nib hit paper! Its a smooth, reliable, wet writer which I love. Its a gem, and looks like it sat in the box mostly unused for the last half a century or more.

 

From what I can make out from the info about the 61 on line, it looks to be a 1962-68 Parker 61 MK 2.

 

The Capillary filler I think is brilliant! You remove the barrel just dip the back end of the pen in a bottle of ink for about 30 seconds and it fills right up and the thing goes on and on and on. Cleaning takes a little time, but basically consists of letting the capillary filler draw up water, gently blowing the water out with a bulb syringe (or your mouth-blow air), and repeat until the water runs fairly clear. Takes about 10 minutes to do a good clean out of the ink for the purpose of changing inks.

 

I did an experiment to see how much ink the pen actually holds. Using water, I let the capillary filler fill up and then gently blew out all the water into a cup. By the amount of water I expelled out of the capillary filler, I would say it holds at least as much ink as the Parker 51 aerometric sac, ie 0.7 to 1 ml easily.

 

 

I have to agree, the 61 is a really underrated Parker. I like the little anchor at the nib that serves as a visual aid to help orient that hooded nib correctly. I wish my 51s and Lamy 2000 had this.

Its a little smaller than the 51, but feels every bit as nice as the 51, maybe arguably more refined with the innovative capillary filler and anchor over the nib. The capillary filler with no moving parts or sac to wear out, feels like could last forever.

Edited August 28, 2017 by max dog

[PenHero]

What a great find! Thanks!

[PaulS]

neither of these has the capillary system, although when both designs were going strong I think the Teflon tube was still being used - it seems to

have been abandoned around 1969, and these two have converters so post 1969. The Insignia model was probably universal and lasted for a fairly long time, but think it's possible that the Consort was a U.K. design only, and not a long lived model - assume this one with only the cap in brick pattern was around during the same period as the full bodied Consort '67 - '72.

The capillary "61" was one of the last Parker models that didn't take converters, and if you read Marshall & Oldfield you'll see how a capillary pen can be converted to cartridge/converter - if you can take the stress!!

Arrows do go missing and complaints were that the capillaries became clogged - so provided you don't use the pen, it should be o.k. - only

joking of course - leaving the pen unused for many weeks so it dried out, was probably the cause.

Black and g.f. always look attractive, and oddly it's this combination that might just be the most common sort in the U.K. - there's quite a few spec. changes in the life of this thing, and not always easy to work out the dating on some of them.

Great pens showing above.

[alexander_k]

The 61 could have been a worthy successor to the 51 if it weren't for a couple of critical problems. Leaving aesthetics and the stupidly loose arrow aside, the plastics used in the 61 are nowhere as good as those of the 51; the capillary filler was well intended but its capacity was too low. The late change to aerometric fillers didn't manage to save the reputation of this lovely pen, with some of the smoothest nibs I've experienced.

[christof]

A Parker 61 thread - what a great Idea. I LOVE the 61!!

 

 

Here some of mines.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2017 by christof

[PenHero]

I always thought the 61 desk pen looked like a 1950s sci-fi spaceship!

[parkergeo]

Below are a few amateur photos (sorry about the black background - I should spend some time in the pen photography forum) that show a few differences between early and late issue P61s. The early pen on the left has a longer cap and a thinner clutch ring than the later model. These are unused pens, so the felt that covers the capillary media is showing on the end of the fillers. The early pen has white felt while the later has pink. I have read an account that the white was the original design but there was a problem with its "wettability" so they changed the material and also the color to differentiate original vs improved fillers in the repair parts drawers, but I haven't seen enough mint pens to know if that holds true.

 

As an aside, if you read the original instructions from Parker, they stress that you need to remove the filler from the ink slowly. Taking your time on the withdrawal does make quite a difference and will allow the Teflon coating to do it's job and leave you with a spotless (or dropless?) surface that required no wiping down before screwing on the barrel.

[InkedPages]

  On 8/28/2017 at 6:12 PM, alexander_k said:

The 61 could have been a worthy successor to the 51 if it weren't for a couple of critical problems. Leaving aesthetics and the stupidly loose arrow aside, the plastics used in the 61 are nowhere as good as those of the 51; the capillary filler was well intended but its capacity was too low. The late change to aerometric fillers didn't manage to save the reputation of this lovely pen, with some of the smoothest nibs I've experienced.

Love this. An apt summary of what the knowledgable outline as the critical shortfalls of the 61.

 

I believe later 61's came out with a cartridge/converter mechanism that worked beauteously. Yes, I know how everyone feels about c/c, but IMO if the pen works better I would rather they go that route than an interesting but ultimately ineffective mechanism.

[christof]

Although there are some problems which can appear on the P61, there are some great examples which are perfectly working out of the box (...or after some tweaking).

I have a first generation Parker 61 in daily use. I had never problems during the last year I am using it. The ink capacity is indeed limited. But in most cases it's suifficient for one week of use.

C.

[jeremycoleman1957]

I have been using a Parker 61 since 1962 and have always been fascinated by its capillary filler. I think the 61 is a beautiful pen which feels very comfortable in my hand. I bought a c/c 61 about two years ago or more. It, of course, does not require the maintenance that the capillary 61 requires. The c/c 61 has the smoothest nib and is so pleasant for extensive writing.

 

Yes, I am extremely fond of the Parker 61 as well as the 51.

[mitto]

I like the 61s in general. But I think the English C/C 61s are better pens in terms of ease of use. And the nibs on these are superb.

[christof]

Here is a somewhat special Parker 61 from my collection. It was made entirely in France. It even has a "made in France, 18ct. nib". But the best thing is the gold platet (or laminée) cap with barley corn pattern:

 

 

And this is my daily wirter. A very reliable pen:

 

 

As already said: I LOVE Parker 61's!

 

C.

Edited August 30, 2017 by christof

[christof]

  On 8/30/2017 at 1:41 AM, mitto said:

I like the 61s in general. But I think the English C/C 61s are better pens in terms of ease of use. And the nibs on these are superb.

 

From my observation, I can say that the later cartridge fillers were made of a different and much softer plastic. In combination with the "finger clutch caps" the section often tend to deformations. That's why I prefer the first generation pens which are made of a lucite like material. Much more like the Parker "51" (except the Mark III which is made of the same soft plastic as the 61).

C.

Edited August 30, 2017 by christof

[mallymal1]

What a good thread. The Parker 61 is a pen I've often seen - in passing, so it's great to have a focus on them.

 

[max dog]

  On 8/28/2017 at 6:12 PM, alexander_k said:

The 61 could have been a worthy successor to the 51 if it weren't for a couple of critical problems. Leaving aesthetics and the stupidly loose arrow aside, the plastics used in the 61 are nowhere as good as those of the 51; the capillary filler was well intended but its capacity was too low. The late change to aerometric fillers didn't manage to save the reputation of this lovely pen, with some of the smoothest nibs I've experienced.

 

 

  On 8/29/2017 at 10:29 AM, InkedPages said:

Love this. An apt summary of what the knowledgable outline as the critical shortfalls of the 61.

 

I believe later 61's came out with a cartridge/converter mechanism that worked beauteously. Yes, I know how everyone feels about c/c, but IMO if the pen works better I would rather they go that route than an interesting but ultimately ineffective mechanism.

Hey cute little PARKER 61.

 

A few people here feel you are no good.

 

I beg to differ.

 

The attention to detail on the 61 is top notch. The way the cap closes onto the barrel or posts is rock solid and feels satisfying. Balance of the pen in hand and feel of the materials exudes quality here.

 

Had the pen completely empty/dry for a couple of weeks.

Dipped the capillary filler for 30 seconds into the ink well, wiped the back, screwed on the barrel, and ink flow was immediate soon as nib hit the paper. Pretty impressive and effective capillary system.

 

I read the reason Parker dropped the capillary filler in the 61 was because the high cost of manufacture ate into the profitability of the 61, so they reverted to the more economical cartridge converter for the later 61s.

Edited September 1, 2017 by max dog

[PaulS]

Imho there's a small design change makes all the difference between the 51 and 61, making the latter look instantly modern compared to the 51. And this is the terminal end of the barrel .............. round ended barrels were a common feature on f.ps. for many decades, and suppose we look at them and they make us think of older things. But when you look at the square ended 61, with metal jewel/tassie, it immediately looks more recent.

That's not a criticism of either, but just a reflection that round end barrels look to be of a certain era, and square ended ones appear more recent.