What is on your bench?

[VacNut]

I can’t speak to the diaphragm, but I think in general the filler sleeves are all the same diameter except for the threaded retaining nut and the inner collar+retainer strip.

you would be surprised what the toaster oven can do to loosen stuck aluminum parts.

 

Sad to say, a quality replacement filler with postage is close to the value of the vac.

 

[Ron Z]

The diameter and length of the plungers are the same.  The cone and thread bushing diameters are different for the three sizes.  Only the OS vac uses the largest.  The Maxima and standard size pens of the 30s use the middle/standard size.

 

The spring is compressed up inside between the bar that goes through the slit in the plunger and the slot in the back end of the cone. 

 

You should be able to dislodge the thread bushing by gripping the threads, and fitting something like a bionic wrench on the shoulder of the cone, and turning back and forth.  This should expose the bar, which can be pushed out.  That will free up the cone regardless whether the notch is there or not.

 

DO NOT just whack the plunger with a hammer to shift it.  You will deform and destroy it.  Soak with a penetrating oil, heat to draw it in, and use an arbor press to push the plunger down.  Be prepared - it may be so corroded that it can't be used, or you could be lucky and have it be good enough to clean up and reuse.

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

3 hours ago, VacNut said:

I can’t speak to the diaphragm, but I think in general the filler sleeves are all the same diameter except for the threaded retaining nut and the inner collar+retainer strip.

you would be surprised what the toaster oven can do to loosen stuck aluminum parts.

 

Sad to say, a quality replacement filler with postage is close to the value of the vac.

 

 

There's a guy in India selling reproduction lockdown units made out of titanium in all three sizes for about $30 a pop on eBay. Haven't tried one but they seem well enough made based on the pictures and his customer feedback.

 

I'll see if I can get this one working but for $30 including shipping (not including tax) it seems like it could be worth the gamble.

 

1 hour ago, Ron Z said:

The diameter and length of the plungers are the same.  The cone and thread bushing diameters are different for the three sizes.  Only the OS vac uses the largest.  The Maxima and standard size pens of the 30s use the middle/standard size.

 

The spring is compressed up inside between the bar that goes through the slit in the plunger and the slot in the back end of the cone. 

 

You should be able to dislodge the thread bushing by gripping the threads, and fitting something like a bionic wrench on the shoulder of the cone, and turning back and forth.  This should expose the bar, which can be pushed out.  That will free up the cone regardless whether the notch is there or not.

 

DO NOT just whack the plunger with a hammer to shift it.  You will deform and destroy it.  Soak with a penetrating oil, heat to draw it in, and use an arbor press to push the plunger down.  Be prepared - it may be so corroded that it can't be used, or you could be lucky and have it be good enough to clean up and reuse.

 

Okay, will try it. I don't have a bionic wrench, would section pliers be a bad idea? They're padded and I wouldn't twist too hard. Do you know if this pen takes a standard size diaphragm or a debutante? I can't find any mention of a slender junior pen online but I can see one in an early Parker catalog so they must exist. Guess it's a question of if mine is one of them.

 

Also, an interesting observation with this vac I haven't noticed with later ones. The threads for both the section and the filler appear to be separate bits of black celluloid fused to the transparent colorful celluloid tube. I noticed this because a little bit of the outside near the blind cap chipped away but I can see a black underlayer where the threads are. 

 

 

[VacNut]

This is a good Vacumatic but it is fairly common. It is more difficult to find a pen that has not ambered.
 

I wouldn’t personally bother with the titanium reproductions. You can buy NOS fillers for about the same price with shipping or a very good quality lockdown filler for $35. 
 

Why risk a reproduction filler that doesn’t fit?

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

3 hours ago, VacNut said:

This is a good Vacumatic but it is fairly common. It is more difficult to find a pen that has not ambered.
 

I wouldn’t personally bother with the titanium reproductions. You can buy NOS fillers for about the same price with shipping or a very good quality lockdown filler for $35. 
 

Why risk a reproduction filler that doesn’t fit?

 

Where do you see those? I can only find them for like $50+ in decent condition.

 

I can't get this one to dislodge.  I have tried heat, lubricating oil (says on the bottle it's for rusted up parts), even a small soak in vinegar (followed by vigorous drying). 

 

Edit: Ah, I completely destroyed it trying to get it apart. Oh well. Pen repair is always an adventure and not always a good one.

[FarmBoy]

Try the filler in a 51. If it is too big it is a standard. If it fits it is a Deb. 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

47 minutes ago, FarmBoy said:

Try the filler in a 51. If it is too big it is a standard. If it fits it is a Deb. 

 

Oh damn, it really is that simple. I wish I had common sense. It is indeed too big, so I need a new standard size lockdown filler. Thanks. Anyone know where to source one for cheap other than parts pens (don't have any, and in any case this pen might qualify as the parts pen...)? Otherwise I might give the reproduction one a shot.

 

On the plus side, I got the cap jewel off and aligned the clip nice and snug. So at least one problem down. I really do want to restore this pen even if it's not really a valuable pen. Mine dates from 1934 so it is a very early one. Even has a nib without the arrow imprint, just says "Vacumatic."

[VacNut]

5 hours ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

 

Where do you see those? I can only find them for like $50+ in decent condition.

 

I can't get this one to dislodge.  I have tried heat, lubricating oil (says on the bottle it's for rusted up parts), even a small soak in vinegar (followed by vigorous drying). 

 

Edit: Ah, I completely destroyed it trying to get it apart. Oh well. Pen repair is always an adventure and not always a good one.

There are suppliers on this forum that will sell you a lockdown filler.

Sorry about the filler. It happens.

If the parts are still fused, I would be curious if the oven process would work for you. Try it?

[VacNut]

You can also buy a vac parts pen with a good filler on auction sites. You can buy the Green Vacumatic for that price if you already have the nib. Just have to be patient

[John T]

6 hours ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

Anyone know where to source one for cheap other than parts pens (don't have any, and in any case this pen might qualify as the parts pen...)? Otherwise I might give the reproduction one a shot.

 

 

I get mine from Dale Beebe, Pentooling.com maybe not as cheap as you want but if you really want to bring a pen back to life it's worth it.

[FarmBoy]

You can transplant the sleeve and jambnut to another lockdown shaft. Other than being stuck I didn’t see any rot through at the bottom. 
 

If the shaft is bad then you are missing the hardest part to source and finding a loose one isn’t really going to happen. 
 

Really clean lock down fillers bring a premium. NOS, never installed in a pen fillers are also out there but asking prices are obscene. 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

Unfortunately the filler is completely ruined, the shaft snapped off halfway and half of it is still stuck inside the sleeve. I am still debating on buying the reproduction unit. I don't usually see these pens for under $40-50 and even if I buy another parts pen there's no guarantee the filler won't be messed up in that one as well. 

 

I saw Dale's prices and those NOS fillers look good but $80 is a lot more than I am willing to pay for a replacement, especially considering this pen is not in the best condition. Maybe for a nice one with minimal scratches and discoloration...

[VacNut]

To buy a reproduction filler is your choice, but the filler I located on an auction site is an obvious overseas reproduction. If you intend to sell the pen, the buyer will know it is a reproduction, which is not likely to add value to the pen. The threads on the filler do not look to be the same as the Parker Filler, so it may not thread properly into the barrel. 

You can try to salvage the threaded collar from your pen, but this will require you to take apart the new filler.

 

It is about $31 to have the filler posted to you. If the filler doesn’t fit, you may request a refund; but do you really intend on sending back a single filler overseas? 
 

It proclaims to be fabricated from titanium with parts that do not rust. A properly functional filler will not rust if the pen is maintained. The Parker filler does not need improvement. 
 

I have heard people used to pull healthy teeth to replace them with dentures. One can now have their teeth extracted and replaced by implants that also “do not rust”. Are these “reproductions” really better than the original?

 

In my opinion, it is better to install an imperfect Parker lockdown filler, than to install a reproduction. 
 

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

9 hours ago, VacNut said:

To buy a reproduction filler is your choice, but the filler I located on an auction site is an obvious overseas reproduction. If you intend to sell the pen, the buyer will know it is a reproduction, which is not likely to add value to the pen. The threads on the filler do not look to be the same as the Parker Filler, so it may not thread properly into the barrel. 

You can try to salvage the threaded collar from your pen, but this will require you to take apart the new filler.

 

It is about $31 to have the filler posted to you. If the filler doesn’t fit, you may request a refund; but do you really intend on sending back a single filler overseas? 
 

It proclaims to be fabricated from titanium with parts that do not rust. A properly functional filler will not rust if the pen is maintained. The Parker filler does not need improvement. 
 

I have heard people used to pull healthy teeth to replace them with dentures. One can now have their teeth extracted and replaced by implants that also “do not rust”. Are these “reproductions” really better than the original?

 

In my opinion, it is better to install an imperfect Parker lockdown filler, than to install a reproduction. 
 

 

Eh, respectfully, I disagree. If the Parker filler does not need improvement, why did they replace the lockdown filler with the easier to fill and less prone to error speedline filler? And clearly these are prone to rust otherwise so many of the lockdown fillers would not need replacement. 

 

It's seemingly very easy for water to seep into the nooks and crannies of the filler if the sac is compromised. And it's not so easy to tell if your diaphragm is near total failure if it is partially porous since it will still likely fill a little bit.

 

Also kind of a bad analogy as in this case the tooth is already broken and beyond repair... I'll think about it for a few days, might just keep this in my parts bin. But that parts bin is not getting any smaller.

[VacNut]

If one was using the pen regularly in the 1930’s, the pen would be taken to a local pen store for repair. There were far more repair shops when the pen was new. The ink would not sit for years without repair. Aluminum doesn’t rust. Parts were also readily available if they needed replacement.

 

It is very very easy to determine is the diaphragm has been compromised. Ink leaks into the blind cap, and the filler no longer draws ink.

 

I do not have internal Parker communication documents, but I suspect the speed line filler was the result of a general design change in society to slender the pen to match the “thinner” aesthetics of the later 1930’s - almost all mfrs did it. The duofold redesign follows a similar trend.

People try to replicate factory parts and tools due to demand. The threads on the some vac wrenches do not exactly match the threads of the threaded nut. Replacement tassies and jewels do not match the composition, profile, and diameter of the original parts

If these replacement fillers were really perfect and an improvement, I think reputable technicians would have already advocated for the change, such as using more modern seals and gaskets.

It is also probably the reason why original fillers cost more than the replacements. 
 

In the past, people would remove their remaining good teeth so the dentures would be easier to use and build. 
Modern dentistry uses bridges and implants to preserve teeth as long as feasible.

 

It is your pen and you can choose what is best for yourself.

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

1 hour ago, VacNut said:

If these replacement fillers were really perfect and an improvement, I think reputable technicians would have already advocated for the change, such as using more modern seals and gaskets.

 

I don't mean to insult anyone here but pen repair is kind of a esoteric and possibly dead field. I would be surprised if there more than a couple of hundred good repair-people around the world (by decent, I'm excluding hobbyists like me - but even including us, the number might expand to just thousands).

 

There's not much innovation going on, and lots of stuff is done a certain way because it was done that way before. Things are slow to change, only few decades ago Sheaffer vac-fillers were pretty much considered impossible to restore properly (at least that's my impression) and now there's an established way of repairing them perfectly.

 

I have the final edition of Frank Dubiel's "Da Book" of pen restoration, which is what, a little over 30 years old now? Which is comparatively not that old, but there are several very very outdated repair techniques in that book like using open flames to heat up barrels to get the sections out. Even Richard Binder's site, which I consider pretty much the holy bible of pen restoration, is outdated for some pen types. His advice on how to open Triumph-nib Sheaffer vac-fillers bit me in the ass a year or two ago.

 

So, the summary of my long rant here, just because things are done a certain way doesn't mean it's the only way to do them. Fountain pens and pen restoration are largely a stagnant field with only a blessed few trying new repair techniques or creating new parts for old pens. I don't know if these foreign-made reproduction fillers are good or not (maybe you're right about the threads) but I don't think it's worth disregarding them just because they're new, that reasoning doesn't track for me.

 

  

1 hour ago, VacNut said:

It is also probably the reason why original fillers cost more than the replacements. 

 

Well, when it comes to vintage goods people always put a higher value on having all the original parts. And those original parts are a limited resource that dwindles over time. So they'll always cost more than replacements. Especially pristine NOS examples.

[FarmBoy]

“Eh, respectfully, I disagree. If the Parker filler does not need improvement, why did they replace the lockdown filler with the easier to fill and less prone to error speedline filler?”

cost.

[LoveBigPensAndCannotLie]

5 minutes ago, FarmBoy said:

“Eh, respectfully, I disagree. If the Parker filler does not need improvement, why did they replace the lockdown filler with the easier to fill and less prone to error speedline filler?”

cost.

 

Was it that much cheaper to make? Isn't the biggest difference in parts the additional bit of machining to add the notch in the rod of the filler, and the tiny little rod inside that locks? The rest of it seems pretty similar. I assume the 3rd gen plastic filler was a lot cheaper to make since it used a lot less metal parts but this difference should be a lot smaller.

[VacNut]

38 minutes ago, LoveBigPensAndCannotLie said:

 

Was it that much cheaper to make? Isn't the biggest difference in parts the additional bit of machining to add the notch in the rod of the filler, and the tiny little rod inside that locks? The rest of it seems pretty similar. I assume the 3rd gen plastic filler was a lot cheaper to make since it used a lot less metal parts but this difference should be a lot smaller.

Cost is definitely a factor. Alum was a strategic metal during the War. Lucite and new plastic were not - except maybe for the blister canopies on the bombers. They even replaced the alum threaded nut with a plastic nut in the final plastic filler.

 

Almost every major mfr transitioned to thinner tapered design before the War. I can only think of Waterman and Conklin who transitioned later in the decade than others. A Sheaffer Flattop is very different from a Balance. Eversharp followed a similar design philosophy to the Doric and the extremely tapered Skyline pens. It was partly just where the design was heading. A Vac Major does convey more of a jet age look than a standard vac.

 

I do not know who mfrs the replacement fillers, but I speculate they were done in a small shop. They may have measured one pen of each type and compromised on a final size. The filler threads may work the first time, but if the thread size and spacing is not completely correct, it will strip the celluloid since the titanium, if it really is, is a much harder material than alum.

 

It is not my intention to dissuade you from buying a reproduction filler. I note that there is no absolute need for a replacement when original parts are still available.

I know because I am in the process of transporting several hundred pounds of Parker pen parts to a repair shop.

 

I was told that the art of nib production has been lost to time, and that the new nibs cannot match the feel and flex of the early century nibs.

 

New isn’t always better, it just is “new”. 

 

 

[FarmBoy]

Cutting the little notch was an added step.  Also the crown became streamlined.
 

when you are making 1000s a day…