My oversize pencil is also in the "grecian border" pattern-- that's Wahl's name for it. They are interesting in that the inner workings are regular size, with the increased girth resulting from a thicker barrel. Makes the oversized pencils not only bigger but also with a more pleasing heft.
Joe's is particularly interesting, as it is also in the grecian border pattern but probably bears a "silver filled" imprint with the cutaways exposing the brass underneath (Wahl called it the "oxidized grecian border").
The Equipoised "purse pencil" on the right in Joe's tray isn't "Canton" pearl, it's Borneo pearl according to the 1932 catalog. If you called it Canton in your review you might want to print a correction.
I posted a picture of the seven colors of these (clasp and purse models) over at the Fountain Pen Network, including a question concerning a color for which I cannot find a name:
Link: Equipoised clasp and purse pencils.
As for your little dig, David, I decline to take the bait. Your comments say much more about yourself than they do about me.
Useful Wahl info, thanks.
Nah, the review called Borneo by proper name, not Canton. Canton is the blue (very rare. I have a set). That's what I get for posting after post 12-hour-night-shifts naps. Sigh. And up to now I thought I couldn't make mistakes.
I have all the names for all the Pursies. The unnamed pen in your thread at FPN likely is Ceylon Pearl. Yeah, in the catalogue page it has a bit of gray cast, but so it goes. I observe that several of the Purse colors seem to use technique similar to, perhaps same as, the veined pearl seen on Parker's Duofold. I've seen couple crisp Ceylons that are fairly yellow, but most have hint of red. Perhaps Wahl got hold of slightly off Duofold stock. Similarly, India, Canton and Borneo have that veined flavor, though with different color bases. When first I found the pen, I wondered if Wahl did two different patterns black/pearl (the usual black/pearl is more Sheaffer/Waterman in look), but eventually (perhaps in chat with Syd, not sure) decided the Ceylon was the veiny black/pearl (often with off color pearl, but who knows if original). If I can find my PDF of the Stylus article, perhaps I'll upload it and post link. Probably be a few weeks.
As to digs...
I observe again, as I did on Zoss, that the first ever negative exchange between us was initiated by you, a personal slam, based perhaps on nothing else besides your limited understanding of my relationship with Mr. Z and on your personal animus of uncertain root. My first dig ever to you was simply a response in kind.
Your latest line to me in discussion of your keeping tabs on my posts from bygone eras was, and I quote,
Per Jon:
You should be concerned that I remember, not impressed.
Now, Jon, really, why... exactly... should I be concerned? Feel free to clarify your earlier statement.
My note here referenced that quote made scant days ago.
So, since I have it on pretty good authority that fpnuts.com (this Fountain Pen Board) does not wilt from intense dialogue (see the post on Conway Stewart in which simple facts posted by a member over at the slightly bigger board, Fountain Pen Network, have resulted in that member- yet another serious pendom contributor- being chased away from FPN) and that serious debate is not eschewed here, let's then have an intense but honest/polite dialogue.
So, what again is your intent then in suggesting I be concerned ? Do clarify
Earlier , August 2010, you wrote on the Zoss List, and I quote:
Per jon: I'd say so on his forum but I've never been there and I don't plan on going there.
Yet, here you are and you've been pretty well welcomed with your knowledge embraced and appreciated, the only "digs" being somewhat facetious and light hearted
responses to your proactive negative comments such as in the earlier quote.
So, Counsel, would you care to explain the repeated hostility. Prior to another barb you sent my way on the Zoss List, I believe I have never had any bad thing to say about you. Independent of that, you seem to have made assumption that FPB competes with rather than complements the Zoss List , that Tom Zoss and I lack any understanding going into this. You struck out at me de novo. I note with some irony that my cross posting here with deliberate intent to fan the discussion at Zoss List has resulted in an uptick in discussion of real subjects there (not the usual Sales filler that-- iirc-- you weren't too thrilled with anyway) with several of the discussions presenting well more substance at the Z-list than they managed to generate here.
I remain cheerfully bemused by the whole thing.
-d