I'm confused.... What is the Pilot CM nib everyone seems to be raving about, and is it as good as they say?

[51ISH]

Pilot seem to be confusing the heck out of me lately.  I read initially that you could try a CM nib cheaply in a Plumix, so I ordered two, a Med, and a Broad. I later read the nibs in the Plumix are in fact slightly different to the CM nib.  Then, I read the CM nib is in fact a 1.0 Stub...? Much to Pilot's annoyance it seems, I can actually purchase a Prera in the UK that (according to the photos) has got a CM Nib. Can someone confirm the CM nib everyone raves about is a 1.0 Stub, and more importantly is it as good as the hype?  Thanks in advance.

[A Smug Dill]

53 minutes ago, 51ISH said:

Can someone confirm the CM nib everyone raves about is a 1.0 Stub,

 

No. The broadest line width it puts down — without applying downward pressure on the pen — is ≤0.7mm, if I remember correctly. (I haven't used mine in a while.)

[Mercian]

Beware!

The thing that got me interested in the Pilot ‘CM’ nib was information that said that it is a stub whose width is NOT of the order of 1.0mm, but is instead much narrower.

Plenty of stubs in ~1mm are available from other brands here - e.g. Parker’s Vector ‘Calligraphy’ sets contain three stub nibs, the least-wide of which is ~1mm wide (I have no way to measure it accurately), with two more nibs that are wider.

Lamy makes Z50 nibs in 1.1mm, 1.5mm, and 1.9mm wide (marked ‘1.1i’, ‘1.5i’, and ‘1.9i’).

 

Pelikan used to sell pens (called ‘Script’, iirc) that had stubs in 1.0mm, 1.3mm, and 1.5mm. Their subsidiary Herliz (sp?) may still sell them.

The reasonably-common-here ‘Manuscript’-branded ‘calligraphy’ sets come in three widths, with the narrowest again being ~1mm.

 

Mr.Pen.co.uk sells its own, ‘Italix’-branded, pens with stubs that they have ground in-house.
These pens are well-regarded, but their narrowest grind (their ‘Italic Fine’) is ~0.8mm. They do sell wider grinds.

 

I want a stub that is narrower than any of those, so I was intrigued/tantalised when I read recently that the ‘CM’ nibs in Pilot’s ‘Enso’ set of calligraphy pens were supposed to be only 0.58mm wide (meaning that their ‘CF’ nibs will be even finer).

 

[As you are, like me, a Brit, don’t even bother trying to find one of those to buy!

They are sold to Australia & the USA, but the Pilot websites for the ‘Enso’ sets are built to not work when one attempts to view them from the UK. I have tried three different browsers; none of them will display the information about the pens/nibs in the ‘Enso’ sets, or show their prices, let alone allow you to order one.]

Anyway, in this post in another recent thread, there is an official marketing photo that confirms that the Plumix ‘M’ nibs are supposedly 0.58mm wide. The widths of all the grades of Plumix nibs are shown on the picture (if you want to buy one that has a 1.0mm-wide stub, you want a Plumix with a ‘BB’ nib).

 

On the discussion on the previous page of that thread, the similarities/differences between the Plumix ‘M’ nib and the ‘CM’ nibs that are available on other Pilot pens are discussed.

The consensus is that the ‘CM’ nibs have edges that are slightly more-rounded/less-crisp than are the italic-cut nibs on the Plumix.
So, it seems that ‘CM’ is a Pilot nib-marking that means a ‘Cursive Medium’ grind, as opposed to the more-crisply-cut Italic ‘Medium’ that is sold on the Plumix.

 

Anyway, when I recently received a letter that contained some writing that had been made with a Pilot pen that had a ‘CM’ nib on it, I was really keen to get one (and a Plumix ‘M’ too).

 

I have now managed to get my grubby mitts on one of each 😊

 

I shall put up a picture to show comparisons of my barely-legible scrawl idiosyncratic handwriting made with the least-wide Vector ‘calligraphy’ stub, the Plumix ‘M’, and the ‘CM’ nib on my Metropolitan tomorrow 👍

-

 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Mercian
Edited to correct my initial mis-spelling of ‘Enso’.

[51ISH]

This is an example of the kind of things I was seeing online about the CM nib.

 

https://www.wellappointeddesk.com/2018/08/fountain-pen-review-pilot-metropolitan-calligraphy-nib/

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDh5G4v9hcU

 

And the Amazon link.... If you zoom on the photo of the nib it clearly states CM

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Iro-Ai-Calligraphy-Nib-Fountain-Transparent-FPRN-350R-TRCM/dp/B009VUTWU4/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2V7QB0ZQOFX3&keywords=pilot+prera+fountain+pen&qid=1679959212&sprefix=pilot+prera%2Caps%2C170&sr=8-3

 

[Mercian]

I wonder whether either wellappointeddesk or ‘gadgetstop321’ have ever measured their nibs’ widths using accurate calipers etc.

 

That said, given that Pilot’s inexpensive pens for the European market are made to accept different cartridges (that conform to perceived European ‘norms’/‘expectations’) than do their pens for everywhere else in the world, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that they also mark their ~1mm wide cursive nibs as ‘CM’ when they are intended for sale in the European market.

 

After all, this seems to be the width that most European pen companies would mark as ‘Fine Italic’, and Pilot’s ‘M’-graded nibs are closer in width to what most European companies would mark as ‘Fine’, so it would be logically-coherent.

🤷‍♂️
 

Edit to add:

That Prera ‘Iro-Ai’ on sale through Amazon.co.uk on your link is actually being sold by an Italian retailer.

Curiously though, if one visits that company’s own website, there is no mention of any Prera with the ‘CM’ nib 🤪

[51ISH]

Oh, meant to add the Plumix nibs are EF F M B and BB....  the BB is 1.0 Calligraphy or Stub (you decide 🙂) No mention of CM.

 

The only 'charts' I could find for Pilot nibs ....none mentioned CM nibs. I think they were all higher end, Gold nibs.

 

And there seems to be some debate about what CM 'stands for'  I've seen 'Cursive Medium'  not sure how a 1.0 stub could be described as a 'cursive medium'... but anyway... or a Calligraphy Medium.

 

Incidentally, the links I posted will only take a few seconds to get the gist....even the YT vid the CM bit is within the first 30 seconds or so...

[A Smug Dill]

9 minutes ago, 51ISH said:

The only 'charts' I could find for Pilot nibs ....none mentioned CM nibs. I think they were all higher end, Gold nibs.

 

I don't think I've seen a chart (or table) that covers not just Custom fountain pen models, but also Capless (aka Vanishing Point), Elite, Justus, and Silvern models and variants — all (except Custom NS and Capless 'Special Alloy’) of which have gold nibs — in terms of nib type/width availability for (higher end) Pilot branded fountain pens.

[51ISH]

1 hour ago, Mercian said:

Beware!

The thing that got me interested in the Pilot ‘CM’ nib was information that said that it is a stub whose width is NOT of the order of 1.0mm, but is instead much narrower.

Plenty of stubs in ~1mm are available from other brands here - e.g. Parker’s Vector ‘Calligraphy’ sets contain three stub nibs, the least-wide of which is ~1mm wide (I have no way to measure it accurately), with two more nibs that are wider.

Lamy makes Z50 nibs in 1.1mm, 1.5mm, and 1.9mm wide (marked ‘1.1i’, ‘1.5i’, and ‘1.9i’).

 

Pelikan used to sell pens (called ‘Script’, iirc) that had stubs in 1.0mm, 1.3mm, and 1.5mm. Their subsidiary Herliz (sp?) may still sell them.

The reasonably-common-here ‘Manuscript’-branded ‘calligraphy’ sets come in three widths, with the narrowest again being ~1mm.

 

Mr.Pen.co.uk sells its own, ‘Italix’-branded, pens with stubs that they have ground in-house.
These pens are well-regarded, but their narrowest grind (their ‘Italic Fine’) is ~0.8mm. They do sell wider grinds.

 

I want a stub that is narrower than any of those, so I was intrigued/tantalised when I read recently that the ‘CM’ nibs in Pilot’s ‘Enso’ set of calligraphy pens were supposed to be only 0.58mm wide (meaning that their ‘CF’ nibs will be even finer).

 

[As you are, like me, a Brit, don’t even bother trying to find one of those to buy!

They are sold to Australia & the USA, but the Pilot websites for the ‘Enso’ sets are built to not work when one attempts to view them from the UK. I have tried three different browsers; none of them will display the information about the pens/nibs in the ‘Enso’ sets, or show their prices, let alone allow you to order one.]

Anyway, in this post in another recent thread, there is an official marketing photo that confirms that the Plumix ‘M’ nibs are supposedly 0.58mm wide. The widths of all the grades of Plumix nibs are shown on the picture (if you want to buy one that has a 1.0mm-wide stub, you want a Plumix with a ‘BB’ nib).

 

On the discussion on the previous page of that thread, the similarities/differences between the Plumix ‘M’ nib and the ‘CM’ nibs that are available on other Pilot pens are discussed.

The consensus is that the ‘CM’ nibs have edges that are slightly more-rounded/less-crisp than are the italic-cut nibs on the Plumix.
So, it seems that ‘CM’ is a Pilot nib-marking that means a ‘Cursive Medium’ grind, as opposed to the more-crisply-cut Italic ‘Medium’ that is sold on the Plumix.

 

Anyway, when I recently received a letter that contained some writing that had been made with a Pilot pen that had a ‘CM’ nib on it, I was really keen to get one (and a Plumix ‘M’ too).

 

I have now managed to get my grubby mitts on one of each 😊

 

I shall put up a picture to show comparisons of my barely-legible scrawl idiosyncratic handwriting made with the least-wide Vector ‘calligraphy’ stub, the Plumix ‘M’, and the ‘CM’ nib on my Metropolitan tomorrow 👍

-

 

 

I shall put up a picture to show comparisons of my barely-legible scrawl idiosyncratic handwriting made with the least-wide Vector ‘calligraphy’ stub, the Plumix ‘M’, and the ‘CM’ nib on my Metropolitan tomorrow 👍

 

That would be great 👍

 

I must admit I was tempted by the Prera simply because I can buy one with a CM nib...that's kind of why I posted the thread to check if it's the 'real deal'.  I've also ordered the Plumix BB (£11)  As I liked B  and it should be similar to the 1.0 stub (CM??)  I bought the Plumix as a cheap way of trying the nibs, I may yet get me a Pilot MR and swop in one of the Plumix nibs if I can find one I really like.  I'd be interested to know how you are getting on with your Plumix M.  I'm still not happy with mine...it's getting the Fairy Liquid treatment and then some Aurora Black now I know its a SIC converter.

[51ISH]

5 minutes ago, A Smug Dill said:

 

I don't think I've seen a chart (or table) that covers not just Custom fountain pen models, but also Capless (aka Vanishing Point), Elite, Justus, and Silvern models and variants — all (except Custom NS and Capless 'Special Alloy’) of which have gold nibs — in terms of nib type/width availability for (higher end) Pilot branded fountain pens.

 

My apologies,  I didn't look that 'deeply' at the time I was 'just' looking for a CM nib....and I couldn't find one. I've had a quick look but I can't find a link at the minute, it was a photo of Pilot pens  all in a row with the various nibs fitted. (not capless)  I'll try and find it, but I really should be in bed as I'm at work tomorrow 🏃‍♂️

[The Elevator]

I have a US Market Pilot Metropolitan with a nib marked “CM” and according to my real basic and imprecise desk ruler it writes a line on the order of 0.8mm with no pressure. 

 

I also would like to report that the Pilot Plumix Enso calligraphy set previously menioned appears not to be available in the United States either. It is completely sold out on Amazon, and Pilot’s own website shows no available options when I click on the Enso Plumix Kit. A shame too, because I was also interested in trying the CF nib. 

[A Smug Dill]

2 hours ago, 51ISH said:

I can actually purchase a Prera in the UK that (according to the photos) has got a CM Nib.

32 minutes ago, 51ISH said:

And there seems to be some debate about what CM 'stands for'  I've seen 'Cursive Medium'  not sure how a 1.0 stub could be described as a 'cursive medium'... but anyway... or a Calligraphy Medium.

 

People can debate all they like.

https://www.deepl.com/translator#ja/en/カリグラフィ用のペン先

[Mercian]

40 minutes ago, 51ISH said:

That would be great 👍

Well, you say that, but…

 

Here is my photo of my quick-&-dirty comparison of my least-wide Parker Vector ‘calligraphy’ nib; my Aussie Pilot Metropolitan with its ‘CM’ nib, and; my European Pilot Plumix with its ‘M’ nib…

 

This is a quick comparison of any differences in the widths - and in my perception of the widths - of the following ‘stubby’ nibs:

 

1- Parker Vector ‘calligraphy’ set, least-broad nib (no marking);

2- Australian Pilot Metropolitan with ‘CM’ nib;

3- European-market Pilot Plumix, with ‘M’ italic nib.

The ink is Waterman ‘Havana’  - which nowadays is sold as ‘Absolute Brown’.

The paper is Oxford ‘Optik’, from an Oxford ‘Campus’-branded ‘Reporter’s Pad’.
There should not be any ‘spread’ of this ink on this, hard-coated, paper.

 

Although all three nibs look as though they are the same width when the pens are placed nib-to-nib, I find that the nib on the Vector feels (subjectively) as though it is wider than the two Pilot nibs when I am writing with it.
I do not know if this subjective experience is an artefact of the grind-width, or of the greater ‘wetness’ of this nib over that of the two Pilot nibs.

I would say that both Pilot nibs are equally ‘wet’-writing. I.e. that neither of them writes as ‘wet’ as does the Parker nib.

 

The steel of the Parker nib may be slightly ‘deeper’ (in the ‘z’ axis) than the is steel of the Pilot nibs, or the Pilot nibs may be ground to be finer/crisper at their edges, or the Pilot nibs may be shaped slightly, so that their edges do not contact the paper to deposit ink upon it, and that only a central section near their nib-slits does.

I do not have any way to determine this objectively, so I can only report my subjective felt-experience of writing with the different nibs.

 

The italic ‘M’ nib on my European-market Plumix feels subjectively more-crisp than does the ‘CM’ nib on my Australian-market Metropolitan. The ‘CM’ nib feels most-comfortable for me to use when writing ‘normally’ - i.e. without any particular or especial care to form my letters deliberately and correctly.

 

I had hoped that this comparison would provide objectively-useful ‘data’ - but it seems to only add-to the confusion surrounding the nature of these nibs 🤦‍♂️

 

D’oh!

[Mercian]

7 minutes ago, Mercian said:

i.e. without any particular or especial care to form my letters deliberately and correctly.

I dunno why I typed that sentence…

 

…anyone who has eyes can see that no care was taken to form the letters correctly when I wrote that lot 🤦‍♂️😁

[Mercian]

49 minutes ago, 51ISH said:

I'd be interested to know how you are getting on with your Plumix M.

The test above is the first time that I’ve used either Pilot pen.

I have Too Many pens inked currently, although a couple are now running low, which will afford me the opportunity to put at least one of the Pilots in to use.

 

My initial impression of both the Pilot nibs is that they are noticeably less-wet than that Vector ‘calligraphy’ nib.

I think that they do not put down enough ink to make the Waterman ‘Havana’ look ‘brown’ to me.
But then, there are very few pens that do, so it’s not a very useful ‘observation’ 😁

 

That said, I expect that their more-controlled flow will make them great for use with inks such as Diamine ‘Chocolate Brown’, or with some of the more-saturated blue inks that I have.

I am also keen to try Noodler’s Black in them, perhaps some Pelikan 4001 ‘Brilliant Black’, and a couple of saturated dark-purple inks that I have.

And, in the Metro at least, my cartridges of Pilot Blue/Black.

[InkyColors]

I have 3 Pilot Metropolitan pens with CM nibs and I've found that wet or more lubricated inks work best. Some inks just don’t agree with this pen. Here are the inks that worked well for me:  Colorverse Cat, Diamine Midnight, Monteverde Malachite, Sailor Ultramarine, Monteverde Fire Opal, Sailor Yonaga, Diamine Eau de Nil, Monteverde Iced Cookie, and Pilot Iroshizuku Tsuki-Yo.  The following inks were somewhat dry in this pen and unpleasant to use:  Colorverse Schrödinger, Robert Oster Eucalyptus Leaf, Diamine Vermillion, and Diamine Amazing Amethyst. 

[Mercian]

Perhaps the most-likely explanation for the existence of ‘CF’, ‘CM’, and ‘CB’ nibs in addition to the straight-cut nibs on the ‘Plumix’/‘Pluminix’ that are only marked ‘F’ or ‘B’ etc is this:

 

Pilot sells the ‘Plumix’ and ‘Pluminix’ as pens for calligraphy.
As such, it is implicit/expected that their nibs will be straight-cut, without any tipping.

The nibs for these pens therefore only need to be marked with an indication of their width - ‘EF’, ‘F’, ‘M’, ‘B’, and ‘BB’ are sufficient to differentiate between the nibs on these pens, because the customer already knows that their nibs do not have balls of tipping at their points.

 

By contrast, the Pilot ‘Cocoon’/‘Metropolitan’/‘MR’ and the ‘Prera’ are mostly sold as pens for ‘general use’/‘normal’ writing.

As such they are mostly sold with ‘normal’, tipped, nibs of various width-grades.

If one is selling a ‘calligraphy’ version of one of these pens, it is therefore a good idea to put an additional mark on the nib, to differentiate it from a ‘normal’ version of the pen; i.e. to explicitly indicate that the particular pen has a straight-cut/stub/italic nib on it, rather than a ‘normal’, tipped nib.

 

So, the ‘CF’, ‘CM’, and ‘CB’ nibs from the ‘Enso’ calligraphy sets may well be ground in exactly the same way as the ‘F’, ‘M’, and ‘B’ nibs that are sold on the ‘Plumix’ and ‘Pluminix’ pens.

 

The slight difference in ‘crispness’ that I perceive between the ‘CM’ nib on my ‘Metropolitan’ and the ‘M’ nib on my European ‘Plumix’ may merely be an artefact of the variations-within-nominal-manufacturing-tolerances that inevitably occur between the same models of manufactured goods.

 

@A Smug Dill has proved (many times) that the variations that one finds between ‘western’ manufacturers’ nibs that are stamped with the same grade are much greater than the variations that one finds between Japanese manufacturers’ nibs that are stamped with the same grade; but it is reasonable to expect that there will still be some observable differences between different nibs marked with the same grade by any Japanese manufacturer.

 

It’s just that, what with much greater precision being required to write Chinese/Japanese characters than is required to write Latin letters in ‘normal’ ‘western’ cursive handwriting, the Asian manufacturers have to produce their nibs to much-tighter tolerances. Otherwise the consumers in their main markets will deem their products to be ‘shoddily-built’, and will simply not buy them.

‘Western’ manufacturers can ‘get away with’ much ‘sloppier’ tolerances when making their nibs.

For for-Profit businesses, as for biological lifeforms, it pays to do no more work than the least amount of it that is absolutely necessary. ‘Always go for the low-hanging fruit.’
 

We FPN members are atypical ‘consumers’, in that we often collect pens, and/or buy far more of them than do most ‘ordinary consumers’.

As such, we are far more likely than ‘the average Joe’ to own multiple examples of ‘the same nib’ from any manufacturer(s).

We, therefore, are much more likely to discover/notice the variations between nibs made by the same manufacturer, and the differences in amount-of-variation between nibs produced by different manufacturers.

 

Slàinte,

M.

[51ISH]

17 hours ago, A Smug Dill said:

 

I don't think I've seen a chart (or table) that covers not just Custom fountain pen models, but also Capless (aka Vanishing Point), Elite, Justus, and Silvern models and variants — all (except Custom NS and Capless 'Special Alloy’) of which have gold nibs — in terms of nib type/width availability for (higher end) Pilot branded fountain pens.

 

Yes, sorry 'chart' was not a  good choice of word.  This is what I saw and meant, which I'm sure you have already seen, even nicer pictures on Pilot site.

 

https://www.penboutique.com/blogs/blog/a-pilot-pen-geeks-dream-comparing-all-15-nib-options

 

https://www.pilot-custom.jp/en/feature/nib.html

 

I hadn't noticed both referred to Custom pens

[51ISH]

17 hours ago, A Smug Dill said:

 

People can debate all they like.

https://www.deepl.com/translator#ja/en/カリグラフィ用のペン先

 

🙂 

[51ISH]

4 hours ago, Mercian said:

Perhaps the most-likely explanation for the existence of ‘CF’, ‘CM’, and ‘CB’ nibs in addition to the straight-cut nibs on the ‘Plumix’/‘Pluminix’ that are only marked ‘F’ or ‘B’ etc is this:

 

Pilot sells the ‘Plumix’ and ‘Pluminix’ as pens for calligraphy.
As such, it is implicit/expected that their nibs will be straight-cut, without any tipping.

The nibs for these pens therefore only need to be marked with an indication of their width - ‘EF’, ‘F’, ‘M’, ‘B’, and ‘BB’ are sufficient to differentiate between the nibs on these pens, because the customer already knows that their nibs do not have balls of tipping at their points.

 

By contrast, the Pilot ‘Cocoon’/‘Metropolitan’/‘MR’ and the ‘Prera’ are mostly sold as pens for ‘general use’/‘normal’ writing.

As such they are mostly sold with ‘normal’, tipped, nibs of various width-grades.

If one is selling a ‘calligraphy’ version of one of these pens, it is therefore a good idea to put an additional mark on the nib, to differentiate it from a ‘normal’ version of the pen; i.e. to explicitly indicate that the particular pen has a straight-cut/stub/italic nib on it, rather than a ‘normal’, tipped nib.

 

So, the ‘CF’, ‘CM’, and ‘CB’ nibs from the ‘Enso’ calligraphy sets may well be ground in exactly the same way as the ‘F’, ‘M’, and ‘B’ nibs that are sold on the ‘Plumix’ and ‘Pluminix’ pens.

 

The slight difference in ‘crispness’ that I perceive between the ‘CM’ nib on my ‘Metropolitan’ and the ‘M’ nib on my European ‘Plumix’ may merely be an artefact of the variations-within-nominal-manufacturing-tolerances that inevitably occur between the same models of manufactured goods.

 

@A Smug Dill has proved (many times) that the variations that one finds between ‘western’ manufacturers’ nibs that are stamped with the same grade are much greater than the variations that one finds between Japanese manufacturers’ nibs that are stamped with the same grade; but it is reasonable to expect that there will still be some observable differences between different nibs marked with the same grade by any Japanese manufacturer.

 

It’s just that, what with much greater precision being required to write Chinese/Japanese characters than is required to write Latin letters in ‘normal’ ‘western’ cursive handwriting, the Asian manufacturers have to produce their nibs to much-tighter tolerances. Otherwise the consumers in their main markets will deem their products to be ‘shoddily-built’, and will simply not buy them.

‘Western’ manufacturers can ‘get away with’ much ‘sloppier’ tolerances when making their nibs.

For for-Profit businesses, as for biological lifeforms, it pays to do no more work than the least amount of it that is absolutely necessary. ‘Always go for the low-hanging fruit.’
 

We FPN members are atypical ‘consumers’, in that we often collect pens, and/or buy far more of them than do most ‘ordinary consumers’.

As such, we are far more likely than ‘the average Joe’ to own multiple examples of ‘the same nib’ from any manufacturer(s).

We, therefore, are much more likely to discover/notice the variations between nibs made by the same manufacturer, and the differences in amount-of-variation between nibs produced by different manufacturers.

 

Slàinte,

M.

 

Wow !!  Mercian I'm lost for words, talk about going above and beyond! Thank you for all your very thorough responses, observations and conclusions (even if some may be 'subjective' 🤣  Many thanks for taking the time to do the writing sample, very interesting comparison.  Not sure why you were 'playing down' your handwriting, I'd be pretty pleased if mine looked anywhere near so good.

[51ISH]

17 hours ago, Mercian said:

The test above is the first time that I’ve used either Pilot pen.

I have Too Many pens inked currently, although a couple are now running low, which will afford me the opportunity to put at least one of the Pilots in to use.

 

My initial impression of both the Pilot nibs is that they are noticeably less-wet than that Vector ‘calligraphy’ nib.

I think that they do not put down enough ink to make the Waterman ‘Havana’ look ‘brown’ to me.
But then, there are very few pens that do, so it’s not a very useful ‘observation’ 😁

 

That said, I expect that their more-controlled flow will make them great for use with inks such as Diamine ‘Chocolate Brown’, or with some of the more-saturated blue inks that I have.

I am also keen to try Noodler’s Black in them, perhaps some Pelikan 4001 ‘Brilliant Black’, and a couple of saturated dark-purple inks that I have.

And, in the Metro at least, my cartridges of Pilot Blue/Black.

they do not put down enough ink to make the Waterman ‘Havana’ look ‘brown’ to me.
But then, there are very few pens that do,

 

I bet both my Bejing Jin Xing 28 and my Jinaho 159 would give it their best effort 🤣