66 replies to this topic

[J Appleseed]

Regarding your presentation, I have only one caveat: the Webster in the image above is not, per se, a rebadged Challenger.

The Good Service shown appears to be a rebadged Parker Parkette Deluxe, but the Webster (assuming button filler; i have the same ad will post in larger form if have quiet minute) shows a side clip (presumably tabs, maybe a "Z") not the washer clip of the a Challenger. The top of the cap in the image above looks to be a fused black end not a threaded removable part. Basically, the cap looks to be Parkette (non Deluxe, 1935-6-ish) derived. Here is a Parker Parkette superimposed on your ad

[...]

That said, some of the earlier Diamond Medal pens show clear derivation from Challenger family, albeit with some tweaks on plastic used. If this one has button filler (again, ad too small, though I have my larger copy to post later), then it is a style mix-- as the Parkette shown, though it resembles the Webster, is lever filler-- a theme that will be driven home solidly regarding your fluted pen shown earlier.

And, there are Websters derived from Challenger-like pens of course, though they perhaps can be more specifically attributed to derivation from... Parker Televisor ( a quite Challenger-like pen itself) rather than from Challenger, proper. More on that a bit later too.


regards

David

I would agree - I was using Challanger incorrectly. The Websters shown in that ad are button-fillers, so really they represent a mix of Parkette and other depression-era styles.

Your image of the DM's with top clip insertion (which to me vaguely evoked Rider, but now I'm not so sure), in Sears catalogues at least puts to rest my concern I'd seen that ad elsewhere (I suppose I still might have...).

The Diamond Medal Comrade pens, with the funky top-clip insertion, otherwise have classic features of the presumptive National/Barrett source pens - particularly the lever box. While I am not convinced that we know these were produced by National (maybe Fulz had some paper that showed it, but I have not seen it), I think they clearly were by the same manufacturer as the rest of the DM pens at the time.

Impressive, though perhaps not surprising, that Sears made catalogue variants for what they perceived to be different markets.

It may have been motivated as much by supply-chain issues and factors with stocking the different warehouses as it was by targetting regional markets. I am not sure. One of my projects for some point in the future is to dig into more of the extensive history of the Sears company and how it operated. One of the challenges for all of us in researching pen history is that pens were not produced in a vacuum (not even vac-fils). They were part of a number of trends in industrial, business, and legal development. Understanding the industrial background of the time, particularly in regards to things like transportation and distribution networks, sales and marketing strategies, and cultural trends, is crucial in putting a lot of pen developments in context (or in other words, I really need to brush up on my industrial history.)

John

[Teej47]

My hypothesis for pens of this sort are that they represent rerebadged, re-rebadged, derebadged, de-re-badged, etc...

De-ranged, perhaps?

Tim
(Sorry... I just can't help it)

[david i]

I would actually not discount the notion that some of these odd Parkers were meant to be prototypes. Tony Fisher's site has some pictures of Silver and Green Web vacumatics, that have styling more like the Golden Web vacs (two band, etc.). Since Parker did produce the Golden Web as a Parker, it is not too hard to conceive that they would have made prototypes in all three colors, but decided to go the more conservative route and only produce one color, leaving the others as patterns for their rebadged pens.

While lunchtime projects and using old stock are certainly possibilities, I think it just as likely that Parker did up some prototypes of new rod-stock before they decided which patterns to use for Parker, and which to offer to Sears or other companies.

I keep open mind. Tony's pens largely are of the sort shown above, two band green/silver mosaics with DM like arrangement of blind cap, top piece etc, but with double band (triple in one case iirc). They are not just Junior Vacs in anomalous colors, they look like the DM's.

Too, the so-called de-re-badged Parkers, done in the cases under discussion in colors that were released-- indeed catalogued-- as DM's (eg the pinstripe just shown, the striped pen like Chris's in green, and a brown striped not yet shown but in my collection) all feature BLADE clips which date them to late in the game, in some cases to after the appearances of the DM versions in Sears catalogues. That the de-re-badged pen show trim that appeared later than the DM versions appeared, to me argues they did not precede the DM's.

Recognizing that "prototype" is bit malleable and indeed perhaps ill defined, I admit I lean away from "prototypes" that show all the traitsof pens already released, save for later style trim (blade clip appeared, again, long after DM had started releasing Vac-Fil) and different imprints. Had these pens appeared before any of the DM's, or with "early" features...

I guess I lean toward... "leftovers" and "quirks" rather than prototypes.

Still, I cannot be too strident in such views, as hard evidence is not available.

I do note that there are no Diamond Medals in standard Parker top-line colors. There are colors unique to the DM line, and some overlap with the Jr. and Challanger/Televisor/Moderne patterns. Parker clearly did not want to devalue the uniquness of the top-line patterns, but seems to have been willing to have some overlap with the lower line.

Also, I would be really interested in comparing that odd striped vac to some Truepoint and Eagle stock I have seen.

John

It makes sense that Parker would preserve its unique lined pattern for its premier pens.


I have no qualms setting up a comparison of pens. Just meet me at a pen show or send couple pens and I'll shoot side by side.

I have more pens of the Sears-Parker sort to offer up, as this shifts directions a bit from the de-re-badged Parkers and from the DM Vac-Fil proper. If i survive the month+ of straight nights, I'll even shoot the pens I've not yet imaged.

My hope is to put all this into a PENnant series or PWI. Satisfies the self-aggrandizement urge so much better than just having things appear online

The info appearing here is pretty neat. A fun discussion.

-d

[George]

David,

Do you, or anyone know if there are any DM's and such in the Parker Archives? That would be something.

The colors and patterns are a very difficult topic to understand (at least to me) regarding the plastics in the pen world at the time. Or is it that the color spectrum for these pens are huge, and isolating every color, both Parker and other brands, would be daunting and impossible? hmmmm....

Regards,
George

[david i]

John's Sears catalogue pages have been quite helpful.

We have covered most (not yet all) of the material (of which I'm aware) regarding the DIamond Medal Vac-fil, including some ad images, some pen images, and some discussion of their basic structure as re-badged Parker pens, deriving filling mechanism from Parker Vacumatic but styling cues from more than one Parker series.

We have seen the so-called de-re-badged Parkers, which i assert represent rodstock and core contour "meant" to be Diamond Medal Vac-Fill pens but trimmed as Parkers proper, thus not fitting the appearance of any conventional Parker. Clearly other hypotheses can be (and have been) posited to explain those anomalous pens.

Before wrapping up (of course the subject can be unwrapped any time if any further info or opinion is posted) on the Diamond Medal Vac-Fil and on related Parkers, proper, there are a few more ads and pens to image. Perhaps then I can provide a summary of known DM Vac-Fil variants, per George's request, and can touch upon which pens might have been de-re-badged and thus made it back to Parker trim. And, then we can move into the arenas of the NON Vac-Fil DM's and of other non-DM Sears pens made by Parker (Webster and Good Service)

We've seen now the "PINSTRIPE", "SYMMETRIC STRIPE" and MOSAIC pattern DM Vac-Fil and de-re-badged Parkers. BTW- if any one has better descriptive name for Chris's green striped pattern, do chime in. The last plastic style of which I'm aware for the DM Vac-Fill is the earliest to appear in catalogue, the "PLAQUE-on-BLACK" (or Plaque-on-Clear) pens.

Here is an ad:

I... like this pattern.

Perhaps, like the Emerald and Silver Mosaic pens, I view this as a missed opportunity for Parker. Such nice Vacumatics they would have made. It's a shame the plastic shown in this ad was squandered on a second tier non-Vacumatic Parker. Ok OK... I'm fond of that second tier pen, so maybe the plastic was not "squandered".

What pen you ask?

Well, notice the plastic pattern in the admittedly limited ad image, above.

It shows chunks of pearlescent color on black background for cap, on CLEAR background for barrel. No, it is not the mottled swirl of the Parker Vacumatic Junior.

Right! It's NOT the plastic from the mottled Parker Vacumatic Junior

Rather, the DIamond Medal Vac-fil, in its first catalogued color scheme uses a plastic with more discretely edged pearlescent panels surrounded by clear or black plastic. The plastic reflects that of the Parker Deluxe Challenger. I call the pattern Plaque-on-Black. But, Parker never gave us Plaque-on-Black in the Vacumatic line. As the Deluxe Challenger is an opaque-barrel pen, both top and bottom are plaque-on-black, made of the same plastic.

The re-badged Parker, the DIamond Medal Vac-Fil, takes its plastic from Deluxe Challenger.

Plaque-on-Black. Lovely plastic.

But, the DIamond Medal form upped the ante. As the pen was functionally a Vacumatic, the barrel "had" to have transparency to see the ink level. That was the whole point, right?

This shot does not show the clarity perfectly, though I believe the pen has decent clarity. Needs the barrel flushed. This is a Diamond Medal Vac-Fil. The cap shows typical Plaque-on-Black celluloid as seen in the Parker Deluxe Challenger. The barrel though is Plaque-on-Clear. Again, this would have been nice to see in Vacumatic trim. I have never seen a de-re-badged Parker, proper, in this plastic. That proves nothing in this rarified group, but does raise the possibility again that the de-re-badged Parkers (Parkers that look like they were meant to be released as Diamond Medal, but which... weren't) represent late product or leftovers, since they turn up in plastics closer to the release of Parker's late 1937 blade-style Clip. Of course, this is speculative.

Here is close-in of the involved Sears Diamond Medal ad

regards

David

[david i]

De-ranged, perhaps?

Tim
(Sorry... I just can't help it)

Indubitably.

-d

[J Appleseed]

David,

Do you, or anyone know if there are any DM's and such in the Parker Archives? That would be something.

The colors and patterns are a very difficult topic to understand (at least to me) regarding the plastics in the pen world at the time. Or is it that the color spectrum for these pens are huge, and isolating every color, both Parker and other brands, would be daunting and impossible? hmmmm....

Regards,
George

It would be a huge, but fruitful, undertaking to map out all of the plastic patterns used at the time. We know that most pen companies bought celluloid stock from major chemical companies like DuPont. Larger companies appear to have obtained exclusive patterns for many of thier pens - think the Sheaffer or Parker striped patterns - but other patterns show up across multiple brands and manufacturers, and still other patterns show up in slightly different forms from differen manufacturer. Doing a photo-study of a few thousand pens to try to document which companies likely got rod-stock from the same source, and which companies used copy-cat patterns would be an interesting and valuable project.

John

[david i]

PER GEORGE

David,

Do you, or anyone know if there are any DM's and such in the Parker Archives? That would be something.

The colors and patterns are a very difficult topic to understand (at least to me) regarding the plastics in the pen world at the time. Or is it that the color spectrum for these pens are huge, and isolating every color, both Parker and other brands, would be daunting and impossible? hmmmm....

Regards,
George

It would be a huge, but fruitful, undertaking to map out all of the plastic patterns used at the time. We know that most pen companies bought celluloid stock from major chemical companies like DuPont. Larger companies appear to have obtained exclusive patterns for many of thier pens - think the Sheaffer or Parker striped patterns - but other patterns show up across multiple brands and manufacturers, and still other patterns show up in slightly different forms from differen manufacturer. Doing a photo-study of a few thousand pens to try to document which companies likely got rod-stock from the same source, and which companies used copy-cat patterns would be an interesting and valuable project.

John

Agreed. Cataloguing all plastics used amongst all pen makers seems... hopeless. That said, Catalogue data, backed by observation of real pens gives us a very good sense of what is out there for the Parkers rebadged as Diamond Medal, either as Vac-Fil or other models. We are lucky Parker left us so much data, even via the Sears catalogues.


Will post summary of the DM color soon.


-david

[david i]

Above, I showed the final plastic pattern found for the rebadged-Parker pens, the Diamond Medal Vac-Fil.

Based on the Parker Deluxe Challenger "Plaque-on-Black" plastic, the DM version offered clear barreled versions, something very appealing.

Here again it the Royal Challenger, with its well known plastic

I have possession of one pen of this sort, in standard size in Silver Pearl color. I have photographed a Burgundy Pearl- Richard's pen iirc- but cannot seem to find the image. In the photo a couple posts above, the clarity of the barrel was not well demonstrated. I shot couple more images to better illustrate the barrel clarity. Again, when this pattern appears in Parker pens, proper, it is found only with all-opaque plastic.

To follow: the last of the De-Re-Badged Parkers (deranged Parkers?) , Parkers "meant" to be released as DM's, but ultimately released in Parker trim.


regards

David

[david i]

The thread started with Chris's posting of a green striped " Parker Vacumatic" that seems less a catalogued Parker than it does a pen meant to have been released (rebadged) as a Diamond Medal Vac-Fil for Sears. I've claimed these are re-re-badged (perhaps de-re-badged) pens, with Parker trim slapped on them instead of the "originally intended" Diamond Medal metal. That some have two cap-bands instead of the three cap-bands found on the DM pens is the strongest argument that these were not just pens released as DM's but which subsequently had the clip and nib swapped for Parker stock. Of course some also seem to have the three cap-bands of the DM, proper, so... go figure. All of them lack any barrel imprint (while the DM pens are stamped and while most Parkers are stamped).

Chris's de-re-badged Parker is done in continuous green stripes that are found for DM pens. A few posts back I showed a green "Pinstripe" pen-- a de-re-badged Parker-- that also is plastic found for DM. Indeed, all that have turned up for online chat are done in plastic found catalogued for DM.

Here is a Sears catalogue page showing the pinstripe Diamond Medal Vac-Fil pens. Superimposed is the de-re-badged Parker I own, done in the same Emerald 'pinstripe" plastic

I add now to the two de-re-badged Parkers so far shown in this discussion, a pencil in brown "Pinstripe". I have yet to see a Silver Pearl in either DM form or in de-re-badged Parker trim

The pen above turned up in a junk box at a pen show (it is somewhat worn after all ) with a a label "Parker Thrift Pencil" attached.

The brown pencil with the green pen:

In next post, I will show the final de-re-badged Parker (Parker-for-Diamond-Medal-but-released-as-Parker) pen/image in my possession. That will be all I have for the Diamond Medal Vac-Fil discussion, at least for now. Other info of course is invited. Next, I'll move into the other Sears pens made by Parker: Diamond Medal (non Vac-Fil), Webster, and Good Service, along with the for-Woolworth pen, Safford Fifth Ave. Hmmm, maybe those should start a new thread.

regards

David

[csikora]

This is all very fascinating, and I would like to thank David for facilitating a great discussion of the Diamond Medal/Sears/Parker interactions.
I like the look of the pin-striped de-rebadged Parkers David has, and I find it itneresting how these are found in the wild and quite randomly. I found my matching pair on two separate occasions on eBay from two separate sellers in two separate states.
Chris

[david i]

This is all very fascinating, and I would like to thank David for facilitating a great discussion of the Diamond Medal/Sears/Parker interactions.
I like the look of the pin-striped de-rebadged Parkers David has, and I find it itneresting how these are found in the wild and quite randomly. I found my matching pair on two separate occasions on eBay from two separate sellers in two separate states.
Chris

Yeah, ebay still coughs up some good ones.

Here is final pen/image from my current store of info. Only pen i've ever seen in this color either as Diamond Medal (the rebadged Parker) or as a Parker, proper (de-re-badged Parker, "meant" to be a DM). Like yours but in one of the other two color cited, in this case brown. Bought this even with the chip in the cap-lip (hidden on other side of pen).

Happy to see more info, but I now have no more. After this, I can address other Sears (and Woolworth) re-badged Parkers, though perhaps should dive into that in another thread. This one already is... long

regards

David

[Jason]

Hi all-
Sorry for the aside, but all the discussion of different celluloid patterns got me thinking- Do you think that the use of vertical banded patterns on lower level pens by Parker is an attempt to link this pattern (Obviously associated with Sheaffer's) with the lower level of the market?

Thanks, Jason

[David Nishimura]

I talked to David Shepherd about whether there were any records of the Parker-Sears connection in the Parker archives.  He told me that he had not been able to find anything useful there.  For what it's worth, the pictures of Diamond Medal Vacs in his Vacumatic book were all from my collection; I also sent him a list of all the nib date codes that I had access to.

[david i]

Hi all-
Sorry for the aside, but all the discussion of different celluloid patterns got me thinking- Do you think that the use of vertical banded patterns on lower level pens by Parker is an attempt to link this pattern (Obviously associated with Sheaffer's) with the lower level of the market?

Thanks, Jason

An excellent question, one that touches upon a general theme: the "borrowing" of names and styling cues amongst companies in order perhaps to ride the coattails of a popular item, or (were they that conniving?) using a "high end feature" from the competition in their low-end pens to diminish the value of that high-end feature for the primary user of it. Obviously, many of the 2nd tier pen makers often lifted the basic look of the big guys, but we'll ignore simple wannabee companies.

Similar examples that crop up time to time:

• Did Sheaffer issue sub-brand "Vacuum" and "Vacuum-Fil" pens to "catch the wave" of the Parker Vacuum-Filler/Vacumatic, or instead to weaken the impact of that great pen by using the name (even sometimes on lever-filling pens) on its second tier line? Or both?
• Why did Parker- shortly after Sheaffer introduced two-tone nibs (with serial numbers of course)- introduce a nearly identical nib, then cease to use it in short order?
• Did Sheaffer's striped (longitudinally) plastics intro'd in 1936 appear in order to "battle" the latitudinally lined wildly successful Parker Vacumatic?
• Did Parker's Moderne and Premier (so called Thrift pens) use plastics that were high-end for other makers (eg. the Turquoise of the Waterman Patrician) to add cachet to these pens or to diminish the cachet of their competitions'.

Answer(s)?

Possibly

In all fairness, The Diamond Medal (Parker) Vac-Fil had been out already when Sheaffer introduced its striated plastics. On other hand, it is possible (think I have the Sears catalogue page somewhere, but was not in the bunch I've already shot), the striped Diamond Medal plastic was released after the Sheaffer plastic appeared. Indeed, I suppose the same question can be asked of the Parker (proper) Shadow-Wave plastic which debuted in late 1937 in a Junior-line Vacumatic, a year after Sheaffer started with its stripes.

But, it certainly is possible that the marketing teams (such as they were then) for companies shared views of what constituted popular style and dealt with offerings from the plastics manufacturers that evolved over time. In other words... common approach not rip-off attempt.

Parker's "Thrift" pens used Waterman's high end Turquoise plastic, but it was not clear Waterman still was using it for Patrician by the time Parker had access to it... this might just have been a case of "leftovers".

And... so it goes.

Speculation has some value, but I lack any hard info. Not sure how one would get hard info so far past the original issue of the pens.

regards

David

[djohannsen]

We know that most pen companies bought celluloid stock from major chemical companies like DuPont. Larger companies appear to have obtained exclusive patterns for many of thier pens - think the Sheaffer or Parker striped patterns -

I'm not so sure that there was complete exclusivity of the Vacumatic striped rod stock. Some of the Italian pens of the forties and fifties seem to use the same celluloid. I guess I don't know the dating precisley enough to say whether the production of these pens overlapped with vacumatic production or post-dated the Vacumatic, or if exclusivity agreements were only for the US, or if the plastic is just a really close copy.


Dave

[Rka]

Hi,

I was asking to post pictures of my recent find here, so you are welcome and I will be happy to read your opinions on this pen. Here you have a Parker or not Parker odd piston filler:

[John Danza]

Marta, what is the imprint on the barrel. That would be very helpful.

I'm still convinced that this is Parker USA manufacture, but the piston fill is the stumper. The threads on the end of the barrel are consistent with the barrel being threaded for a lockdown or speedline filler, even with what looks like a ridge in the barrel at the bottom of the threads which is the "stop" for the filler.

One other question - does the end of the feed have a hole for a breather tube, making it a Vacumatic feed?

[david i]

Marta, what is the imprint on the barrel. That would be very helpful.

I'm still convinced that this is Parker USA manufacture, but the piston fill is the stumper. The threads on the end of the barrel are consistent with the barrel being threaded for a lockdown or speedline filler, even with what looks like a ridge in the barrel at the bottom of the threads which is the "stop" for the filler.

One other question - does the end of the feed have a hole for a breather tube, making it a Vacumatic feed?

Hi John,

None of the Parkers of this ilk have barrel imprint... just to keep things interesting, no doubt

-d

[Rka]

No imprints at all ... as to the feed - also no whole for breathing tube ... another two pics, the 'see-through' barrel view and section ... I will not be able to check out my Vac's filler mechanism today but will do it tomorrow and tell you if I find some matching (have P51, standard and junior).