Pilot Con-40. Why?

[Karmachanic]

A mild rant.

 

Pilot Con-40. Whose ideas was this? Why does it exist?

 

Looks nice. And well made too.

 

Can't be filled by conventional methods. Can't be syringe filled. D'you s'pose anyone at Pilot actually uses these? Or tried to before they were released? Do they have a secret stash of Con-20s and Con-50s on hand?

 

Anyway. Anyone know how to find the designer? Perhaps we could lock him up in a small room and let him out once he successfully fills one by the conventional method. And makes a video showing how it's done

 

Bye

.

 

 

 

 

 

[penzel_washinkton]

Honestly, I don't see how CON-40 is better in anyway to the CON-50.

 

Advantages of the CON-50 over the CON-40:

- Smoother screwing piston mechanism

- Can be filled almost to the brim

- Personally like the agitator than the ball type in CON-40

 

Advantages of the CON-40 over the CON-50:

- Jacksh*t, okay if you insist, more see through (hooray?)

 

Really hope Pilot release a new converter in the near future that is a larger capacity version of the CON-50.

Also, I hate cleaning the CON-70 just for your information

[LizEF]

... Can't be syringe filled. ...

 

Actually, it can be, but it's as much a bear as anything. You have to screw the piston down like you would before filling it the conventional way, then put some ink in, then back the piston off to suck the ink in, repeat, sometimes screwing the piston back down so you can suck more in - and then there's the question of how full to fill it this way - too full, and ink will spill out when you insert it in the pen...

 

Sigh. Yes, I agree, terrible design! Bring back the CON-50 (or figure out a better design).

 

I suspect folk complained too much about the noise the CON-50's rivet-agitator-thing made. And yeah, I suspect they didn't test the CON-40, just assumed it would work as well as anything else. I put my CON-40s in my EF nibs, and the CON-50s in the F nibs. I pity anyone who has larger nibs!

[Olya]

I don't understand why Pilot doesn't simply copy Sailor and make a converter like theirs. Basically a con-50 without the agitator. For me Sailor converters have always worked flawlessly.

 

Syringe filling converters makes no sense to me. Syringe filling cartridges is another matter, I do that, greater capacity, cheap and always works well.

[Karmachanic]

Removing the agitator from the Con-50 is easy. More ink!

[BaronWulfraed]

I'd prefer them to bring back the CON-20... can be manipulated with one hand. They fit so nicely in Vanishing Points.

 

Seems a very fine-needle (blunt) syringe would work for the CON-40 (I'm presuming the problem described above is surface tension on the "agitator" (ignore the balls, I refer to the metal piece wedged in the throat) keeping the ink from going down one side and letting air out the other). A fine enough needle should let one inject the ink through one side of the "agitator".

[XYZZY]

I don't understand the comments about not being able to syringe fill the CON-40. I did that with two of them just a couple of days ago. Perhaps it depends on the needle, but I just sneak the needle past the metal retainer for the balls and squirt ink in. I'm currently using the blunt needles from Goulet, but a common syringe like people buy for allergy or insulin injections would be even easier. Are y'all trying to use a syringe without a needle? I can see how the retainer would make that harder.

 

I have no experience with a CON-50, not trying to argue against anybody's preference for that.

 

And in spite of what I wrote somewhere in this forum a couple of months ago, I'm now learning to not like the CON-70 after having a few CON-40s to use.

 

I've also recently tried syringe filling an emptied cartridge since so many people talk about that being easiest. Yup. Easy to clean, easy to syringe fill, never needs lube.

[LizEF]

I don't understand the comments about not being able to syringe fill the CON-40. I did that with two of them just a couple of days ago. Perhaps it depends on the needle, but I just sneak the needle past the metal retainer for the balls and squirt ink in. I'm currently using the blunt needles from Goulet, but a common syringe like people buy for allergy or insulin injections would be even easier. Are y'all trying to use a syringe without a needle? I can see how the retainer would make that harder.

 

Based on this, 20-gauge (what Goulet sell) fits and 15-gauge (what I have) is too large.

Edited December 11, 2018 by LizEF

[XYZZY]

 

Based on this, 18-gauge (what Goulet sell) fits and 15-gauge (what I have) is too large.

 

Thanks, that's great to know!

 

Because I cringe at the idea of mail-ordering a syringe (in my defense needed a syringe, it was late, I had been drinking, and had an order open anyhow ). The next ones will probably be begged from a veterinarian friend and it's nice to know what won't work.

[LizEF]

Thanks, that's great to know!

 

Because I cringe at the idea of mail-ordering a syringe (in my defense needed a syringe, it was late, I had been drinking, and had an order open anyhow ). The next ones will probably be begged from a veterinarian friend and it's nice to know what won't work.

 

Well, that made me go check, and Goulet sell 20-gauge - which are even narrower! I'll go correct my post now. (The higher the number, the narrower the needle - apparently, "gauge" is a fractional unit.)

[inkstainedruth]

Did I like the old Con-20 converters? Yes. Do I have a problem with the fact that my new Decimo came with a Con-40 converter? No. The Decimo (with its F nib) is still on the first fill, and I've been using the pen for a couple of weeks now.

As for filling a converter with a syringe.... Why? I tried filling a pen with a syringe through the nib one time and it was a major PITA (and my grandparents' old dresser now is permanently stained with Noodler's Kung Te Cheng). If the ink in a bottle or vial is too low to adequately cover a nib to fill it directly, just pull the converter and fill it from the bottle or vial, then reinsert the converter in the pen.

Yeesh. What is the problem with people? All this handwringing for pretty much no reason. You don't like the capacity of a converter? Go buy a piston filler pen. Or a vintage pen like a Parker Vacumatic or 51 that has a way bigger capacity. This all sounds like a "First World" problem.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

 

ETA: And if you're worrying about keeping the nib clean? Get a vintage (working) Sheaffer Snorkel. But understand that you're still going to have to flush the entire nib and feed when you change inks, because that's just how feeds work....

Edited December 11, 2018 by inkstainedruth

[Karmachanic]

Yeesh. What is the problem with people? All this handwringing for pretty much no reason. You don't like the capacity of a converter? Go buy a piston filler pen. Or a vintage pen like a Parker Vacumatic or 51 that has a way bigger capacity. This all sounds like a "First World" problem.

 

 

 

OK. Make me a piston filler Pilot 912 with a MS.nib and I'll buy it. Promise.

In the interim I'll get a couple of Con-50s and a Con-20.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Karmachanic

[essayfaire]

I'm at a bit of a loss here - is the mechanism different? I thought they were approximately the same except that the 40 was shorter. I believe Pilot was trying to produce fewer sizes of converters and thought the 40 would be a good compromise between the CON-20 and the -50. I don't know if the 70 would fit any of my Pilots, though I would love larger capacity!

[Karmachanic]

I'm at a bit of a loss here - is the mechanism different? I thought they were approximately the same except that the 40 was shorter. I believe Pilot was trying to produce fewer sizes of converters and thought the 40 would be a good compromise between the CON-20 and the -50. I don't know if the 70 would fit any of my Pilots, though I would love larger capacity!

 

On a good day one might get a 50% fill with a Con-40. So maybe .3ml

[Mongoosey]

I am not a fan of the con40 myself.

 

It's a piece of $h!# .

 

I can't believe they came out with this . This is not something I would expect Pilot to deem acceptable.

 

I got the con40 from Goulet thinking I was adding a con50 to my purchase of a Pilot Pen and when I complained to them about the poor functionality of the con40 they basically gave me an email *shrug* intimating that they know it's terrible and they can't do anything about it because they're all made to that poor standard.

 

I never thought I'd appreciate the Con50 nor Con20, and I actually feel lucky to have both lol.

[prashant.tikekar]

I am using Capless this week. Con50/40 has very small ink capacity when they are full and it is not easy to fill them completely. So I use refilled cartridge only. Cartridge has wider mouth and can be easily refilled using small eyedropper.

[prashant.tikekar]

I don't understand why Pilot doesn't simply copy Sailor and make a converter like theirs. Basically a con-50 without the agitator. For me Sailor converters have always worked flawlessly.

 

Syringe filling converters makes no sense to me. Syringe filling cartridges is another matter, I do that, greater capacity, cheap and always works well.

Small and lightweight pens like Prera and Lucina feel better with some weight of Con50. With cartridge, I don't like them.It is not easy to fill con50 completely so I also refill it by syringe. Maybe due to same reason others are also refilling con50 using syringe.

[jar]

Why would anyone not fill a converter by putting the nib in the ink as it was designed? What is this mania and need to not follow the directions?

[Karmachanic]

Why would anyone not fill a converter by putting the nib in the ink as it was designed? What is this mania and need to not follow the directions?

 

https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/341886-pilot-con-40-why/?p=4140876

[A Smug Dill]

Pilot Con-40. Whose ideas was this? Why does it exist?

To fit Pilot models including the MR (Metropolitan), classic Vanishing Point, Elite 95s (aka E95s), and Parallel pens all equally well? If I'm not mistaken, the E95s and the Parallel pens cannot accommodate the old CON-50 inside their barrels.

 

Looks nice. And well made too.

 

Can't be filled by conventional methods.

I'm not sure whether you mean you cannot fill the converter with the following method (printed on the back of the retail packaging for the CON-40), or that Pilot's method is not conventional.

 

 

Can't be syringe filled.

I see that some other users who prefer that method disagree with you.

 

https://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/topic/341886-pilot-con-40-why/?p=4140876

So hold the pen with the nib pointing upwards, after the first drawing of ink from the bottle, and slowly rotate the piston to displace through the feed the air that is in the converter, and then repeat the method printed on the CON-40 packaging to fill the converter to capacity with ink.

 

I am using Capless this week. Con50/40 has very small ink capacity when they are full and it is not easy to fill them completely. So I use refilled cartridge only. Cartridge has wider mouth and can be easily refilled using small eyedropper.

We have eleven Pilot Capless pens here (with a twelfth on its way to me by USPS, even as I write this), and I use one as my most favoured EDC pen. I've never had an issue with the capacity of the CON-50 that was supplied with the pen when I bought it five years ago, or feel that it has let me down by running out of ink in the middle of writing something at work (or on any other important occasion), even though I only refilled it once every few weeks normally, or out-of-turn especially ahead of an important meeting or some such.

Edited December 16, 2018 by A Smug Dill