Pelican nib widths across different nib sizes

[finzi]

Do you think that the Pelikan nib widths (EF, F, M etc) are consistent across the different nib sizes (M200, M400 etc)? I have an M400, M nib and it is far too wide for my handwriting. I want to hire a couple of Pelikan pens with different nib sizes but my source doesn’t have the M400 in EF, only the M140 and M1000. Is there any point in my comparing the EF nibs on those pens to the nib in my M400, or do you find that the nib widths are slightly inconsistent and vary according to the nib sizes?

 

I hope I’m using the term “size“ accurately in this context!

[Mark from Yorkshire]

@finzi they may have changed over time with the older ones being different to what is available now. That and with different owners as well

[Bo Bo Olson]

I'm not going to get into pre-50. It all depends on what era you are in. Vintage(50-65&semi-vintage '82-97, or modern post '97. 1998 to now. In back then, no one could tell me if the '66-81 Pelikan nibs were semi-nails or regular flex, I didn't buy any.

 

There will be slop/tolerance, where a Fat F can exactly = a Skinny M.

 

I don't test my nibs on Richard Binder's nib width chart. I don't chase EF or F nibs; they happen and if one is skinner than the other...whooppie, they are both thin.

I've never read about any one complaining about a B nib's thickness, unless it was someone got a Japanese B...which is a M; but known, so there is no justified complaint.

 

I do a general eyeball testing. Sometimes I'll go nib tip to nib tip to see if a vintage piston cap marked nib is that width or if it was changed out....one of the reasons one buys a Pelikan.

 

IMO the factory stub of the vintage 400/140 and or by me a flattened teardrop 120 and the '82-97 semi-vintage nibs are @ 1/2 a width narrower than the post '97**. The fat and blobby double ball nib made so ball point users didn't need to learn how to hold a fountain pen. Also, stiffer for less repair work.

 

I have a W.Germany 600 (same standard size but fancier than the 400) OBB, and I have an early 2000sometime 805 OBB. The 600 writes a half a width narrower.

I've read many who said similar.

 

**The 200's great springy teardrop nib was ruined @ 5-6 years ago, when it, too, went double ball.God, how I used to rave about that nib.

 

If possible buy an older 200 with a teardrop tipping, gold-plated or steel....a very comfortable ride for a nib, good for a clean line and dry enough for two toned shading inks. That 200 nib would go on the modern semi-nail 400 and 600 giving you a great cheap upgrade.

 

 

PS...Gold is not softer....a gold nail is a nail, pure and simple.

In vintage, I can match as equal good steel nibs vs good gold in semi-flex and maxi-semi-flex.

My teardrop 200's steel nibs can match my Pelikan gold '82-97 nibs exactly. They are both regular flex springy nibs.

 

 

[Bo Bo Olson]

Ron Zorn tolerance,.........with my opinion of why the brands didn't unify and make just all similar widths.

Ron Zorn and Richard Binder visited the Sheaffer factory as it closed down.

 

Every company has it's very own standard; usually for a good reason.

 

Parker makes or made a fatter nib than Sheaffer, so those who so wished or were so trained by their company of choice back in the day of One Man, One Pen.....(Chevy vs Ford)....to prevent a catastrophe....some Parker user, buying a Sheaffer for his pen of the decade. & vice versa. If Parker made a skinny nib like Sheaffer, why shouldn't a Parker fan not buy a Sheaffer pen...if they were the same width of nib. Such foolishness was avoided.

 

First, you have to look at the Eras....Once, Pelikan was narrower than both Parker and Sheaffer.... Then, in '98 Pelikan went over to fat blobby nibs....wider than Parker or Sheaffer. That was done, so ball point users could use a fountain pen without going through all that hassle of learning how to hold a fountain pen. And stiffer nibs that ball point users had a harder time springing or turning nibs into pretzels.

 

MB is also fatter now than it was in semi-vintage and vintage days.

 

And Japanese nibs are even narrower, than western vintage and semi-vintage days. They have a skinny printed script.

 

A Japanese poster said Sailor was the fattest Japanese nib, perhaps just a bit thinner than pre 2010 Aurora (once the thinnest European nib. I haven't tested a newer Aurora nib, but one that was the @ end of the Aurora semi-flex era.)

 

Japanese nibs are one or more widths narrower than modern Western nibs. They have to be, in they are designed for a tiny printed script; not flowing cursive of western nibs.

 

There is a big gap between sizes of western and Japanese nibs. Those who start with Japanese pens always think of Western nibs as fat.

 

Those of us who started with Western nibs, know Japanese nibs as skinnier than marked size.

 

Japanese nibs could well be 1/2 a width narrower than 'narrow'  Pelikan vintage or semi-vintage nibs......................I don't know if they are even narrower than that.  I had enough $ problems chasing German pens.

 

Three companies, using their own standards plus tolerance means even with in the company it is only approximate and when compared to another company it's oranges vs tangerines, in each company has it's very own standard. Then drop in Japanese narrow nibs.

 

Someone's F could be another's EF or M or so close measurement don't really matter. Call the others a real Skinny M or a real Fat F.

.....and the new number standard of 1.2-1.0-0.8 are just as off as the letter BB, B or M nib sizes are.

Even robot cut steel nibs from Lamy are off in constant width. (I did see the older, larger machine....Goulet's vid, shows the smaller new one.)

 

There will be variance.....it is completely normal for three pens of the same width coming off the factory's line to be each a bit different.....and still be with in tolerance...skinny F, fat F, & normal F.

 

Tolerance is normal, in the AI's haven't taken over and removed slop.

 

IMO many people are too OCD and expect every F nib to be exactly the same, even if made from a different company, much less of different eras.

 

Those boring times are coming in the AI days, so until then, enjoy a thick, regular and thin F................and the next company's F that has a different standard so as your normal company....will overlap what you consider 'normal' in F vs M.

Nib width is either horseshoe or hand grenade close; only.

 ...................................................Ron's facts...................

Sheaffer used a dial indicator nib gauge for measuring nib sizes. The nib was inserted into the gauge, and the size read off of the dial. A given size being nibs that fell within a given range. What is listed below were the ranges given on a gauge that I saw in the Sheaffer service center prior to being closed in March 2008.

Measurements are in thousandths of an inch.

XXF = 0.010 - 0.013
XF = 0.013 - 0.018
F = 0.018 - 0.025
M = 0.025 - 0.031
Broad* = 0.031 - 0.050
Stub = 0.038 - 0.050

*there was some overlap on the gauge. May be 0.035 - 0.050

[A Smug Dill]

On 1/18/2025 at 4:46 AM, finzi said:

Do you think that the Pelikan nib widths (EF, F, M etc) are consistent across the different nib sizes (M200, M400 etc)?

 

Not a chance. Pelikan can't even maintain consistency in nib tipping width (or the line width produced on the page) for a single model of nib in a single width grade:

 

[davisgt]

I can attest to that. I have a medium nib on my M600, and that nib is a firehose. I must use a dry ink. My M800 has a fine nib, and it still writes a pretty wet line. 

[Bo Bo Olson]

Pelikan main ink 4001 is a very dry ink, so they make a wet nib.

Back in the day, Waterman made a wet ink...for then***... because they had a narrow nib.

..............

So I expect a Pelikan nib to be wet, because of their ink.....and if you use a wet ink in a Pelikan I would expect a fire hose.

 

 

***I have read some noodler users think Waterman inks are dry.

 

So Again....a wet ink like some of the noodlers, in a Pelikan pen.....could be used in California right now.