Parker 51 Comeback 2020?

[Mr.Rene]

4 hours ago, sciumbasci said:

Platignum 🤭

Has already been said Platignum is not a chinese brand. 

Sciumbasci maybe you keep in mind PLATINUM...nevertheless Platinum is Japanese brand. Regards.

[inkstainedruth]

15 hours ago, Glenn-SC said:

Mein Gott!
Let's all go storming over to the Lamy Forum and complain that the Safari doesn't come with a converter!!!

What is Lamy thinking?

 

The difference is that you're talking about a $30 pen and a $6 converter.  Whereas, the "new 51s" cost more than double the retail price of a Safari.  Heck they cost more than I paid for my Plum Demi 51, which of course is probably a better fill system overall than on a c/c pen.

If I'm gonna buy a c/c filler Parker?  It's gonna be a Vector -- not a "revamped" 51.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

 

ETA: Heck, I could buy a whole lot of Vectors for the price on one of the "revamped" 51s.  Heck, I paid around $13 for one of the reissued French production Vectors about 3 years ago, so I could probably buy 5 Vectors *plus* the twist converters for them, for the price of one glorified Vector.  And let's make no mistake about this.  The "new" 51 is just that.  An expensive, glorified Vector.

[Ferocity]

Ink Stained Druth💔

I care about you

I want you to be happy through time and space

I respect your opinion

I listen to your ideas

and

I hope you're not correct about that very last part hahaha = )

 

[pajaro]

The first fountain pens I collected were vintage aerometric 51s.  I must have become fixated on them, because the new 51 does not enthuse me.  I already turned one of those vintage 51s in to a C/C pen, using a part made by someone in India.  It only proved to be a novelty.  I bought a new vintage 51 in 1970, and its aerometric filler still fills the pen, which writes on.  I have found that most of the vintage pens, demi and full sized, fill easily and write the smoothest lines of any pen I have used.  Having seen what a good many more modern pens can do, I would not expect much out of the new 51 redesign.  Personally I don't need a redesigned 51, but the Sonnets are OK, so the 51 redesign is probably going to be OK.

 

[FarmBoy]

3 hours ago, inkstainedruth said:

The difference is that you're talking about a $30 pen and a $6 converter.  Whereas, the "new 51s" cost more than double the retail price of a Safari.  Heck they cost more than I paid for my Plum Demi 51, which of course is probably a better fill system overall than on a c/c pen.

If I'm gonna buy a c/c filler Parker?  It's gonna be a Vector -- not a "revamped" 51.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

 

ETA: Heck, I could buy a whole lot of Vectors for the price on one of the "revamped" 51s.  Heck, I paid around $13 for one of the reissued French production Vectors about 3 years ago, so I could probably buy 5 Vectors *plus* the twist converters for them, for the price of one glorified Vector.  And let's make no mistake about this.  The "new" 51 is just that.  An expensive, glorified Vector.

OK OK, I'll ask.  What did you pay for a Plum 51.

[corniche]

14 hours ago, Ferocity said:

❤️💖🍀💖❤️ Thank you and I hope you stay both happy and in good health regardless of anything else in the world 💖💖🍀💖💖

 

 

(that's a four leaf clover by the way haaaaahahahaaahaaaahaha)

 

Hello Ferocity, 

 

Tut, tut. One must exercise care and discretion when using the shamrock. My people own the trademark for it, don't you know?

 

- Sean  🍀🍀🍀

[FarmBoy]

For fun I looked at what a modern Esterbrook Estie costs.  It is a lot less than what I paid for a Presidential "51" and I didn't even get a box.  But that Estie will run you 2X a new 51.  AND if you want to use vintage Renew Points you need to spend the greater portion of another new 51 to get the adapter.  I think Parker should charge more.

 

[peroride]

22 hours ago, Heinkle said:

This seems to be legit, but honestly who knows

Nice find! I love Japanese pens Made in France 😋

[shostakovich]

2 hours ago, pajaro said:

Having seen what a good many more modern pens can do, I would not expect much out of the new 51 redesign.  Personally I don't need a redesigned 51, but the Sonnets are OK, so the 51 redesign is probably going to be OK.

That is all a matter of opinion. I have Sonnets and I don't rate them. I find modern pens excellent and far superior to most if not all of the old junk I have. (Snorkels etc). But as I say, people have different expectations.

[WJM]

5 hours ago, inkstainedruth said:

And let's make no mistake about this.  The "new" 51 is just that.  An expensive, glorified Vector.

 

I thought Rialto was that. 

 

  

5 hours ago, inkstainedruth said:

The difference is that you're talking about a $30 pen and a $6 converter.  Whereas, the "new 51s" cost more than double the retail price of a Safari.

 

Lamy is just an easy example. There are better ones out there, like this Pelikan P205, 124 USD - so more expensive than Parker. Converter not included.

 

Or this Cross Townsend for 115 USD, converter  not included. 

 

Kaweco Dia 2 for 120 USD, converter not included.

 

I despise the habit of not including a converter to a c/c fountain pen as much as everyone else, but there's no reason to put any special blame on Parker. 

 

 

 

[PithyProlix]

18 hours ago, Estycollector said:

No one is fussing, just observing that a new $200 historic pen lacks the necessary equipment to be able to use ink from a bottle. 
 

Given that Parker sells ink in a bottle, seems intuitive to include one . 

Perhaps Parker has figured that the only people who will buy this pen are those who will put it in a glass case (or wherever else they keep their pen collection) and never use it? 😉😁

[TheRedBeard]

8 hours ago, ele said:

Is this their standard practice? To only update their website after they've sold a few? Seems like a very antiquated way of doing things.

Such a low profile approach is understandable and quite common in cases when a company wants to keep marketing costs under control and avoid bad PR if a particular product happens to be a flop.

It looks like that Newel decided to go that way as it represented no risk for them.

If "new" P51 is not successful it will not harm their position too much while potential negative feedback from original P51 devotees and pen "connoisseurs" will be insignificant for them...

[TheRedBeard]

24 minutes ago, PithyProlix said:

Perhaps Parker has figured that the only people who will buy this pen are those who will put it in a glass case (or wherever else they keep their pen collection) and never use it? 😉😁

I don't think Parker-Newell bothered with any serious marketing efforts at all

However, you seem to be right some way as I am one of those who buy a "new" P51 and intend to keep it just as a piece of my collection :)

[TheRedBeard]

1 hour ago, WJM said:

 

I thought Rialto was that. 

............

 

 

Absolutely right.

P88/Rialto was dubbed "fancy-dressed" Vector that time...

But 88/Rialto was rather successful for Parker.

I actually like it (especially early 88s) and still use them occasionally.

[PithyProlix]

45 minutes ago, TheRedBeard said:

I don't think Parker-Newell bothered with any serious marketing efforts at all

However, you seem to be right some way as I am one of those who buy a "new" P51 and intend to keep it just as a piece of my collection

Oh, I was half-joking that it's the reason they aren't including a converter. But you are right - it might also explain the lack of marketing ...

[Estycollector]

5 hours ago, FarmBoy said:

For fun I looked at what a modern Esterbrook Estie costs.  It is a lot less than what I paid for a Presidential "51" and I didn't even get a box.  But that Estie will run you 2X a new 51.  AND if you want to use vintage Renew Points you need to spend the greater portion of another new 51 to get the adapter.  I think Parker should charge more.

 

Esterbrook is just a brand with no resemblance said or implied to the brand's heyday. 

 

If someone wanted to use a vintage nib, the vintage bodies are readily available for less than a good bottle of wine. 

[Estycollector]

9 hours ago, inkstainedruth said:

The difference is that you're talking about a $30 pen and a $6 converter.  Whereas, the "new 51s" cost more than double the retail price of a Safari.  Heck they cost more than I paid for my Plum Demi 51, which of course is probably a better fill system overall than on a c/c pen.

If I'm gonna buy a c/c filler Parker?  It's gonna be a Vector -- not a "revamped" 51.

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

 

ETA: Heck, I could buy a whole lot of Vectors for the price on one of the "revamped" 51s.  Heck, I paid around $13 for one of the reissued French production Vectors about 3 years ago, so I could probably buy 5 Vectors *plus* the twist converters for them, for the price of one glorified Vector.  And let's make no mistake about this.  The "new" 51 is just that.  An expensive, glorified Vector.

Here, here!! Well said, Ruth. 

[Aysedasi]

5 hours ago, shostakovich said:

That is all a matter of opinion. I have Sonnets and I don't rate them. I find modern pens excellent and far superior to most if not all of the old junk I have. (Snorkels etc). But as I say, people have different expectations.

 

Likewise.  I've owned 4 or 5 and sold them all.  

[AL01]

7 hours ago, shostakovich said:

That is all a matter of opinion. I have Sonnets and I don't rate them. I find modern pens excellent and far superior to most if not all of the old junk I have. (Snorkels etc). But as I say, people have different expectations.

 

 C/C pens (for the most part) win in terms of reliability as they very rarely, (if never) have to be serviced.

 

 I think most people's qualms with the "new" 51 is less about its internals and more about its appearance and other (possibly unrelated) factors.

[corgicoupe]

3 hours ago, Estycollector said:

Esterbrook is just a brand with no resemblance said or implied to the brand's heyday. 

 

If someone wanted to use a vintage nib, the vintage bodies are readily available for less than a good bottle of wine. 

And, in my opinion, the much smaller Esterbrook vintage nibs would appear dwarfed in the new Estie.