A New 139. It's A No Brainer... Or Is It?

[zaddick]

Over many years I have seen multiple threads talking about the desire to revive the 139 pen and make a modern offering available to enthusiasts. With the last few years of MB focused on historical/nostalgia issues the topic has been revived. Many people I know consider the 139 a “grail pen” and an icon to covet and chase. Much of the feedback and posts have heaped praise on the 139 and its vintage attributes. There is even an entire cottage industry in the semi-shadows dedicated to creating 139-style pens (call them homage or copycats as you please) and MB itself has dipped into the pool with 3 pens using a 139 form factor in the last millennium – Hemmingway (1992), Dumas (1996), and Year of the Golden Dragon (2000). So it must be in strong contention for the best overall pen MB has made (and the father of my treasured 149s)?

 

Or maybe not?

 

There is a faction of people of users/collectors who are not, shall we say, smitten with the 139. I have learned about this through individual conversations and it is fascinating to hear their perspective. I obviously do not speak to everyone, but those I have spoken with are not in the camp of rolling out a modern 139 pen nor even madly in love with vintage examples. They see it as a pen whose time came and went and often find the fervor over the 139 by current collectors a bit hard to understand, and dare I say misguided.

 

So I’d like to see if we can get an honest debate going here among friends where those who are in favor of a modern 139 can share their thoughts and those who are against a modern reissue will feel comfortable sharing their equally valid opinions. Please share your thoughts. There are no right or wrong answers. Hopefully we can all expand our horizons.

 

[zaddick]

I'll get the ball rolling. For those of you newer to the forum or who don’t follow me in Instagram, I must start by saying I love the MB 149 and the associated #9 nib. It is my favorite production pen and the #9 nib is my overall favorite nib. I have many standard 149s, many customized 149s, and a large handful of custom pens that use 139/149 nibs.

 

When I first discovered the 139 I was taken by the flattened ends. I loved the long ink windows and the “tie” clip. It was a look I could enjoy and different enough from a 149 to make it a worthy compliment. I like celluloid pens and the particular weight of the 139 vs its length. I also like nibs with some flex/spring/bounce and the older #9 nibs often provide me a pleasurable writing experience.

 

But, you can get most all of that fun on a 1950s celluloid 149 for a lot less money and with easier to find spare parts. A celluloid 149 is really only giving up the long ink window, the clip and the flattened ends. Are those worth so much extra money and adulation? Well, for me the answer is pretty much yes, just not in black.

 

I have several pens that look and feel a lot like a 139 in the hand, but are made of more colorful materials – some celluloid and some resin. Turns out I like the look of the flat ends a lot and even went out to get the MB offered variants of the 139 design as a more robust daily use version of the form factor. But I like to cheat a little and put really nice vintage #9 nibs into those custom pens to ensure a pleasurable writing experience. I also have other pens that are vintage style that use vintage MB nibs and parts (like the piston or clip) that are not trying to be a 139 and I still love them.

 

For me the important characteristics are the nib, the filling system, and the material of the body. I don’t need a modern black 139 pen from MB with a stiff #9 and piston from a 149. MB pretty much did that 20 years ago and there is no reason to look back. But if MB came out with a large piston filler with a specialized #9 nib, a piston, flattened ends, and some color I would be quite interested. It does not need to be a 139. Custom pen makers can fill that need for those who want a 139 in colorful celluloid. Let’s encourage MB to focus on more interesting nibs!

[Michael R.]

You might be able to already guess my answer...

I'd love a flat-top Montblanc pen, 149/139 size with a #9 nib:

• regular Meisterstück looks
• no additional ornamentation (like on the Dumas)
• no futuristic/rounded interpretation of the original 139 design being too far away from a classic pen; anyhow some interpretation I can appreciate. Think Hemingway. They did some interpretation on the design there (gripping section, filling knob, overall...) which I can really appreciate. An evolution (e.g. compare the original celluloid 146/149 to the modern version) would be much preferred compared to a completely new design.
• colored materials are totally fine with me
• must have the original style knurling
• would love an traditional style Montblanc clip
• resin construction (or maybe metal overlay style for barrel and cap might be ok) but please not a lacquered metal construction (like on the 1912 or current Heritage line)
• piston filler or a similar true internal filler

 

So basically most 139 tribute pens tick all those boxes but I have to agree that I would love to own one originally made by Montblanc again.

Cheers

 

Michael

[Karmachanic]

You might be able to already guess my answer...

 

I'd love a flat-top Montblanc pen, 149/139 size with a #9 nib:

• regular Meisterstück looks
• no additional ornamentation (like on the Dumas)
• no futuristic/rounded interpretation of the original 139 design being too far away from a classic pen; anyhow some interpretation I can appreciate. Think Hemingway. They did some interpretation on the design there (gripping section, filling knob, overall...) which I can really appreciate. An evolution (e.g. compare the original celluloid 146/149 to the modern version) would be much preferred compared to a completely new design.
• colored materials are totally fine with me
• must have the original style knurling
• would love an traditional style Montblanc clip
• resin construction (or maybe metal overlay style for barrel and cap might be ok) but please not a lacquered metal construction (like on the 1912 or current Heritage line)
• piston filler or a similar true internal filler

 

So basically most 139 tribute pens tick all those boxes but I have to agree that I would love to own one originally made by Montblanc again.

 

Cheers

 

Michael

 

Yes please! And a136 version. With soft nibs for both.

[GOTO10]

I would absolutely love a newly produced 136/139. While I do enjoy the 146/149 I prefer flat ends on a pen.

 

I've looked into acquiring a 136/139 in the past, but I normally bring a 6 pen roll with me and feel ok with pocket carrying most pens in my collection. I don't think I would feel comfortable pocket carrying something that rare/vintage but new production would strip that worry away.

[CS388]

No.

 

I haven't got one.

I'd very much like one, but when it happens, I'd like an original, rather than one of a new line of 139's.

Even if the modern repro had a twin telescopic piston and celluloid parts, I'd still prefer an old one.

 

It's difficult to define, but there's something special about a pen which has survived 70 (or so) years and is still in use. That it came from an age in which fountain pens were important intruments, in everyday use, by most people. Built for a reason, not to satisfy a whim.

It's probably important that I'd have to search for it, from a very limited stock - rather than just turn up at the shop, anytime I fancied, with the appropriate amount of cash.

 

I realise that these are quite shallow reasons and I hasten to add that this is only my perspective, rather than a broader school of thought

And, of course, I wouldn't be against Montblanc re-issuing the 139 - but, I doubt if I'd be in the market for one.

I think the Hemingway is about as good as it gets for a tribute act.

Personally, I'd be more likely to buy a re-issue of the Hemingway, than a re-issue of the 139.

 

Thanks.

[KAC]

Most of my perspectives have already been captured in the posted comments. I'd add that I'll buy a 139 (new or original) in a picosecond if I could obtain one at a "reasonable" price. I bought the 139 derivative (but still very nice) Hemingway because of its fealty to the 139's design and it's relatively tasteful color scheme.

 

While I'd prefer an original 139, that goal is beyond my pen budget. As for a new one, if MB could resist the temptation to embellish (and thereby detract from) the classic clean lines and timeless design of the original, I'd get one of them. There's much to be said in favor of a modern pen that's in standard production, especially when considering tangibles like daily use, carrying it out of the house, etc.

 

Anyway, Yes: I'd be very interested in a modern iteration of the 139 with the above caveats.

 

Keith

[jmnav]

There's another difference between 139 and 149: the former's concave section.

 

I wouldn't like a modern 139 for the same reason I don't like that much the 149, be it modern or vintage: too big. I'm more for the 136/146 size, maybe even 138.

 

Of these, 1950's 146 is (for me) a bit too short, other than that is basically perfect: section, weight and balance. And what's a 146 only longer enough? Not the modern 146 and its straight section but the 136 model. Same weight and balance, same section, same warm celluloid...

 

And then, the nibs. I haven't tested the new MB flex nib, but those in 12x, 13x, 14x while never "wet noodles" are terribly good semi-flexes and I really doubt the new offer is any better. Add to it that, in my short experience, the shorter the nib, the better the flex, so I find #6 of that time better than their #9s and, unluckily, even if MB copied the 136/138 form factor, it still would lack in celluloid warmness, weight, balance and nib quality...

 

Oh, and even all these vintage pens being no bargain, I'm sure MB would manage for its new 13x series to be even more expensive than their "original" counterparts!

Edited September 22, 2020 by jmnav

[Marcwithac]

Zaddick, what an interesting question you've posed.

 

Putting aside the specific question - a modern 139, yay or nay - I prefer the 139 to the 149. I say this even though I've become more infatuated with the 149 over the past few years, especially my currently inked 1952 model and my Calligraphy Flex version. For me, the 13x series of pens simply seems timeless. It's a matter of personal taste, of course, but I generally favor a flat ended pen over a cigar shape. The look of the tie clip is so powerful that it dramatically boosts the appeal of lesser pens (who wouldn't choose a 234 1/2 with a tie clip over one with the traditional papyrus clip?). I also prefer the silver-gold-silver band configuration, although I acknowledge that the oldest 149s come similarly outfitted.

 

So, would I be interested in a modern version of the 139? It's true that vintage 139s are prohibitively expensive for most penthusiasts. They are also, at least from my experience, harder and more expensive to repair (and more likely to sustain even worse damage in the attempt). I can, therefore, see some value in a modern version with a resin body and synthetic piston seal. I agree that the nib would need to have some vintage-like flex - not like the nail on my early 1980's 149. If such a pen were made today, I would be quite tempted by it.

 

But I'm not sure I would buy it. In fact, I bought a Hemingway precisely because it seemed like a modern version of a 139. Even after I had the nib reground to a slightly springier cursive italic, the pen just didn't measure up to my regular-use 139. Why not? Was it the nib, which still was too stiff? Was it the weight, which was a bit too light? Was it the orange/black combination? All these factors contributed, but I think the real reason is that the pen will always feel like a reproduction to me. Perhaps a better example of this point of view would be the Pelikan "Originals of Their Time" series. I am as crazy about Pelikan as I am about Montblanc and own a wide variety of vintage 100s (including several 1929 versions, which had no model number) and 100Ns. The recent replicas are almost identical to the originals and, as they are new, can be freely used without the anxiety that sometimes comes with using a rare vintage pen. But after trying one I realized I get more enjoyment from the original - from knowing that I'm writing with a pen that has been in use for 80-90 years and still gets the job done.

 

To conclude, I like the idea of a modern 139, but I will always prefer the original.

[siamackz]

The 139 is special to me for many reasons - only one of them is the shape and dimensions. I prefer the celluloid and hard rubber material over the current resin. I prefer the ink window with stripes made with celluloid that slowly fade over many years, rather than the perfect resin stripes in modern windows. I love the telescopic piston even though it is fussy at times. And I love the way the old nibs had some softness and the way their tips were cut and shaped. I dont think MB will intend on replicating any of these features in a modern pen.

Also, I love vintage pens because of their history and the fact that they have endured over decades, and all the other romanticism associated with them.

 

So, for me, I would not be interested in a modern 139.

[Lam1]

My favorite pens have flat ends and soft nibs.

So, if MB were to create a modern reinterpretation of the 139 with some color (I don't need another black MB), that tie clip and a #9 soft nib, I'd certainly get one. If the nib were the same as the current 149 nibs, I'd probably pass.

[dubhe]

I have never had an original 139 but have owned both Hemingway and Dumas in the past. I love the style of the pen, imposing size with flat ends; I also loved the Hemingway clip and Dumas nib but for some reason the sum of these parts didnt work for me with either so I traded them in. My main issues were probably the price of H and conspicuous look of D; produce a plain 139 (or 136 - this would be just as well received) with a special nib and I believe it would be very popular. It is a shame the current calligraphy 149s are not based on the 139 shape, a great opportunity missed maybe?

[Michael R.]

There's much to be said in favor of a modern pen that's in standard production, especially when considering tangibles like daily use, carrying it out of the house, etc.

 

Keith

Good point I totally agree with!

[como]

When I look at similar relaunches of iconic models, I often feel tempted to get one. There are good examples of such well done attempts, vintage vs. modern:

- Parker Duofold Big Red

- Pelikan 100N

- Aurora Internazionale

I would consider buying, out of nostalgia and support for pen makers who honor their heritage and revive an iconic design. But my heart first goes to an original vintage one, especially because I don’t have one yet .

[Uncial]

The Strauss pen sort of does it, but I would like to see a 139 release that was also somewhat modern too. Something like the 1912 would be great. The long cap, long banded ink window and that unusual star under clear plastic would be a great addition.

 

I think there are also some who would not like to see any manner of 139 re-issue because they feel it might hurt the value and rarity of the original 139's.

[danrodcard]

Hi

 

I would love to see a 139 in celluloid or any pen, but in this modern times I think is very difficult due to environmental issues

 

but wouldn't mind at all a modern take on the 139 with the 149 piston "easy to service" and modern resins.

 

Their take on the last year calligraphy nib (flex nib) for me was outstanding and this give me little hope that they are paying attention.

 

 

PS. Still waiting for the new calligraphy nibs.

[jchch1950]

A new MB 139 will be in my shopping list if they are ever produced.

[fpupulin]

It seems to me that many of the answers already given hit the mark, and to a large extent reflect my own thoughts.

The Meisterstück 139 was an extraordinary pen. Those that have survived in sufficient order continue to be extraordinary fountain pens for their lucky owners. For fans of vintage pens - with all that this means, in terms of charm, "flavor", but also of fragility, difficulty in finding spare parts, etc. - there is no doubt that the 139 is a true myth.

For others, the many who also highly appreciate the functionality of a pen, the existence of an efficient customer service, etc., a celluloid pen that is 70 or 80 years old is simply not an option.

For the former, I suppose, a "replica" of the 139 would have no appeal. For the latter, as the many answers testify, it depends on many factors.

Personally, I don't like "copies", precisely because they are simple replicas. I don't buy a replica of the Aurora Internazionale because I imagine they would always ask me "Is it an original?", "No, a copy". I don't think a "replica" of the 139 would be very successful. Montblanc should then make a "reinterpretation" of it, but the adventure becomes risky.

The Hemingway is a reipterpreation. The Year of the Golden Dragon (YOGD) - aside from the over the top clip - is an even better reinterpretation of the 139. But, once we leave the replicas aside, we get to the real point of the question: what must be "saved" for a reinterpretation to be fascinating in a way comparable to the original? I fear that a "reinterpretation", however successful, will continue to not be a 139, simply because the 139 is just that thing of the past.

How many will want this new non-139? How much will they be willing to pay for it? From time to time, when I find a YOGD at a not outrageous price, I feel tempted to buy it and ask Tom Westerich to replace the clip with one he had made similar to the 139 tie clip. But then I wonder: when it will eventually be just a modern black plastic pen that looks like a 139, will it be worth the money? Will I use this pen with a slightly short barrel for my taste or will I continue to prefer the longer body of my 149, which is better suited to my hand? (Thank goodness Montblanc mounted its Calligraphy nib on the body of a 149).

Montblanc was able to convince me to buy a new Meisterstück by introducing a new (and fantastic) nib on its proven (and overpriced) 149. Unless Montblanc really surprises me with an irresistibly perfect design, at those Montblanc prices I think I will not buy a new, plastic 139 alike.

[zaddick]

 

 

[Karmachanic]

Uh Oh! Sans finial band please. I've started saving.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Karmachanic