Jump to content


Photo

Sheaffer Balance Nib Evolution (?). Unusual nib finding.


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 david i

david i

    ADVISOR

  • ADVISORS
  • 7,515 posts
  • LocationEast Coast USA

Posted 05 August 2011 - 03:14 AM

Hi,

Let's take a painful step into would-be academic Balancedom.


I was shooting a pen for possible sale, a quite nice Sheaffer Balance full size first tier (standard girth Lifetime) in Jade with early features- extra long barrel, short section, ladder feed and so forth. Dates to around 1930.

Posted Image



The pen has a two tone nib, which at first glance I suspected might be be present as a swap from a slightly later pen, as most of the "long" early Balances have monotone nib, and reportedly two tone nibs kicked in around 1932. I offer caveat though that with only a 1930 catalogue prior to 1935's catalogue and with my not having examined every advert out there, I am uncertain as to when the early Balance features (Iong barrel, short section) were lost and when two tone nibs appeared. I thus am uncertain then that the nib is later than the rest of the pen. But, that was my first thought.

In any case, I noticed something that struck me as being a bit "off" for the nib. Look at it below, then I will comment.

Posted Image



The imprinted line dividing the platinum plated distal nib and gold proximal unplated gold portion is fairly straight and is located distal to the breather hole. At first recollection, two-tone Lifetime Sheaffer nibs are found instead with more curved line located proximal to the breather hole. Occasional straight-line divider lines are found on the scarce flexible Lifetime nibs, but on those the divider still is proximal to the breather hole... and in any case this nib is firm,

A typical two tone Lifetime nib is shown below. Note the curve to the stamped divider between the two portions of the nib and note that the line is proximal to the breather hole, between it and the gripping section.

Posted Image



So... batch variation?


Or... early/earliest form of two tone nib?


I could be mistaken, but I believe this has never been formally addressed.

Thoughts?

regards

David
David R. Isaacson MD. Website: VACUMANIA.com for quality old pens with full warranty.
Email: isaacson@frontiernet.net

Posted Image

#2 jonro

jonro

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 221 posts
  • LocationSouth Florida

Posted 05 August 2011 - 03:39 AM

I have never seen a Sheaffer nib like that. My gut tells me that you are right about it being a prototype of Sheaffer's two-tone nib. It's logical to assume that they made a certain number of prototype nibs to test the plating process and nib performance. That's a cool find.

#3 david i

david i

    ADVISOR

  • ADVISORS
  • 7,515 posts
  • LocationEast Coast USA

Posted 05 August 2011 - 03:44 AM

I have never seen a Sheaffer nib like that. My gut tells me that you are right about it being a prototype of Sheaffer's two-tone nib. It's logical to assume that they made a certain number of prototype nibs to test the plating process and nib performance. That's a cool find.


Hi Jon,

Appreciate the input :)

At risk of going "all academic" on you, I do lean away from "prototype", a term that causes contention and which- at least in some circumstances- is well abused in pendom, as in, "Hey, this one is new to me... PROTOTYPE!".

Of course, it could be that, but we have other possibilities to entertain. Nibs styles for various pens do vary amongst pens found. Sometimes they are clearly era-specific. I cannot exclude a prototype status, but batch variation and early-form nibi consider stronger candidates for explanation. Of course... i could be wrong. Don't get me started on Parker Parkette nib evolution ;)

regards

-d
David R. Isaacson MD. Website: VACUMANIA.com for quality old pens with full warranty.
Email: isaacson@frontiernet.net

Posted Image

#4 Gerry Berg

Gerry Berg

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 130 posts

Posted 05 August 2011 - 02:44 PM

Definitely unusual: both straight and its location. A errant batch?

I was curious about your remark that flexies can be recognized by that separation line. It used to be thought that if the line was not incised, it was a flexie. Yet in the flexies I have handled I've seen no correlation with a particular kind of separation line. incised or otherwise.

The question is especially useful for those hunting for flexies because a visual tell would dispense wit the need to pick up the pen and press the tines on your thumbnail (in any case hard to do on E-bay and not always appreciated at shows).

Gerry

#5 Teej47

Teej47

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 527 posts
  • LocationSpokane, WA

Posted 05 August 2011 - 03:40 PM

For the sake of symantic fun (what, nobody else finds that fun?)... Surely this would be proto-atypical (the first of a different kind), right? A true and literal prototype (first kind) establishes the form or pattern of something that is subsequently followed. A prototype establishes a pattern, and thus typically is difficult to distinguish from what follows.

Sorta like if you were to call my house and a deep male voice answers the phone. Good luck being able to tell whether you've got me or one of my four sons. The newer models are pretty tough to distinguish from the prototype.

What this nib is though is very interesting.

Tim
The only sense that's common is nonsense...

#6 david i

david i

    ADVISOR

  • ADVISORS
  • 7,515 posts
  • LocationEast Coast USA

Posted 06 August 2011 - 12:33 AM

For the sake of symantic fun (what, nobody else finds that fun?)... Surely this would be proto-atypical (the first of a different kind), right? A true and literal prototype (first kind) establishes the form or pattern of something that is subsequently followed. A prototype establishes a pattern, and thus typically is difficult to distinguish from what follows.

Sorta like if you were to call my house and a deep male voice answers the phone. Good luck being able to tell whether you've got me or one of my four sons. The newer models are pretty tough to distinguish from the prototype.

What this nib is though is very interesting.

Tim




Hi Tim,

You're lobbing me the softball for a classic David Pen Semantics Rant. ;)

To set up my answer, I start by noting that hobby jargon can carry specific meaning, nuance or import not found in general definitions. If you have any doubt about that, note that in real life most of us are happy to have done a good job at something, or to get a good grade in schoolwork or to be considered a good guy by our acquaintances... and so forth. But in collecting- whether pens or coins or what have you- if you spend money blindly for that pen or coin in Good Condition expecting to have it turn out to be in good condition, you will be sorely disappointed to find out that "good condition" means rotten in hobby jargon.

SImilarly if you buy a Parker Vacumatic sold as a Demonstrator (hey, you can see the guts do their thing via the transparency, so it does... demonstrate, right?) that turns out to be a generic boring black Major, you would be disappointed, even though the pen indeed does deomonstrate.

Hobby jargon matters.

Moving on...

Indeed, quick dictionary peek for prototype offers

pro·to·type Posted Image (prPosted ImagePosted ImagetPosted Image-tPosted ImagepPosted Image) KEY

NOUN:
  • An original type, form, or instance serving as a basis or standard for later stages.
  • An original, full-scale, and usually working model of a new product or new version of an existing product.
  • An early, typical example.
However-- and recognizing there is room for debate as we have no rule book for this sort of thing--- hobby usage for capital-P Prototype transcends absolutely simply the use of the term for "early issue". If it didn't , the legitimate gravitas and cachet carried by the term would be lost as every first year Balance, every first year Vac could be called a prototype.

Just as in pendom "Good" means "Bad" and "Demonstrator" transcends "to demonstrate" instead meaning a specific and usually not-for-sale special issue pen issued in limited quantities to dealers in order to demonstrate the function of pens that actually were for sale to the public, so to does Prototype carry specific definition, even if the edges grow fuzzy.

Vintage pen prototypes in hobby jargon reference factory trial pieces, overlapping the notion of "experimental", often different from items released for sale to general public, or at least marked (if no different from released items) by factory markings to suggest the trial status. And, yes, I realize that there are finds that can push the edges. Too, hobbyists have habit of attributing this status to things that are anomalous, off-catalogue or new in their experience, which imo is incorrect to do.

As to this nib.

Could it be a prototype that leaked to the public? Could it be a nib not meant for general sale, made in tiny number, a trial piece to hone the technique of the two tone effect that eventually would be released publicly in different form?

Well... maybe. But that should not be the default assumption following first observation, as it plumps the status of the finding, perhaps inappropriately.

And, again, if it is an early form of the nib (my speculation), I note again I don't want to use "prototype" simply for "earlier form", although obviously, most prototypes will be- literally- early forms of that to which they lead.

Too, while I have handled literally thousands of Balances and have peeked at most of the nibs of pens handled, It is entirely possible that others of this sort have fallen under my radar and of that of most casual observers. We'd have to ask how many people have looked at, say, 100 Lifetime nibs found in relatively early model pens and how many of them were paying attention to the two-tone divider line, to see if there even is a sampling out there of anecdote for this sort of nib.

And, that's my rant.

-d
David R. Isaacson MD. Website: VACUMANIA.com for quality old pens with full warranty.
Email: isaacson@frontiernet.net

Posted Image

#7 david i

david i

    ADVISOR

  • ADVISORS
  • 7,515 posts
  • LocationEast Coast USA

Posted 06 August 2011 - 12:38 AM

Definitely unusual: both straight and its location. A errant batch?

I was curious about your remark that flexies can be recognized by that separation line. It used to be thought that if the line was not incised, it was a flexie. Yet in the flexies I have handled I've seen no correlation with a particular kind of separation line. incised or otherwise.

The question is especially useful for those hunting for flexies because a visual tell would dispense wit the need to pick up the pen and press the tines on your thumbnail (in any case hard to do on E-bay and not always appreciated at shows).

Gerry


Hi Gerry,

An excellent question.

Keeping in mind my knowledge of Sheaffer is not as strong as for Parker, my recollection and observations are that by the 1950's (Snorkel), the flexible two tone nibs indeed lack a stamped division, just using the color effect, unlike firm nibs that have stamped divider lines. However, this is not so for 1930's Sheaffers, which have divider line either way, even on monotone Flex nibs often found. As I've handled essentially no 1940's Triumph flex nibs, I cannot well comment on that decade as to when the style shifted.

regards

David
David R. Isaacson MD. Website: VACUMANIA.com for quality old pens with full warranty.
Email: isaacson@frontiernet.net

Posted Image

#8 Roger W.

Roger W.

    ADVISOR

  • Moderators
  • 944 posts
  • LocationIllinois

Posted 06 August 2011 - 01:46 AM

The first ad to show a two toned nib in October 1931. I observe no distillates as my scotch is located behind me. The pen shows the regular saddle divide. An English ad in Punch shows both nibs (masked and monotone) this being from November 1931 which is similar to the Popular Science ad ran in December 1931. A 1933 brochure shows a straight line separation on a 5D (deskpen). Your nib is shown on a Feathertouch in a 1934 proof ad (a more exact data cannot be determined). A Saturday Evening Post ad shows a similar Feathertouch for the August, October, November and December 1934 ads. This seems the key distinction between Feathertouch and Lifetime nibs thru 1935 and 1936. This would lead me to believe that you have a Lifetime nib with Feathertouch masking treatment. After this only Lifetimes and 3's are illustrated.

Roger W.

#9 david i

david i

    ADVISOR

  • ADVISORS
  • 7,515 posts
  • LocationEast Coast USA

Posted 06 August 2011 - 02:08 AM

The first ad to show a two toned nib in October 1931. I observe no distillates as my scotch is located behind me. The pen shows the regular saddle divide. An English ad in Punch shows both nibs (masked and monotone) this being from November 1931 which is similar to the Popular Science ad ran in December 1931. A 1933 brochure shows a straight line separation on a 5D (deskpen). Your nib is shown on a Feathertouch in a 1934 proof ad (a more exact data cannot be determined). A Saturday Evening Post ad shows a similar Feathertouch for the August, October, November and December 1934 ads. This seems the key distinction between Feathertouch and Lifetime nibs thru 1935 and 1936. This would lead me to believe that you have a Lifetime nib with Feathertouch masking treatment. After this only Lifetimes and 3's are illustrated.

Roger W.


Hi Roger,

Thanks for joining the discussion. You presented a bunch of info, but for poor Davey some of the details are blurring. So...

Your earliest ad showing 2-tone Lifetime nib has the saddle split (I like that term). Mine thus is different from the early ad both for shape of line and for location of line (past the vent rather than proxima).

Your 1933 showign a straight (non saddle) divider on a desk pen... this is a Lifetime or feathertouch nib, the location of the straight line is typical (pre-vent) not like mine (post-ven)?

The 1934 Proof Ad you mean by "like my nib" but on a non-Lifetime Feathertouch has the line after the vent?

You mention similar for 1935-6 Feather Touch nibs. By key distinction, you mean the 1934-6 non-Lifetime Feathertouch nibs shown have not only the straight non-saddle divider, but also has the divider after the vent? Keep in mind that while I didn't mention earlier, I know the non-Lifetime feathertouch pens have a straight divider, but I'd thought that generally was in same location as the saddle divider, between vent hole and section, not after the vent.

Possibility that my nib has a Feathertouch non-lifetime divider line on a nib marked Lifetime occurred, but I'd thought even the non-Lifetime FT nibs had the line in the usual place. Please clarify.

regards

david




David R. Isaacson MD. Website: VACUMANIA.com for quality old pens with full warranty.
Email: isaacson@frontiernet.net

Posted Image

#10 Roger W.

Roger W.

    ADVISOR

  • Moderators
  • 944 posts
  • LocationIllinois

Posted 06 August 2011 - 03:04 AM

Hi Roger,

Thanks for joining the discussion. You presented a bunch of info, but for poor Davey some of the details are blurring. So...

Your earliest ad showing 2-tone Lifetime nib has the saddle split (I like that term). Mine thus is different from the early ad both for shape of line and for location of line (past the vent rather than proxima).

Your 1933 showign a straight (non saddle) divider on a desk pen... this is a Lifetime or feathertouch nib, the location of the straight line is typical (pre-vent) not like mine (post-ven)?

The 1934 Proof Ad you mean by "like my nib" but on a non-Lifetime Feathertouch has the line after the vent?

You mention similar for 1935-6 Feather Touch nibs. By key distinction, you mean the 1934-6 non-Lifetime Feathertouch nibs shown have not only the straight non-saddle divider, but also has the divider after the vent? Keep in mind that while I didn't mention earlier, I know the non-Lifetime feathertouch pens have a straight divider, but I'd thought that generally was in same location as the saddle divider, between vent hole and section, not after the vent.

Possibility that my nib has a Feathertouch non-lifetime divider line on a nib marked Lifetime occurred, but I'd thought even the non-Lifetime FT nibs had the line in the usual place. Please clarify.

regards

david


David;

See -

Posted Image


Posted Image
Just so there's no confusion - this is the LT nib in the same ad - Saturday Evening Post May 25, 1935.


Roger W.

#11 david i

david i

    ADVISOR

  • ADVISORS
  • 7,515 posts
  • LocationEast Coast USA

Posted 06 August 2011 - 03:48 AM

David;

See -

SNIP

Just so there's no confusion - this is the LT nib in the same ad - Saturday Evening Post May 25, 1935.


Roger W.


OK. We now are getting somewhere. Although this information does raise new challenges. Time to collate some of the info, then offer challenges

Here is my anomalous early Balance Lifetime (high line) 2-tone nib next to typical nib. Note the shape of the divider and its location

Posted Image


The 2nd tier nibs with two tone effect have Feathertouch imprint and are non-Lifetime. Feathertouch nibs do have a straighter divider though I find the line not to start proximal to the vent hole as in my odd nib. Here are two advert images showing on left a NON LIFETIME Feathertouch nib that somewhat resembles my Lifetime nib. On the right is typical Lifetime nib similar to the "typical" nib I showed at right, just above.

Posted Image



Key subsequent note: I now have examined several non-Lifetime Feathertouch nibs. All of course have the straighter divider but all have line that starts either before (proximal to) the heart shaped vent hole (often at very edge) or even mid-vent hole. But (noting most of these were later issue pens) none had the line start after the vent hole as with my nib above or in the ad image for the non-lifetime nib.

-----------------------
Explanations?


1) I remain with the idea that my nib might be a very early form of the Lifetime 2-tone nib, perhaps predating Roger's 1931 ad. To my eye- the nib seems to resemble early monotone nibs (heavier flavor to the font) save for the divider and the two tone effect. I am amenable to other views. The pen is early style shown in the 1930 catalogue. "Prototype" is consideration, but as per my above notes, we do not want to start with that conclusion.


2) A glitch: a nib that was partially stamped as if for Feather Touch but issued Lifetime. Is this possible? Was the divider stamped on separate pass from the rest of imprint? Seems a stretch.

------------------------

Other issues in play involve interpretation for plain old NON-Lifetime Feather Touch nibs. Roger's image (above, left) shows the divider at distal end of the vent hole. The few pens of this sort I pulled just now (later issue than the 1935 ad) shows the line further back, midway to vent or at start of it, as with the typical Lifetime nibs? Did the divider on FT nibs evolve? Is the artwork wrong? We need to examine now a bunch of Feathertouch nbis. I have many, but cannot address tonight.

regards

David
David R. Isaacson MD. Website: VACUMANIA.com for quality old pens with full warranty.
Email: isaacson@frontiernet.net

Posted Image

#12 Roger W.

Roger W.

    ADVISOR

  • Moderators
  • 944 posts
  • LocationIllinois

Posted 06 August 2011 - 05:10 AM

David;

It could certainly be early. Perhaps they first came up with the dividing line which would be novel as they didn't do that before and then they got fancy with it so fancy equaled LT's and straight equaled 5's or non LT' feathertouches but, likely a time when only the straight line was in use. The pen it is on is consistent with early while we can't eliminate absolutely that it is a marriage of parts though, the parts seem of the same era. Still, could be a later nib on an earlier pen. In that case it would have to be a LT nib crossing over with a Feathertouch feature. Just pacing the 6 foot room...

Roger W.

#13 Hugh

Hugh

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 1,878 posts
  • LocationNorthern NSW, Australia

Posted 07 August 2011 - 02:58 AM

Logic tends to support David's first possible explanation, that it hasn't come to notice previously (by those here anyway) has to indicate a short run. At a guess I suspect the "odd" just didn't look as good as "common".

Regards
Hugh
Hugh Cordingley

#14 Teej47

Teej47

    journeyman

  • Members
  • 527 posts
  • LocationSpokane, WA

Posted 10 August 2011 - 04:15 PM

Hi Tim,

You're lobbing me the softball for a classic David Pen Semantics Rant. ;)

-d


Glad to help.
:)

I have been known to pitch an actual softball or two... The object isn't actually to throw a strike, but to put the ball in play. It's far more interesting with a couple runners on base, right?

Tim
The only sense that's common is nonsense...

#15 MacKozinsky

MacKozinsky

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 56 posts
  • LocationPoland, Warsaw

Posted 11 May 2014 - 01:59 PM

 

Did the divider on FT nibs evolve? Is the artwork wrong? We need to examine now a bunch of Feathertouch nbis. I have many, but cannot address tonight.

 

Any chance said examination occured? Adverts/Catalog artworks showing straight dividing line (often being actually somewhat curvy, to show arched shape of the nib I guess) and vent hole mutual position are not consistent, sometimes even on the same page (vide 1938 catalog, p. 7, Admiral's vs. Milady's nib). But so far, I never seen the dividing line not even touching the heart. Same for the real nibs. But my experience is limited here.

 

Your nib looks like someone took the mono-tone LifeTime nib and tried to make it two-tone but used the tools for a slightly smaller FT nib.

 

Regards,

Maciek


The fundamental substance is air. The soul is air; fire is rarefied air; when condensed, air becomes first water, then if further condensed, earth, and finally stone...


#16 Lordrdx666

Lordrdx666

    greenhorn

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts

Posted 09 June 2014 - 04:18 AM

I came across this post right now and I've seen a similar sheaffer but in black color with the same type of nib at my pen dealer in New Delhi. Since my knowledge of sheaffer balance pens ain't upto the Level, so I never considered it carefully...

Now I'm wondering was that pen a prototype or an early run model if this one is ? Any ideas ?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users