29 replies to this topic

[Teej47]

Hope everyone had a good Father's Day.

My outdoor working plans for Saturday were mercifully rained out, which freed me for a little antique district excursion in search of Father's Day gifts for myself. (My daughter got me a card and a gift. Her four brothers... are boys.) I picked up a few things without spending all that much, including the smallest pen I've ever seen. I think it may be the least I've ever spent on a pen, too. After tax it was $3.44!

I spotted the tiny little ring-top snug in what must be it's original box and figured I should have a closer look. Expecting maybe a plated untipped point or a steel crows quill I was very surprised to find "14KT" lurking under the old dried ink. That's unfortunately the only mark on the entire pen. It's an eye dropper with a feed that looks very much like a Waterman's spoon feed. The nib is about the size of a "51" nib. It had obviously been used (dried ink), but is in perfect condition. It's clearly spent most of it's existence in the little box with the lid on. It's a nice writer, too. I haven't taken any pictures or measurements at all yet but hopefully I'll remedy that tomorrow.

So, does anybody else have any really tiny pens, or perhaps insight into this one I found?

Tim

[JonSzanto]

pixplzkkthxbai

[david i]

Hope everyone had a good Father's Day.

SNIP

So, does anybody else have any really tiny pens, or perhaps insight into this one I found?

Tim

Hi,

I shot what perhaps is the world's largest collection of "baby" pens back at the Portland Pen Show (now defunct) in 2005. Just never got around to editing the images. One of these days...

d

[AndyR]

So what defines a 'tiny' pen? I have over 300 Conway Stewart Dinkies (all different, all lever fillers and mostly pre-WW2), these come out at 3.5 ins long when capped if that counts as 'tiny'! As well as these I have another 30 or 40 pens of a similar size from other UK manufacturers, again pre WW2, including the smallest syringe filler you are ever likely to see!

Andy

[Teej47]

Well, I don't have pictures yet, but excluding the ring at the top it's 3-1/4 inches long and the barrel is 7/32 inch wide... which makes the 3/8 inch wide cap band look very impressive!

Tim

[Pedro]

Pen must be very tiny, I couldn't even see the pic.

[Teej47]

[Teej47]

There are a couple more shots in the gallery. I really think I need to get my own camera and a desktop tripod one of these days...
Thoughts?

Tim

[Pentangeli]

Will this qualify as a tiny pen? It measures 85mm long when capped and 80mm with cap off.
It's a lever filler Peter Pan in orange celluloid with a smooth writing steel nib. I will post photos as soon as I figure out how to do it.

Cheers,

J.P.

[Teej47]

This pen of mine is even a little shorter than your Peter Pan at about 80mm capped, though it's not the length that really struck me. Note the first picture above. With no context it doesn't look small at all because it's not proportioned like most small pens.

There's a limit to how small you can make a self filler, or at least one with a sac (one could make a really tiny piston filler I suppose) because it must be large enough to contain the sac and filling mechanism (unless it's a bulb filler). Thus pens like the Peter Pans and Dinkies tend to be on the squat side. When you see one by itself it actually looks small (to my eye anyway). My pen is an eye dropper, so no extra girth is required to accommodate a sac.

When I first saw mine the thing that struck me was how thin it is. Then I was surprised to discover that it's a 'real pen' with a 14kt nib with enough tipping to be on the wide side of fine. Maybe the biggest surprise is that it's just big enough that I can actually use it. The icing on the cake is that it's actually the most pristine BHR I've ever seen. It's clearly been used, because I had a surprising amount of dried ink to clean up, but it obviously stayed in it's little box when not in use. 80 years in a dark box seemingly does wonders for the complexion.

Tim

[david i]

This pen of mine is even a little shorter than your Peter Pan at about 80mm capped, though it's not the length that really struck me. Note the first picture above. With no context it doesn't look small at all because it's not proportioned like most small pens.

There's a limit to how small you can make a self filler, or at least one with a sac (one could make a really tiny piston filler I suppose) because it must be large enough to contain the sac and filling mechanism (unless it's a bulb filler). Thus pens like the Peter Pans and Dinkies tend to be on the squat side. When you see one by itself it actually looks small (to my eye anyway). My pen is an eye dropper, so no extra girth is required to accommodate a sac.

When I first saw mine the thing that struck me was how thin it is. Then I was surprised to discover that it's a 'real pen' with a 14kt nib with enough tipping to be on the wide side of fine. Maybe the biggest surprise is that it's just big enough that I can actually use it. The icing on the cake is that it's actually the most pristine BHR I've ever seen. It's clearly been used, because I had a surprising amount of dried ink to clean up, but it obviously stayed in it's little box when not in use. 80 years in a dark box seemingly does wonders for the complexion.

Tim

You guys better not make me bring out picture of the really little pen... by a very large maker (queue the foreboding music...)

-d

[Teej47]

Well what are you waiting for?

[david i]

Well what are you waiting for?

Right, because my life isn't at all busy

The iconic Waterman Doll pen. Smallest (TBOMK) working pen and better still one done by a major manufacturer, not some fly by night novelty brand

Recollection is around 1.5" pen, maybe 40mm. Here it is next to truly Giant Waterman 420 silver-on-red-hard-rubber, and "typical" 5.5" OS Balance.

regards

david

[John Danza]

The iconic Waterman Doll pen. Smallest (TBOMK) working pen....

I'm not sure that it's smaller than the miniature pen that Parker made as the insert into the Ultra Giant. Having seen both in the flesh, I think they're roughly equivalent.

Smallest (TBOMK) working pen better still one done by a major manufacturer, not some fly by night novelty brand

I don't think we should "dis" Tim's little pen as a novelty brand. The Waterman Doll pen and the little pen Parker made were clearly made as novelties and never as truly usable pens. I think Tim's pen is actually intended by the manufacturer, whoever that was, to be a working pen. The fact that Tim's pen is made with a sac and a lever filler is pretty darn impressive.

[david i]

I'm not sure that it's smaller than the miniature pen that Parker made as the insert into the Ultra Giant. Having seen both in the flesh, I think they're roughly equivalent.





I don't think we should "dis" Tim's little pen as a novelty brand. The Waterman Doll pen and the little pen Parker made were clearly made as novelties and never as truly usable pens. I think Tim's pen is actually intended by the manufacturer, whoever that was, to be a working pen. The fact that Tim's pen is made with a sac and a lever filler is pretty darn impressive.

Hi John,

Thus we see that winky icons don't always convey sufficient tone of facetiousness. My bad.

How's that famous saying go(?).... "You're Light. I shoodn't have said that the Enterprise should be hauliiing garbage. What I meant to say was that Enterprise..."

Many of the baby pens were made by quality, if not "Big 5"m makers. As we know, "non-Big-5" does not prove lack of quality.

I was teasing a bit that the Waterman Baby pen perhaps is the smallest pen out there, AND it is made by one of the big boys. I did not intend to mock smaller makers, at least not this time

The red baby HR pen found obstructing the back end of the Parker Ultra Giant might be smaller, but not clear it counts as a pen. Of course it's not clear it doesn't. Now there lies a subject for heady debate.

regards

david

[AndyR]

Thus pens like the Peter Pans and Dinkies tend to be on the squat side.

Hi Tim,

Not sure why you should think Dinkies were 'squat', this pictured Dinkie 532 is typical in size of the early vulcanite Dinkies at 3.5 ins (90 mm) long (capped), with a maximum barrel diameter of 0.3ins (7.6 mm) and it looks pretty much in the same proportions as your pen. The little syringe filler I have that I mentioned in passing in my earlier post is the same length but only 0.26 ins (6.8 mm) in diameter, and that looks decidedly skinny to me!

Also gently correcting John, Tim actually says his pen is an eyedropper filler, not a lever filler. The lever fill Dinkies were very much a mainstream product for Conway Stewart for 50 years from 1922, though for various reasons the size gradually increased little by little over the years.



Andy

[John Danza]

Also gently correcting John, Tim actually says his pen is an eyedropper filler, not a lever filler. The lever fill Dinkies were very much a mainstream product for Conway Stewart for 50 years from 1922, though for various reasons the size gradually increased little by little over the years.

Andy

My bad!! I got confused between a couple of the posts and thought I saw something about it having a small sac and lever. Gotta keep track of that better!

Apoligies too to David. I missed the winkie face inference.

[Teej47]

Hi Tim,

Not sure why you should think Dinkies were 'squat', this pictured Dinkie 532 is typical in size of the early vulcanite Dinkies at 3.5 ins (90 mm) long (capped), with a maximum barrel diameter of 0.3ins (7.6 mm) and it looks pretty much in the same proportions as your pen. The little syringe filler I have that I mentioned in passing in my earlier post is the same length but only 0.26 ins (6.8 mm) in diameter, and that looks decidedly skinny to me!

Also gently correcting John, Tim actually says his pen is an eyedropper filler, not a lever filler. The lever fill Dinkies were very much a mainstream product for Conway Stewart for 50 years from 1922, though for various reasons the size gradually increased little by little over the years.



Andy

"Squat" is both subjective and relative, I suppose. I'm about 6 foot and 175 pounds; not what most would consider "squat"... but 30 years ago I was maybe half an inch shorter but 40 pounds lighter. My length to width ratio is less than it was, thus I'm "more squat". This Dinkie (which is seriously cool, by the way!) has about a 12:1 length to width ratio, which is pretty close to what a Parker "51" is, actually. My little pen has about a 16:1 length to width ratio. Skinny little dude (as I once was).

Tim

[Teej47]

Right, because my life isn't at all busy

The iconic Waterman Doll pen. Smallest (TBOMK) working pen and better still one done by a major manufacturer, not some fly by night novelty brand

Recollection is around 1.5" pen, maybe 40mm. Here it is next to truly Giant Waterman 420 silver-on-red-hard-rubber, and "typical" 5.5" OS Balance.

regards

david

Seriously cool!

This image is conveniently just a bit more than life size on my monitor, so I make it roughly 2-3/8 inches with a barrel diameter of about 3/16 inch, or about 60mm x 4mm. Now that's tiny!

But how does it write?


Tim

[Teej47]

So what defines a 'tiny' pen? I have over 300 Conway Stewart Dinkies (all different, all lever fillers and mostly pre-WW2), these come out at 3.5 ins long when capped if that counts as 'tiny'! As well as these I have another 30 or 40 pens of a similar size from other UK manufacturers, again pre WW2, including the smallest syringe filler you are ever likely to see!

Andy

I'd love to see that syringe filler... not to mention 300 of anything by CS!

Tim