Pelikan 100 nib

[DerMarsianer]

23 hours ago, stoen said:

Do you have indications that tipping finish may point at a specific nib factory?

IMHO, the tipping finish is rather an artisan work, which requires a skilled craftsperson and specific tooling for individual nib grinding, rather than stampers for industrial nib forging, cutting welding and branding, which can eventually identify the sources of the nib. I’m convinced that nib grinding ar that period was a hand work,

 

I'm sorry, I have no further information. This was just an idea and maybe someone will recognize this grinding. It's possible that this was the work of only one special nibmeister.

 

23 hours ago, stoen said:

 

As for the nibs you propose dating 1935-37, it seems circumstantial and a bit unlikely. Pelikan started making their own nibs in 1934. Why yould the in-house made nibs carry embossings so radically different? 

 

The “striped embossing” nib is dated somewhat earlier in the “Pelikan collectibles” site.

 

To be honest, I did overlook these nibs and dating at the nib page. The timeline of the pelikan 100 on dominics page dates the nib size on the feed from 1935 - 1938. That's why I dated this nibs to that period. Both nibs came with pens typical from 1934-1937. Both where unserviced pens from privat sellers. There where no signs of a nib change, but you never know what has happend over the last 8 decades.

There is another picture from christof on that page dating the nib with the dots around the 14 to 1936 and the pd and cn nibs have the same thin letters. So I think this is a newer nib.

 

Another guess was, the bolder the letters, the older the nib. The other one with the "-14-" looks like a transitional design between the old nibs with bold letters and the newer nibs with the thin letters.

Maybe I'm wrong. Some more information would be helpfull. If we can proof the date of the nibs then i better correct my post. Otherwise my guesses can become facts for someone else.

Finally my last two nibs.

 

The medium nib has a very significant wind rose marking. I've seen this nib on earlier pens from 1930 - 1933. My pen was a frankenpen with plastic piston, hardrubber cap, celluloid barrel and the nib had the latest feed with three lamellas instead of the shortend middle-lamella. And again there are circles in the letters.

The ef nib came with typical pen from 1934-1937.  The 14 has a slim middle-line and the bold letters are filled with dots. Both nibs have a dot right beside KARAT.

Greetings Thorsten

 

p.s. I wish, when I have to pay some extra money for modern pelikan ef nibs, they will grind them like that one.

[stoen]

15 hours ago, DerMarsianer said:

There is another picture from christof on that page dating the nib with the dots around the 14 to 1936 and the pd and cn nibs have the same thin letters. So I think this is a newer nib.

Thanks. You may guess so, but it is more of a guess:

•  if you take a closer look you may find that the letters are not what you call the “same thin letters” at all ! I’ve had quite a few golden nibs with thin letters, they look differently, the thin line is just plain enraving, while this nib clearly has embossment.
• few series of Pelikan 100 and 100N nibs have been provenly issued in between this nib model and the late 1838 Pd nib, and nothing like the embossment on this nib was preceding the Pd nib, starting with in-house nib production around 1934/35, and millenial fineness inscriptions included around 1937.
• this particular nib came with a pre-1935 pen, which suffered a substantial damage very early. It was almost unused, but the barrel was cracked and split beyond repair, so the original owner must have put it in the attic and forgotten it. It must have stayed there for some 80 years before being rediscovered. So it definitely had no repairs meanwhile.
• I have seen a few early Pelikan 100s with such nibs. If this was a 1936+ nib then it would have been an in-house made nib, but the embossment substantially deviates from any embossments found on nibs which can be detected as in-house made.

Here’s a typical “thin letters” Pelikan 100 nib from ca. 1938. (pre-Palladium series). The inscriptions look too different to compare: no line width variation.

 

Details are very important in deciphering nib inscriptions. Please, take a closer look at @OMASsimo‘s posts to this thread and his method of inspecting details. Simple answers, such as “thinner the letters, newer the nib” don’t seem to work here. I used to think so 10 years ago, and had quite a few examples of Pelikan 100, literature, discussions with experts and time for re-considering such a thought meanwhile. 

There is still much research to be done to eventualy come to some general conclusions.

 

Quote

My pen was a frankenpen with plastic piston, hardrubber cap, celluloid barrel and the nib had the latest feed with three lamellas instead of the shortend middle-lamella. And again there are circles in the letters.

Not necessarily a frankenpen. Looks like an early pre-war pen which got some legitimate post-war repair, such as possible damaged feed and piston replacements.

Although they never remarketed the Pelikan 100 after WWII, I’ve read in several places they still made replacement parts well into the fifties. As they stopped making ebonite/cork pistons already before 1942, I doubt they ever reintroduced them, but service-installed the simpler acrylic pistons with elastomer gaskets instead.

As for the feed, at some point they also stopped shaving the inner part of the middle fin because it gave a more reliable ink compensation chamber, but it is basically the same feed (The feeds, being rather easy breaking parts must have also been rather commonly replaced). So, I think this pen of yours may be a perfectly legit pen. Only not mint.

 

Thanks for your recent contributions. Now the FPN “base” of early Pelikan nib photographs really looks more relevant.

🙂

[DerMarsianer]

On 3/30/2021 at 11:56 PM, OMASsimo said:

Thank you for sharing these excellent pictures and infos. Both look very similar to one of my two nibs, including the slightly off-centre breather hole with respect to the slit. Only the teardrop point of the “i” might be a bit different. And the tipping does look rather unusual for a nib from that era. Of course, grinding the tip was much less standardised in the 1930s and I see quite a bit of variation. But in my experience, the top of the tip is almost always flat rather than angled. The only exceptions I know are “K” nibs, which have a tip more of the shape of a ball (“Kugel”) and protrude slightly above the top of the tines. Pelikan’s “S” nibs might be another exception but, unfortunately, I haven’t seen one in person, yet.

Thank you for the confirmation. Maybe one day we will find another pen with such a tipping and will be surprised.
Greetings Thorsten

[DerMarsianer]

On 3/31/2021 at 11:05 PM, stoen said:

Details are very important in deciphering nib inscriptions. Please, take a closer look at @OMASsimo‘s posts to this thread and his method of inspecting details. Simple answers, such as “thinner the letters, newer the nib” don’t seem to work here. I used to think so 10 years ago, and had quite a few examples of Pelikan 100, literature, discussions with experts and time for re-considering such a thought meanwhile. 

 

There is still much research to be done to eventualy come to some general conclusions.

Thank you for your explanations. Well, I think "same" was the wrong word in this context, and similar would fit better. But this letter rule doesn't work for the 585, 100n or 400 nibs anyway.

I searched for something different and found another variation of the "-14-" nib (afaik there was never a Pelikan 111 with the acrylic one piece body except as a replacements):

https://pic2-c.avaluer.org/imgspic/b/h/o/x/n/-pelikan_111___585_14ct_solid_gold_fountain_pen_1930s___14c_full_flex_nib___boxed-4_69.jpg

This one had bold letters with circles and looked like one of the older nibs from 1931-1934.

This is the pen from 1935-1937 with the medium nib. I replaced it by the fine nib. Both with the nib size on the feed. The original pen with that F nib looked identical but broke.

 

On 3/31/2021 at 11:05 PM, stoen said:

Not necessarily a frankenpen. Looks like an early pre-war pen which got some legitimate post-war repair, such as possible damaged feed and piston replacements.

Although they never remarketed the Pelikan 100 after WWII, I’ve read in several places they still made replacement parts well into the fifties. As they stopped making ebonite/cork pistons already before 1942, I doubt they ever reintroduced them, but service-installed the simpler acrylic pistons with elastomer gaskets instead.

As for the feed, at some point they also stopped shaving the inner part of the middle fin because it gave a more reliable ink compensation chamber, but it is basically the same feed (The feeds, being rather easy breaking parts must have also been rather commonly replaced). So, I think this pen of yours may be a perfectly legit pen. Only not mint.

My guess is, many of the pre-war Pelikan 100 pens were not used through the war time. After the war they were not able to revive the cork. If they sended these pens to the Günther Wagner company for service, the got a replacement piston with the new plastic seal instead. That would explain why so many of the older pens with the newer piston knob pop-up on eBay.

I have only a pre-war Ibis, but it has  a lot of parts in common the Pelikan 100, like the Pelikan 140 had with the 400.
The post-war ibis had a longer barrel. I wonder if that was exactly the same one they used for the Pelikan 100. The length would fit. If so, there was no need for a aftermarket production. They only needed piston knobs, caps and feeds and could use Ibis parts and Pelikan 400 nibs instead.

 

Thorsten

 

Edited April 4, 2021 by DerMarsianer

[dnic]

On my page I have tried to list the changes to the 100 model.

https://www.pelikan-collectibles.com/en/Pelikan/Surroundings/Modell-100-Details/index.html

Hope the site is helpful.

I look forward to discussions and pointing out spelling and grammatical mistakes.

Dominic

[Nethermark]

On 4/9/2022 at 9:47 AM, dnic said:

Hope the site is helpful.

Hi Dominic: your site is hugely helpfull. Thank you for all the effort you put into it, so we others have reliable information on Pelikan pens and thank you very much for the update on the Pelikan 100; very informative