Demand For Flex Nibs: Do People Want Them?

[strelnikoff]

  On 5/11/2018 at 9:16 PM, sansenri said:

this is how Pineider is playing the game (the pen is La Grande Bellezza), since Dante del Vecchio is collaborating with them as advisor

(still I find these cut out nibs less convincing - the tines look interestingly long though)

 

 

 

by the way "la Grande Bellezza" is a film about Rome

 

I've watched "La Grande Bellezza"

 

I don't believe in these nibs. I have few, and they are - at best - moderate flexible. They work horrible.

Cut-outs are gimmick. And I can go on this topic a lot - last year, just for fun - I've modeled one nib in CAD and run FEA analysis just to see what is the deformation pattern and where is the stress concentration.Deformation (elastic) line starts where cut-out is applied. From that point toward the tip - whole nib is bending. Only then do tines come under pressure (stress). True line variation comes from tines spread (you're right, this one has long tines) and flexibility comes from material properties, design (nib shape) and nib thickness. By adding cut-outs behind the tines, nib is handicapped - because tines "spread" is delayed. In fact, looking at this nib - if it was made of good material - it would be better without these cutouts (it seems similar to that Visconti barrel nib). It also allows for more of the nib surface to separate from the feed - so we can forget about ink flow

 

I presume manufacturers do these kind of things to make nib look interesting and to make them "soft".

 

Let's assume that nib is made of the correct material, has good design and long tines. And then add cut-outs. Then, start writing and apply some pressure - by the time those tines start to spread, the nib is already very "bent" or "elastically deformed" (i.e. not a plastic/permanent deformation). Then, to spread those tines a bit - more pressure is needed, so the nib is even more deformed. By that time - you are already touching the paper with the feed and ink flow is lost - feed and nib are completely separated from the cut-out onward.

 

It is a pretty nib though

[max dog]

Argument for and against cut outs is all academic. Would like to see the nib in action. The truth is in the pudding.

 

They almost got it right with the unmodified pilot FA nib. Its feed is a little anemic.

 

If this nib has a good feed, I am hopeful.

[Driften]

  On 5/11/2018 at 9:16 PM, sansenri said:

this is how Pineider is playing the game (the pen is La Grande Bellezza), since Dante del Vecchio is collaborating with them as advisor

(still I find these cut out nibs less convincing - the tines look interestingly long though)

 

 

by the way "la Grande Bellezza" is a film about Rome

 

 

Dante is calling it a soft nib not a flex nib. At least in the interview with Goulet.

[JonSzanto]

Nib is one thing, ultra-polished and slick section is another. Talk about a deal-breaker (for me)!

[sansenri]

@Strelnikoff
thank you for explaining the theory of the matter in a straight forward way.

I also do understand it as tines spreading vs nib bending with very different effect.

Andrew here also mentioned the physics involved in these two different things, differentiating flex vs softness.

@ Driften, thank you for comment, so Dante himself recognizes the nib as being "soft" due to the nib design (rather than "flex").

@max dog

you are probably right that it would be best to try it, but I suppose the nib design will influence performance at least to a certain extent according to theory, despite parameters involved will be several (shape, alloy, thickness of the sheet, etc.)

[AAAndrew]

Flex vs. soft for those who missed it.

 

https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/335876-flex-vs-soft/

[strelnikoff]

  On 5/12/2018 at 12:32 AM, max dog said:

Argument for and against cut outs is all academic. Would like to see the nib in action. The truth is in the pudding.

 

They almost got it right with the unmodified pilot FA nib. Its feed is a little anemic.

 

If this nib has a good feed, I am hopeful.

 

If I may - I would have to disagree here to some extent. The argument for and against the cut outs - in 21st century, and with current offer on the market - is more than academic (I'd assume this means philosophical). It is scientific, or engineering..ic.

 

Cut-outs are design feature, added to the stiffer materials to allow for greater overall elastic deformation. This is not invented for the nibs, rather it's an old "trick" or design solution, and it is applied to the nibs. Originally, this was done to prevent stress concentration in steel structures, where two metal beams are connected, and structure is required to sustain some form of elastic deformations. If you have a sharp corner and whole thing is bending - crack forms in the corner and structure fails. If you just round this corner - or drill a hole directly in that connection - you've relieved stress concentration and cracks are no an issue (well, this is not an absolute truth but for this purpose and conversation it is valid). That's why we call it a "gimmick" because - gold alloy (even 14k) used in modern nibs is stiffer and manufactured differently than vintage flex nib alloys. So if the market demands softer nibs, some flexibility - manufacturer will not pull out machines fro 1930s and start new manufacturing process just for the sake of flexibility. If I was a PM in the company, I'd do the same - ask engineers to come up with a solution to add some softness or flexibility to existing metal and nibs - keep it cheap. And this is - logical solution.

 

You've mentioned FA nib (Pilot) - I have two, as well as few nibs with cut-outs. In fact, I gave away (as presents) most of them.

You are right about FA nib, Pilot almost got it right - were they avoided use of their conventional feed. And I've destroyed 3-4 feeds trying to enlarge those channels. I'd say that for the FA nib - several things went right, before those cut-outs were added.

Firstly - metallurgy. To some extent, that nib has some snap-back. It is border-line too soft, but still on an elastic side.

Secondly - design. If we disregard the cut-outs, that nib would/will produce nice line variation - it is fairly narrow, pulled shoulders, with tines just long enough to ensure the effect. Also, nib is sufficiently thin.

Thirdly - cut-outs: These are not as dramatic as what one may see - Franklin Christoph, Marlene Aleph, Pineider and so on. In fact, FA nib cut-outs are fairly moderate which just confirms matallurgy and design were almost spot-on.

 

I'm yet to try to fit FA nib to some vintage or similar feed and see what happens.

[strelnikoff]

  On 5/12/2018 at 12:48 PM, AAAndrew said:

Flex vs. soft for those who missed it.

 

https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/335876-flex-vs-soft/

 

I guess this summs it up - especially if we just look at the Pineider's nib - it says "Quill Nib" )) i.e. soft nib.

[max dog]

  On 5/14/2018 at 8:36 PM, Strelnikoff said:

 

If I may - I would have to disagree here to some extent. The argument for and against the cut outs - in 21st century, and with current offer on the market - is more than academic (I'd assume this means philosophical). It is scientific, or engineering..ic.

 

Cut-outs are design feature, added to the stiffer materials to allow for greater overall elastic deformation. This is not invented for the nibs, rather it's an old "trick" or design solution, and it is applied to the nibs. Originally, this was done to prevent stress concentration in steel structures, where two metal beams are connected, and structure is required to sustain some form of elastic deformations. If you have a sharp corner and whole thing is bending - crack forms in the corner and structure fails. If you just round this corner - or drill a hole directly in that connection - you've relieved stress concentration and cracks are no an issue (well, this is not an absolute truth but for this purpose and conversation it is valid). That's why we call it a "gimmick" because - gold alloy (even 14k) used in modern nibs is stiffer and manufactured differently than vintage flex nib alloys. So if the market demands softer nibs, some flexibility - manufacturer will not pull out machines fro 1930s and start new manufacturing process just for the sake of flexibility. If I was a PM in the company, I'd do the same - ask engineers to come up with a solution to add some softness or flexibility to existing metal and nibs - keep it cheap. And this is - logical solution.

 

You've mentioned FA nib (Pilot) - I have two, as well as few nibs with cut-outs. In fact, I gave away (as presents) most of them.

You are right about FA nib, Pilot almost got it right - were they avoided use of their conventional feed. And I've destroyed 3-4 feeds trying to enlarge those channels. I'd say that for the FA nib - several things went right, before those cut-outs were added.

Firstly - metallurgy. To some extent, that nib has some snap-back. It is border-line too soft, but still on an elastic side.

Secondly - design. If we disregard the cut-outs, that nib would/will produce nice line variation - it is fairly narrow, pulled shoulders, with tines just long enough to ensure the effect. Also, nib is sufficiently thin.

Thirdly - cut-outs: These are not as dramatic as what one may see - Franklin Christoph, Marlene Aleph, Pineider and so on. In fact, FA nib cut-outs are fairly moderate which just confirms matallurgy and design were almost spot-on.

 

I'm yet to try to fit FA nib to some vintage or similar feed and see what happens.

By academic, I meant in theory. In theory the bumblebee should not fly but in reality it does. Cutouts perhaps is a trick or shortcut to extracting more flex or softness, but if it works than why not. If increased metal stress because of cutouts will reduce the life of a nib from 90 to 30 years, will anyone mind really? As you stated manufacturers today arent going to invest in inventing 1930s type equipment for flex mettalurgy.

 

I only have the FA nib with its cutout design to cite as an example, and I think it does have acceptable snap back and flex. Maybe not at the level of a great vintage flex. When I dip the FA nib saturating the feed like a dip pen and removing the weak feed from the equation, I get the kind of ink pooling wetness and line variation reminiscent of my vintage Waterman 52. So the nib structure of the FA is quite capable. It just needs a better feed.

 

Perhaps Pilot felt producing the FA with a feed that can pool ink like a vintage flex nib would be too unwieldy for the masses who dont care about vintage flex, but it would be nice if they offered it as an option to indulge some of us more crazy fountain pen aficionadsos.

Edited May 15, 2018 by max dog

[Pendel]

Bock Titan nibs can be greatly improved when one laboriously changes their geometry to make the nibs more cylindrical. This ads rigidity to the breather hole area and allows the tines to open before the nib lifts off the feed too much. I have done this successfully several time by burnishing the nib in a nib block. Each time progress was slow, but the results are fabulous when the nib is set onto a custom ebonite feed that can supply enough ink to make it fly. My Bock Titans are paired with Namisu Nova Titanium pens.

 

:-)

Edited May 15, 2018 by Pendel

[bobje]

Steinikoff, Sansenri, this is fascinating stuff. Thank you for sharing this important information. Sansenri, where does the Italian article come from? A business journal or Italian pen publication, maybe? Is there a URL?

[ReadyFireAim]

This could be a game changer...

 

https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/336188-fountain-pen-revolution-gold-flex-nibs/

[zslane]

For my own part, I define a flex nib as a nib with tines that separate when slight to moderate pressure is applied, with the designed intent of producing strokes of a line weight of at least BB (without railroading). A nib with separable tines that is hard-pressed (no pun intended) to achieve at least BB strokes is semi-flex at best. A nib lacking separating tines is not a flex nib in my book, no matter how "flexible" its metal may technically be.

 

I don't use a flex pen for ordinary writing. For that I either use a Lamy Safari (if I want one of my more interesting ink colors) or just a good rollerball (I'm partial to the navy blue G2 .7mm cartridges myself). I only use flex pens for writing calligraphic Elian script, which makes them a very specialized, single-purpose pen category for me.

 

When writing this Elian stuff, I ideally want to be able to produce lines anywhere from M thickness to at least 1.2mm, without having to press down too hard. So far my favorite modern pen for this purpose has been the Conklin Duraflex. However, I'm really itching to try a classic wet noodle pen for this; I'd love to get strokes in the 2-3mm range. But such pens are always old vintage pens, and any in really good reliable condition cost way more than I'm willing to spend (if eBay auctions are anything to go by).

[strelnikoff]

  On 5/15/2018 at 12:26 AM, max dog said:

By academic, I meant in theory. In theory the bumblebee should not fly but in reality it does. Cutouts perhaps is a trick or shortcut to extracting more flex or softness, but if it works than why not. If increased metal stress because of cutouts will reduce the life of a nib from 90 to 30 years, will anyone mind really? As you stated manufacturers today arent going to invest in inventing 1930s type equipment for flex mettalurgy.

 

I only have the FA nib with its cutout design to cite as an example, and I think it does have acceptable snap back and flex. Maybe not at the level of a great vintage flex. When I dip the FA nib saturating the feed like a dip pen and removing the weak feed from the equation, I get the kind of ink pooling wetness and line variation reminiscent of my vintage Waterman 52. So the nib structure of the FA is quite capable. It just needs a better feed.

 

Perhaps Pilot felt producing the FA with a feed that can pool ink like a vintage flex nib would be too unwieldy for the masses who dont care about vintage flex, but it would be nice if they offered it as an option to indulge some of us more crazy fountain pen aficionadsos.

 

 

Do you know - by any chance, and without me experimenting - which pen/feed Pilot FA nib would fit?

I would pull out my FA and fit it to that pen like... immediately.

[strelnikoff]

  On 5/15/2018 at 4:07 PM, Nail-Bender said:

This could be a game changer...

 

https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/336188-fountain-pen-revolution-gold-flex-nibs/

 

I don't see on the website - does it says anywhere to which pens these fit?

 

I'm only slightly worried about that slit ending like that. A nice hole at the end would prevent cracking (but I may be completely wrong). This nibs look nice, I hope they have a good snapback. I'll order one ... just to figure out which pen to use ...

[ReadyFireAim]

  On 5/16/2018 at 5:12 AM, Strelnikoff said:

 

I don't see on the website - does it says anywhere to which pens these fit?

 

I'm only slightly worried about that slit ending like that.

 

The #5.5 is actually just a #5 that is a bit wider in the shoulders...Noodler's calls them a #2 in keeping with the old nomenclature.

FPR says what fits what in the description of their pens.

For all others I'm guessing it is hit & miss.

Gold tends to be a different thickness than the same size steel nib (generally thinner)

 

The #6 should be an easier swap because...???

I don't know...That's just been my experience.

 

If you don't have a Himalayan yet, I'd recommend one with or without the gold nib. (size #5.5)

The Triveni is a #6 and is also very nice but you might have to sac-verter the filling mechanism and remove the little ball to keep up with flex.

[strelnikoff]

  On 5/16/2018 at 9:38 PM, Nail-Bender said:

 

The #5.5 is actually just a #5 that is a bit wider in the shoulders...Noodler's calls them a #2 in keeping with the old nomenclature.

FPR says what fits what in the description of their pens.

For all others I'm guessing it is hit & miss.

Gold tends to be a different thickness than the same size steel nib (generally thinner)

 

The #6 should be an easier swap because...???

I don't know...That's just been my experience.

 

If you don't have a Himalayan yet, I'd recommend one with or without the gold nib. (size #5.5)

The Triveni is a #6 and is also very nice but you might have to sac-verter the filling mechanism and remove the little ball to keep up with flex.

 

When I saw the pens - I remembered that I do have one Himalayan and few other ebonite pens, plus some plastic ones too.

I've pulled out their nibs and replaced them with some Waterman's # 2 (vintage) I had.

 

And I remembered, I have even their steel nibs with long slits - few months ago they showed up in our local pen store and I just bought them.

[max dog]

  On 5/16/2018 at 5:08 AM, Strelnikoff said:

 

 

Do you know - by any chance, and without me experimenting - which pen/feed Pilot FA nib would fit?

I would pull out my FA and fit it to that pen like... immediately.

I am not sure what pen/feed it would fit. The #10 FA nib looks to be about a #5 nib size. Its narrower and shorter than the #6 nib on my 146 and Yard O Led. I have yet to see any mention of anyone trying the nib on a different pen feed.

 

Here is a quick flex writing sample with one dip of the #10 FA nib. Without the limitation imposed by the feed, it looks like true flex to me. Maybe not as good as the best vintage flex, but not bad.

Click the image to see in full size.

 

If you occasionally dip the nib as needed while the converter is filled with ink too, you can get vintage level flex that can go on and on (trick is keeping the feed saturated all the time when flexing). The FA nib has good snap back and is not mushy at all like other modern flex nibs can be, as demonstrated in the squiggly lines above, and I find it does not take that much more pressure than a vintage Waterman 52 nib to get flex. Nib is very soft.

 

The strategy with the Pilot FA nib is to find the right ink first. I find Montblanc Permanent Blue the best. Royal Blue works pretty good too. Pilot Iro inks are too expensive in Canada, so I haven't tried them.

 

If you want to take full advantage of the flex the FA nib is capable of, occasionally dip it when you notice first signs of railroading to help the feed stay saturated.

Edited May 17, 2018 by max dog

[ReadyFireAim]

  On 5/17/2018 at 8:05 AM, max dog said:

If you want to take full advantage of the flex the FA nib is capable of, occasionally dip it when you notice first signs of railroading.

 

Try one drop of Liquitex Flow Aid per 5ml sample tube.

You may be very pleasantly surprised.

 

https://www.dickblick.com/products/liquitex-flow-aid-fluid-additive/?clickTracking=true&wmcp=pla&wmcid=items&wmckw=02002-1004&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIwYubn82M2wIVBVSGCh2rhA4JEAQYASABEgLnxPD_BwE

[clazbill]

I just happened to read the last page or so of this topic, so forgive me if this was mentioned before. With the comments about "if only the feed could keep up", I suspect not. There is a new and still small company that is producing ebonite feeds. The most interesting part - for this discussion - is their efforts to produce a feed replacement for FA nibs.

 

I don't have a FA nib, but I have been considering buying one of their standard #6 feeds to put in one of my regular pens, just to see if the ebonite feed would make a big difference or not.

 

If you follow their social media accounts you'll also see they are starting to figure out how to make their own nibs. Hopefully they'll be able to figure it out and live up to the company name, 'flex nib factory'.