The New Parker 51 -- photos and first impressions

October 2

4 hours ago, donnweinberg said:

Why would a cartridge’s ink evaporate much less than the same ink in a converter in this pen? I understand that the cap has openings at the top, but why would it matter whether you use a cartridge vs. a converter?

I have no idea, unless it is not sealing properly, that or converter material is more porous than what they make cartridges from. Anyone else got any bright ideas

October 2

I would have thought that a converter would be made of LESS porous material, since a converter is *designed* to be reused repeatedly....

Ruth Morrisson aka inkstainedruth

October 2

I have not investigated the specific materials used in the manufacturing on converters, but I agree with Ruth. Robustness and longevity with dictate LESS permeability/porosity than cartridges.

Perhaps your converter was defective.

October 4

On 10/3/2024 at 12:25 AM, Glenn-SC said:

I have not investigated the specific materials used in the manufacturing on converters, but I agree with Ruth. Robustness and longevity with dictate LESS permeability/porosity than cartridges.

Perhaps your converter was defective.

Quite possibly, i suspect escaping out of back of piston mechanism

October 11

Check the plastic at the end of the converter where it seals around the nipple in the section. Parker and waterman converters often crack or split there. You will need 10x or 20x magnification to check for splits.

October 12

On 10/11/2024 at 6:08 AM, thx1138 said:

Check the plastic at the end of the converter where it seals around the nipple in the section. Parker and waterman converters often crack or split there. You will need 10x or 20x magnification to check for splits.

All my converters are in other pens or the bin. I will not touch a waterman converter for exactly that problem.

October 12

The old waterman converters with the steel band last forever. The modern all plastic front end versions last as little as 2 uses (as happened in my carene).