Modern Pens With Ebonite Feeds

[OMASsimo]

This is an interesting topic, indeed. I can attest that well made ebonite feeds usually do a superb job, regardless if vintage or modern. There was a good reason why top tier companies used them for so many decades. But it's true in my experience that other materials can perform as well as long as they are well designed. Pelikan switched from ebonite to molded plastics in the 80s without loss of performance. There is a lot more about the feed than just the material and the above linked blog of Amadeus W gives an excellent insight into the physics of this. But not all producers went through the trouble of producing top notch molded feeds resulting in quite displeasing experiences.

 

On the other hand, an ebonite feed is no guarantee for an excellent writing experience either. Just try a low end vintage pen and you may think twice about the quality of modern pens with molded feeds.

 

Anyway, since the original question was about currently produced pens with ebonite feeds, scratch OMAS off the list because they went out of business and don't produce anymore. But their ebonite feeds and nibs were outstanding.

[Bo Bo Olson]

"""Pelikan switched from ebonite to molded plastics in the 80s without loss of performance.""" ????

WOG on my part.....that may have been earlier. In the '80's they were using regular flex nibs (actually from '66-81 also? Having none don't know if they are regular flex or semi-nail, or even nail nibs)....admittedly a very superior regular flex...the '82-90 W. Germany nib is a slight tad more springy than the '90-97 Germany nib..................IMO there was a loss of performance in they were no longer semi-flex.

:headsmack:I wonder if Pelikan reformulated it's ink, once they went away from semi-flex?? Different feed needs a different ink....or? Too many old pens around?

 

In 1965 Pelikan went away from semi-flex nibs ...I think, with the end of the 400nn. Semi-flex being wetter required an ebonite feed.The last German semi-flex out side the 1000 was the Geha 725, which stopped production in 1972, when Geha closed it's pen sub division. It like MB and Pelikan were office supply companies.

 

I asked around here, but no one could tell me then if the '66-81 Pelikan nibs were semi-flex. So I didn't throw away any scarce money looking at regular flex nibbed pens of that era. I was chasing semi-flex only, on the whole.

 

I did have a '90-96 Tortoise regular flex 400 bought as a 'noobie' thinking it was a '50's semi-flex, at a live auction.

And later a good buy of a pretty pen, a pre '97 381. The green stripped 400 was made a year longer to '97, before the new 400 came in with the ring at the piston knob. I also have a couple of Celebry pens; a steel & a gold, '96-2000 and something.They are all regular flex like the 200 and equal to the 200. The regular flex gold nibs are exactly equal to the 200 or the steel Celebry. Being regular flex did not require the speed of feed of a semi-flex.

 

In ''98 they came in with the fatter stiffer nibs nibs, requiring even less speed, except on the 200 and later 1000. But I don't see them making s special 200's feed.

 

The machining of the '30's 3 comb and '50-65 four comb was so simple and cheap to make in it did not involve cutting many combs. Simpler thicker saws, and grinding down to the tip of the feed.

 

Max whom I believe has passed had a great thread in the header section of MB, on the many slightly different '50-to modern feeds (being more interested in the '50's feeds don't remember how far back he went with MB feeds)........where they kept trying for better and or cheaper to make feeds. By @ 1970 MB also stopped making semi-flex nibs.

They had a medium wet ink, with a regular flex nib in the '70-80 era, so would need a different feed for best flow......when they went pure plastic I don't know.I believe the modern 'Springy' nib....good tine bend, only 2 X tine spread came in in '90. Having only 5 or 6 MB's don't know as much as I do about Pelikan.....which is not as much as I'd like to think.

 

What was 'shocking' was the news to me, Bock and JoWo make ebonite feeds.

How ever much of making a feed is matching it exactly to an ink. One of the reasons many seem to dislike Bock.........who makes for many companies and might well have more than one feed.

 

The below in my signature Bock info has a mistake, Osmia belonged to Parker @ 1929 (There were already German made Duofold clones for cheaper and Soennecken and MB were cheaper also)....not late '30s .

And there is no info on the feeds.

Bock nibs made nibs for 31 different brands of fountain pens. Among them were nibs for well-known German and Italian pen manufacturers ... ones that are often assumed to make all of their own nibs.

 

Shocking to me was they made for Geha...slightly better than the then Pelikan and Soennecken (in the '50's some of the best German nibs)....

and once for Pelikan, which I knew.

The same complaints made about Bock Pelikan nibs are still the same with Pelikan's in house nibs.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Bo Bo Olson

[sansenri]

 

If an in-depth report from a materials engineer who actually went through the process of replacing ebonite feeds with plastic won't convince you, nothing will. You're being irrational.

 

I don't thinks so, I am just giving myself other priorities.

It has been discussed in depth (also in other threads) that it seams that the main reason for changing from ebonite to plastic is cost.

That does not just mean cost of material, but also means reproducibility and quality control, because pen companies want an averagely good feed and not have the issue of some very good feeds and some very bad ones. And also machinability, plastic is much easier to produce that ebonite. So it's an industrialization process.

(I read somewhere that an ebonite feed made industrially can cost 1 dollar while a plastic feed a few cents.)

All these priorities are perfectly fine for a company producing pens, not for the pen enthusiast though.

I just want the best feed I can get, I don't make pens industrially, I don't need to aim at inter-batch or batch to batch reproducibility...

 

So perhaps the pen industry has moved on to plastic feeds for good commercial reasons and has reached a high level of quality in it's feeds, so much that many pen users don't feel the difference vs ebonite.

I think I do, in some cases. That is of course subjective but up to me define how important I feel it is to me.

 

That said, I do agree that some plastic feeds are very good (Pelikan for example) but the capability of some ebonite feeds to behave in a way that I can feel is different does positively surprise me, and still makes me think it is desirable to have a (good) ebonite feed.

Edited April 7, 2018 by sansenri

[sansenri]

One of these days when my Lamy Joy....a Safari with a skinny long tail, is empty, I'll remove the nib and look at the top of the nib..........but the bottom of that and my 1990 Persona (1990 in it don't have the tiny bump on the clip later models had to keep it from rolling off the desk........are all '20's flat with no buffer to be seen. '20 and before and were made to deliver ink faster for I suppose were more flexible nibs needing a faster flow. In the '30's more stiffer nibs came in needing a slower ink flow and buffering came on big time.

I don't know what sort of buffering the top of those two Lamy feed has...if any.......but the chemical roughening of plastic does the trick.

 

After reading, https://fountainpend...ade-of-plastic/, and the rest....I came away with a much better feeling about my Lamy pens.

 

I'm much more interested in the German '50-70 semi-flex pens and their ebonite feeds than modern stiffer nibs..

How ever I am pleasantly (reading the linked threads) surprised that both Bock and JoWo feeds are ebonite.

Bo Bo I think the thread says that Jowo and Bock feeds are ebonite only in some nibs, namely size 8 only, plus Jowo also makes a size 6 nib with ebonite feed (I have one) but the threading is different that standard Jowo threading (I discovered the hard way, since it will not screw in any of my pens...). For the other #6 nibs both Bock and Jowo the feed is plastic.

You can actually check this out on fpnibs, the Spanish site that sells Jowo nibs.

 

By the way, it seems that Delta also used ebonite feeds on some of its high end pens.

[OMASsimo]

"""Pelikan switched from ebonite to molded plastics in the 80s without loss of performance.""" ????

WOG on my part.....that may have been earlier. In the '80's they were using regular flex nibs (actually from '66-81 also? Having none don't know if they are regular flex or semi-nail, or even nail nibs)....admittedly a very superior regular flex...the '82-90 W. Germany nib is a slight tad more springy than the '90-97 Germany nib..................IMO there was a loss of performance in they were no longer semi-flex.

:headsmack:I wonder if Pelikan reformulated it's ink, once they went away from semi-flex?? Different feed needs a different ink....or? Too many old pens around?

 

In 1965 Pelikan went away from semi-flex nibs ...I think, with the end of the 400nn. Semi-flex being wetter required an ebonite feed.The last German semi-flex out side the 1000 was the Geha 725, which stopped production in 1972, when Geha closed it's pen sub division. It like MB and Pelikan were office supply companies.

 

I asked around here, but no one could tell me then if the '66-81 Pelikan nibs were semi-flex. So I didn't throw away any scarce money looking at regular flex nibbed pens of that era. I was chasing semi-flex only, on the whole.

 

I did have a '90-96 Tortoise regular flex 400 bought as a 'noobie' thinking it was a '50's semi-flex, at a live auction.

And later a good buy of a pretty pen, a pre '97 381. The green stripped 400 was made a year longer to '97, before the new 400 came in with the ring at the piston knob. I also have a couple of Celebry pens; a steel & a gold, '96-2000 and something.They are all regular flex like the 200 and equal to the 200. The regular flex gold nibs are exactly equal to the 200 or the steel Celebry. Being regular flex did not require the speed of feed of a semi-flex.

 

In ''98 they came in with the fatter stiffer nibs nibs, requiring even less speed, except on the 200 and later 1000. But I don't see them making s special 200's feed.

 

The machining of the '30's 3 comb and '50-65 four comb was so simple and cheap to make in it did not involve cutting many combs. Simpler thicker saws, and grinding down to the tip of the feed.

 

Max whom I believe has passed had a great thread in the header section of MB, on the many slightly different '50-to modern feeds (being more interested in the '50's feeds don't remember how far back he went with MB feeds)........where they kept trying for better and or cheaper to make feeds. By @ 1970 MB also stopped making semi-flex nibs.

They had a medium wet ink, with a regular flex nib in the '70-80 era, so would need a different feed for best flow......when they went pure plastic I don't know.I believe the modern 'Springy' nib....good tine bend, only 2 X tine spread came in in '90. Having only 5 or 6 MB's don't know as much as I do about Pelikan.....which is not as much as I'd like to think.

 

What was 'shocking' was the news to me, Bock and JoWo make ebonite feeds.

How ever much of making a feed is matching it exactly to an ink. One of the reasons many seem to dislike Bock.........who makes for many companies and might well have more than one feed.

 

The below in my signature Bock info has a mistake, Osmia belonged to Parker @ 1929 (There were already German made Duofold clones for cheaper and Soennecken and MB were cheaper also)....not late '30s .

And there is no info on the feeds.

Bock nibs made nibs for 31 different brands of fountain pens. Among them were nibs for well-known German and Italian pen manufacturers ... ones that are often assumed to make all of their own nibs.

 

Shocking to me was they made for Geha...slightly better than the then Pelikan and Soennecken (in the '50's some of the best German nibs)....

and once for Pelikan, which I knew.

The same complaints made about Bock Pelikan nibs are still the same with Pelikan's in house nibs.

 

It doesn't make sense to consider nib and feed separately, they are a unit. If a nib/feed combination works fine, nothing is wrong with the feed obviously. I also think that your logic might be a little off. The decisive parameter is not whether it's a flex or a stiff nib but how much ink must be delivered in a given period of time which is called ink flow (in physics this is called a current). A modern broad stiff nib lays down a substantial amount of ink requiring a high ink flow, certainly no less than what is required by a flex nib laying down the same amount of ink when flexed. Modern plastic feeds can deliver that amount of ink in my experience. There may be numerous reasons why some of us prefer vintage pens or modern brands using ebonite feeds. But I doubt that the reaspons can be reduced to the material of the feed.

 

 

 

 

I don't thinks so, I am just giving myself other priorities.

It has been discussed in depth (also in other threads) that it seams that the main reason for changing from ebonite to plastic is cost.

That does not just mean cost of material, but also means reproducibility and quality control, because pen companies want an averagely good feed and not have the issue of some very good feeds and some very bad ones. And also machinability, plastic is much easier to produce that ebonite. So it's an industrialization process.

(I read somewhere that an ebonite feed made industrially can cost 1 dollar while a plastic feed a few cents.)

All these priorities are perfectly fine for a company producing pens, not for the pen enthusiast though.

I just want the best feed I can get, I don't make pens industrially, I don't need to aim at inter-batch or batch to batch reproducibility...

 

So perhaps the pen industry has moved on to plastic feeds for good commercial reasons and has reached a high level of quality in it's feeds, so much that many pen users don't feel the difference vs ebonite.

I think I do, in some cases. That is of course subjective but up to me define how important I feel it is to me.

 

That said, I do agree that some plastic feeds are very good (Pelikan for example) but the capability of some ebonite feeds to behave in a way that I can feel is different does positively surprise me, and still makes me think it is desirable to have a (good) ebonite feed.

 

You are certainly right that the main reason to change from machined ebonite to molded plastics was an economical one. But the conclusion that ebonite is better than other materials, based on the subjective impression that pens with ebonite feeds are superior, may be misleading. I absolutely love my OMAS pens with ebonite feeds but I couldn't tell if their marvelous performance couldn't be achieved with plastic feeds as well. There are too many parameters involved and too few samples available for us as users to judge this.

[Tseg]

I just ordered an ebonite pen from FPN (India produced/US based Fountain Pen Revolution) after much research. Their lower cost pens have Ebonite feeds, higher cost are plastic. Annecdotally, an issue with Ebonite feeds from this brand is they tend to leak ink into the cap much more easily during transportation than their plastic counterparts. I'm not sure if that is Ebonite driven or similar experience across all Ebonite feeds? May need to be careful using a broad brush that plastic feeds are about cost savings. The labor rate in India for skilled Ebonite artisians that produce <$50 Ebonite pens (and feeds) must be quite low.

Edited April 8, 2018 by Tseg

[Karmachanic]

Ebonite housing/feeds aplenty. For Jowo #6 and Pilot 743 anyway. Pelikan on the horizon,. Haven't tried one as yet, so I can't say how they perform.

http://flexiblenib.com/store/standard-replacement-feeds/

Edited April 8, 2018 by kd3

[sansenri]

 

It doesn't make sense to consider nib and feed separately, they are a unit. If a nib/feed combination works fine, nothing is wrong with the feed obviously. I also think that your logic might be a little off. The decisive parameter is not whether it's a flex or a stiff nib but how much ink must be delivered in a given period of time which is called ink flow (in physics this is called a current). A modern broad stiff nib lays down a substantial amount of ink requiring a high ink flow, certainly no less than what is required by a flex nib laying down the same amount of ink when flexed. Modern plastic feeds can deliver that amount of ink in my experience. There may be numerous reasons why some of us prefer vintage pens or modern brands using ebonite feeds. But I doubt that the reaspons can be reduced to the material of the feed.

 

 

 

 

You are certainly right that the main reason to change from machined ebonite to molded plastics was an economical one. But the conclusion that ebonite is better than other materials, based on the subjective impression that pens with ebonite feeds are superior, may be misleading. I absolutely love my OMAS pens with ebonite feeds but I couldn't tell if their marvelous performance couldn't be achieved with plastic feeds as well. There are too many parameters involved and too few samples available for us as users to judge this.

 

Massimo, I did say my conclusion is absolutely subjective

and agree that some pens perform extremely well with plastic feeds.

Subjectively I still feel a difference, mostly in the flow.

 

Just out of curiosity, here is a comparison image Omas feed vs Ranga feed.

The Omas is an Extra (557F size, dating probably 80s) with a 18k nib M (small o omas), not exceedingly flexy.

The Ranga is a model 8 eye dropper with a Bock made, Conklin imprinted, M nib.

 

The Ranga feed is evidently hand made, but design is really similar!

[Bo Bo Olson]

There is more info coming out on ebonite vs plastic feeds than I've seen in my decade here....about who's still making some ebonite nibs. Penengineer's blog was such a wonder; which I'd read quite a while back. If Lamy can acid treat it's plastic feeds to improve roughness, so can others.

Just don't know if and when they did.

 

I do tend to think a plastic feed B, don't put out as more ink than easier tine spread of my semi-flex B or OB, OBB's. (Some of them maxi's.)

Pelikan does make a wet nib, because it makes a dry 4001 ink. Edelstein seems wetter on the whole.

My once 605's BB now a 1.0 stub, is generous with ink flow. My MB Woolf is a fatter nib, it's B, a BB*** to me, but my eye was calibrated back in Vintage days. It is a wet stubbish 'Springy' nib. (Good tine bend but only 2 X tine spread.)

 

*** Could well have a B on the fat side of Tolerance....taking it down to a skinny B is on my list of things to do, once my money tree gets back from the Italian Rivera.

(more sandy than the French.)

 

No, I've not done a 'test' of the 605/Woolf and ebonite nibs...(not going too either)............... nor do I have but a couple highly buffered '40-50''s US plastic nibs.

Due to Penengineer's fine blog, I am willing to discard some prejudice of plastic feeds.

When hit in the face with a pie full of facts have been known to change my mind.

[sansenri]

Ebonite housing/feeds aplenty. For Jowo #6 and Pilot 743 anyway. Pelikan on the horizon,. Haven't tried one as yet, so I can't say how they perform.

http://flexiblenib.com/store/standard-replacement-feeds/

thank you kd3, very interesting, have you tried any?

[Karmachanic]

thank you kd3, very interesting, have you tried any?

 

Not as yet, but it's s distant horizon simply for the experience, and to see how/if forming the nib to the feed makes a tangible difference. Aknowledging that what is tangible to one is not necessarily tangible to another. All personal experience is, after all, are subjective.

Edited April 8, 2018 by kd3

[sansenri]

fully agree, but I think it's very intersting to have access to them. Cost sound surprisingly high though...

 

@ OMASsimo

 

"It doesn't make sense to consider nib and feed separately, they are a unit. If a nib/feed combination works fine, nothing is wrong with the feed obviously."

 

This is moslty true, especially if you are pen producing company, who designs the nib feed collar unit to get best performace (or buys a ready made unit from another producer, typical industrial arrangement).

When doing this though a company always has cost contraints.

It is also true that a pen user most of the time will judge a nib feed collar unit, but here we have some possibilities of a different approach.

I asked Ranga to make me a 8B pen. As you know Ranga offers a considerable amount of customization, for example you can have an ED filler, with a Wality Nib, Ambitious nib, etc.

At this level of hand made customization I don't think there will be a lot of scientific testing behind it, but a large amount (decades probably) of direct experience.

I think it's fun to see what happens if you fit an ebonite feed to a Bock #6 nib on a Ranga ED (which is exactly what I asked Ranga to do, asking them their opinion about it and being told "don't worry Sir, it will work fine!" )

Whatever the result, it will have been great fun to try, currently I have far too many Jowo/Bock nib units that often perform almost in the same way.

[Pen Engineer]

 

 

None. The other thread mentioned was a "what if" thought exercise. I don't know of anyone ever trying to make a metal feed and apparently it wouldn't work anyway, so yeah...

from a function point of view, there is no reason why not. Machining one, or 10 million a year, could pose some challenges, however, they are only there to be jumped over,

[Pen Engineer]

There is more info coming out on ebonite vs plastic feeds than I've seen in my decade here....about who's still making some ebonite nibs. Penengineer's blog was such a wonder; which I'd read quite a while back. If Lamy can acid treat it's plastic feeds to improve roughness, so can others.

Just don't know if and when they did.

 

 

they have not read my website

[Pen Engineer]

 

Not as yet, but it's s distant horizon simply for the experience, and to see how/if forming the nib to the feed makes a tangible difference. Aknowledging that what is tangible to one is not necessarily tangible to another. All personal experience is, after all, are subjective.

ahm... a circle and a straight line, if they touch, do form a tangent ... for nib and feed a good tangentiveness depends on the place and length of contact, whereby I would give the right place the prime priority. .... meaning: it's not THAT subjective

[como]

The new Leonardo Momento Zero Grande pens seem to be using ebonite feed similar/same as the old Omas ones. I ordered one but haven't receive it yet. I prefer the ebonite feed over the plastic feed on the their Bock made nib. The plastic Bock feeds sometimes have trouble sitting well with the nib and shift around (and you can't heat-set them).

[sansenri]

I ordered one too! waiting...

Clearly it all depends if the ebonite feed is a good ebonite feed as I mentioned several posts back.

However, since ultimately we write with these things, and the writing experience is very subjective, still I have a preference in the performance I experience with ebonite feeds. I'm not sure what it depends on. The merely scientific discussion is not sufficient in my opinion. Clearly too many variables are involved however given the number of pens with or without ebonite feed I own and the average impression I get overall, still I tend to like the pen with ebonite feed better (on average that is, obviously there are some pens with plastic feed that behave as well, at least to my expectation - as it may be different for others - notably Pelikan, but I suspect the piston filling systems weighs in here).

I have tried to describe the benefit I feel, as I don't want to just claim ebonite is better. I feel a less restrained ink flow, which is a characteristic I like. Often, also much better behaviour vs hard starts, prompt start all the time, vs some hesitation with several plastic feeds on first strokes.

[como]

I know what you meant. I don't care if I need to justify why I prefer the ebonite feeds. Same as corks for wine: I prefer the ones made of real cork, not rubber. I know the rubber ones work very well, and I am not trying to be a snob and putting the rubber ones down. But I am allowed my preference Plastic feeds are ok. I have plastic feeds too, and I have c/c pens too, all good.

I ordered one too! waiting...

Clearly it all depends if the ebonite feed is a good ebonite feed as I mentioned several posts back.

However, since ultimately we write with these things, and the writing experience is very subjective, still I have a preference in the performance I experience with ebonite feeds. I'm not sure what it depends on. The merely scientific discussion is not sufficient in my opinion.

[Karmachanic]

Flexible Nibs now has Ebonite collar/feeds for Pelikan M200/400 and M800. Bock 260 hopefully by the end of the year. In the interim I'm enjoying the Ebonite feeds on my M400 and MB 234.5, and look forward to the arrival of the above mentioned Bock feeds.

[DipIt]

Santini Italia also makes their own nibs and feeds. At least some of their feeds are ebonite. I have one that is very recent mfg.

 

I recall seeing an advertisement for an aluminum feed that was lacquer coated.....my poor memory is that it was ASC.