44 replies to this topic

[Kirchh]

Too, we might need to tweak your three term schema to be specific:

• post-war celluloid
• post-war pre-touchdown injection-molded plastic
• post-war (pre-TM) Touchdown

For compactness, I would suggest trying "Forticel" instead of "injection-molded plastic". Shorter, and adds a bit of data. Also, I *think* you're naming segments of production, while I was naming varying durations all starting with the first post-war items.

--Daniel

[Kirchh]

Well, if you've never heard of those numbers, then I too would be interested in Gerry's view, so that we can proceed.

However, if you have heard of these codes and simply disagree with Gerry's usage of them, then rather than wait for him to toss out a view with which you've already offered disagreement-- and given that you already made the claim to offer clarity that remains incomplete-- then there appears to be little need to await other postings prior to your completing your claimed clarification.

... like pulling teeth...

d

Rather than try to guess what Gerry was trying to impart, I'll wait for him to speak for himself. But the clarification I offer is merely that they should not be taken as model symbols for the listed pens.

I'll also add that the military-clip Skyboy (and Service Autograph) should be mentioned for completeness.

--Daniel

[J Appleseed]

Too, we might need to tweak your three term schema to be specific:

• post-war celluloid
• post-war pre-touchdown injection-molded plastic
• post-war (pre-TM) Touchdown

(emphasis added).

I am not sure we need such a complicated term for #3. There were no war-era or pre-war Touchdowns, so it is really not necessary to list that (unless we are talking about Korea or some other war than "The" war). Really all we need is Touchdown and TM Touchdown, but some designation of "pre-TM" might be useful for clarity.

John

[david i]

(emphasis added).

I am not sure we need such a complicated term for #3. There were no war-era or pre-war Touchdowns, so it is really not necessary to list that (unless we are talking about Korea or some other war than "The" war). Really all we need is Touchdown and TM Touchdown, but some designation of "pre-TM" might be useful for clarity.

John

Some shades of gray I guess to what one is trying to convey with the terms. I'm ok with dispensing with "post-war" regarding non-TM Touchdown, given that TD, as you note, implicitly is post-War. But, as many collectors (I submit indeed a majority- perhaps overwhelming majority of the general collecting population) do not know when TD gave way to TM-TD, I suspect specifying "pre TM" (which should be implicit, but only if one knows well Sheaffer evolution) still serves key role.

Thus:

• post-war celluloid
• post-war pre-touchdown injection-molded plastic
• (pre-TM) Touchdown

regards

d

[Kirchh]

Some shades of gray I guess to what one is trying to convey with the terms. I'm ok with dispensing with "post-war" regarding non-TM Touchdown, given that TD, as you note, implicitly is post-War. But, as many collectors (I submit indeed a majority- perhaps overwhelming majority of the general collecting population) do not know when TD gave way to TM-TD, that specifying "pre TM" (which should be implicit, but only if one knows well Sheaffer evolution) still serves key role.

Thus:

• post-war celluloid
• post-war pre-touchdown injection-molded plastic
• (pre-TM) Touchdown

regards

d

Are you designating contiguous periods, or increasingly-long periods starting at the end of the war?

--Daniel

[david i]

Rather than try to guess what Gerry was trying to impart, I'll wait for him to speak for himself. But the clarification I offer is merely that they should not be taken as model symbols for the listed pens.

I'll also add that the military-clip Skyboy (and Service Autograph) should be mentioned for completeness.

--Daniel

Sounds then more like disagreement than clarification, as you do not offer what you believe the codes to represent, not that anything is wrong with disagreement, per se.

I'll also add that the military-clip Skyboy (and Service Autograph) should be mentioned for completeness.

Completeness of what?

-d

[Kirchh]

Completeness of what?

-d

The enumeration of military-clipped pens of the period.

--Daniel

[david i]

Some shades of gray I guess to what one is trying to convey with the terms. I'm ok with dispensing with "post-war" regarding non-TM Touchdown, given that TD, as you note, implicitly is post-War. But, as many collectors (I submit indeed a majority- perhaps overwhelming majority of the general collecting population) do not know when TD gave way to TM-TD, that specifying "pre TM" (which should be implicit, but only if one knows well Sheaffer evolution) still serves key role.

Thus:

• post-war celluloid
• post-war pre-touchdown injection-molded plastic
• (pre-TM) Touchdown

regards

d

Are you designating contiguous periods, or increasingly-long periods starting at the end of the war?

--Daniel

Not sure I'm offering either, per se, as I don't have hard discontinuation dates on hand for any of the three styles; too, I vaguely recall discussion that the first category cited started before the formal end of the war, though we tend to call them "post-war".

I am offering what I believe to be three feature sets that appeared in the sequence listed during 1945-1948.

-d

[david i]

The enumeration of military-clipped pens of the period.

--Daniel

I see.

Have we added the military-clipped pens with milled band? Perhaps not mainstream production but...

I've now seen green and brown (slender NWD iirc) and suspect I have black pencil lying about somewhere

-d

[david i]

For compactness, I would suggest trying "Forticel" instead of "injection-molded plastic". Shorter, and adds a bit of data. Also, I *think* you're naming segments of production, while I was naming varying durations all starting with the first post-war items.

--Daniel

Yeah, and then the collectors who are asking how wire pens differ from vacuum-pens will start asking how Forticel differs from injection-plastic. Strange how our pet terms are ok even when they add new jargon to the mix and risk confusion, but others' pet terms... not so much ok

I have no problem introducing new jargon, though there will be effort needed to seeing it become de rigueur.

And yes, I hear you that wire-fill or wire-pen might not have been original jargon (or original when first intro'd, Pens iirc have that title in the 1947 Workbook), but the term is short, easy, unique-to-Sheaffer, differentiating the pen from various other companies' filling systems. I remain open on the point, but do not yet see reason to disfavor it.

d

[Kirchh]

Not sure I'm offering either, per se, as I don't have hard discontinuation dates on hand for any of the three styles; too, I vaguely recall discussion that the first category cited started before the formal end of the war, though we tend to call them "post-war".

I am offering what I believe to be three feature sets that appeared in the sequence listed during 1945-1948.

-d

I was trying to designate (approximately) post-war pre-Snorkel periods of varying extents (so, all starting at the same point around 3/1/45), just to clarify. Tricky, with all the changes of materials/fillers/etc.

- Post-war celluloid period
- Post-war pre-Touchdown period (includes Forticel items)
- Post-war pre-TM Touchdown period (includes first round of Touchdown items as well as lever-fillers made during that period)
- Post-war pre-Snorkel period
- Post-war pre-PFM period (?)

Segment terms could be

- Post-war celluloid period
- Pre-Touchdown Forticel period
- Pre-TM Touchdown period (possibly ambiguous wording -- could be wrongly taken as "pre-TM-Touchdown period", meaning the whole time before TM Touchdowns; maybe use "Touchdown period (pre-TM)")
- TM Touchdown period
- Snorkel period

--Daniel

[Kirchh]

Yeah, and then the collectors who are asking how wire pens differ from vacuum-pens will start asking how Forticel differs from injection-plastic. Strange how our pet terms are ok even when they add new jargon to the mix and risk confusion, but others' pet terms... not so much ok

I have no problem introducing new jargon, though there will be effort needed to seeing it become de rigueur.

And yes, I hear you that wire-fill or wire-pen might not have been original jargon (or original when first intro'd, Pens iirc have that title in the 1947 Workbook), but the term is short, easy, unique-to-Sheaffer, differentiating the pen from various other companies' filling systems. I remain open on the point, but do not yet see reason to disfavor it.

d

The parallel fails. "Forticel" is a term used by Sheaffer at the time of introduction and production to identify and distinguish those items. It adds data -- the actual name of the material, which enriches one's knowledge. It is more specific than "injection-molded plastic", and so it further adds data when it is properly used. The application of "Forticel" produces education and opens research opportunities for those encountering it. It is also, as noted, significantly more compact than "injection-molded plastic". "Wire filler" holds none of those advantages over, say, "vacuum".

I've seen no reference to "wire pen" or "wire fill" in the 1947 Workbook, nor in any other piece of Sheaffer documentation. I'd be interested to see any.

--Daniel

[david i]

I was trying to designate (approximately) post-war pre-Snorkel periods of varying extents (so, all starting at the same point around 3/1/45), just to clarify. Tricky, with all the changes of materials/fillers/etc.

- Post-war celluloid period
- Post-war pre-Touchdown period (includes Forticel items)
- Post-war pre-TM Touchdown period (includes first round of Touchdown items as well as lever-fillers made during that period)
- Post-war pre-Snorkel period
- Post-war pre-PFM period (?)

Segment terms could be

- Post-war celluloid period
- Pre-Touchdown Forticel period
- Pre-TM Touchdown period (possibly ambiguous wording -- could be wrongly taken as "pre-TM-Touchdown period", meaning the whole time before TM Touchdowns; maybe use "Touchdown period (pre-TM)")
- TM Touchdown period
- Snorkel period

--Daniel

Yep. Reflects somewhat Matt's "How many Sentinels?". Even taking pre-TM-TD window, factoring in Sentinel vs Sentinel Deluxe, filler changes, cap changes (including WD), parallel filling types (lever during wire era, lever during TD era), one is left with many... variants.

I vaguely at best follow the intent to your initial category list (before the "segment terms"). perhaps reflecting why I found your prior question ambiguous. You are trying to define global eras post-war encompassing all pens up to some personally chosen cut-off? So, after "- Post-war pre-PFM period (?)" we can have "post-war pre-Targa period"?

Is there some taxonomic purpose to this?

What you call "segment terms" would seem to be the more common approach to categorizing pen eras. I was using, in my three categories, what you then would call segment terms.

-d

[david i]

I've seen no reference to "wire pen" or "wire fill" in the 1947 Workbook, nor in any other piece of Sheaffer documentation. I'd be interested to see any.

--Daniel

Then I might be mistaken. Will review the Workbook next week

d

[matt]

I suspect that the $3.95 Cadet sets do not include the $2.50 pencil (H1), but rather the Utility pencil (E1), which is a flat-topped top-eraser item priced at $1.50. The pencil that matches the Minerva listed at $2.00, but that may still have allowed a set discount down to $3.95, as the per-item pricing matches the pre-war Junior items that went in sets for $3.95. But I do not yet have hard evidence regarding the composition and pricing of these sets.

--Daniel

Daniel,

Then where do my chrome-trim green and carmine 250 bead band pencils belong if NOT w/ a Cadet? Did the Utility pencil come in stripes or just black? Selling a "set" w/ a mismatched pencil, but charging more for a matching pencil smells like bait and switch.

Is the 200 pencil to match the Minerva shorter than the 250/300 pencil? If shorter, then dang!, are there shorter gold trim pencils to match the Diana? What is that pencil's price code? Hope my head doesn't explode.

Matt

[Kirchh]

Kirchh, on 28 September 2010 - 10:09 AM, said:

I suspect that the $3.95 Cadet sets do not include the $2.50 pencil (H1), but rather the Utility pencil (E1), which is a flat-topped top-eraser item priced at $1.50. The pencil that matches the Minerva listed at $2.00, but that may still have allowed a set discount down to $3.95, as the per-item pricing matches the pre-war Junior items that went in sets for $3.95. But I do not yet have hard evidence regarding the composition and pricing of these sets.

Daniel,

Then where do my chrome-trim green and carmine 250 bead band pencils belong if NOT w/ a Cadet? Did the Utility pencil come in stripes or just black? Selling a "set" w/ a mismatched pencil, but charging more for a matching pencil smells like bait and switch.

Is the 200 pencil to match the Minerva shorter than the 250/300 pencil? If shorter, then dang!, are there shorter gold trim pencils to match the Diana? What is that pencil's price code? Hope my head doesn't explode.

Matt

Ah, Grasshopper, the head-exploding factors are like footprints on rice paper. When you understand why, you may leave the temple.

The chrome-trim $2.50 bead-band pencils are indeed mates for the Cadet II pens; they are even called Cadet II pencils. But there is also a Utility pencil that matches -- the Cadet Utility II, and it comes in matching striated colors.

And the Minerva II pencil is indeed a wee thing -- the same size as the more expensive ($2.50) GF-trimmed Diana II pencil, but with chrome trim instead. What, you didn't know about the Diana II pencil??

--Daniel
P.S. Did I mention the Sovereign/Admiral/Craftsman Utility II pencil? Maybe I shouldn't...

[matt]

Interested in citations for the "Commander" military-clipped pen at a $3.50 price point. Also, to clarify for those who are not so familiar with Sheaffer designations: the numbers given above (e.g. "73") are not model symbols for the pens listed.

--Daniel

I'm unfamiliar w/ the Commander, but, to clarify, the rest of Gerry's message is just shorthand to cover both filler types, lever and vac-fil:

3H/3WH = 350 Commandant, 5H/5WH = 500 Defender, 73H/73WH = 875 Vigilant, 74H/74WH = 1000 Valiant

Side note: all 3 Life ads for Skyboy, 1940-41, balance and military clip, show lever fill only, but this model is missing from the PenSac Co catalog; oh well, we may never know everything....

[matt]

For compactness, I would suggest trying "Forticel" instead of "injection-molded plastic". Shorter, and adds a bit of data. Also, I *think* you're naming segments of production, while I was naming varying durations all starting with the first post-war items.

--Daniel

After celluloid, Sheaffer's are typically injection molded plastics, so "injection molded plastic" works as generic term for a huge range of pen models and types of plastics.

I think polystyrene when I see the words "injection molded plastic", but Forticel is cellulose proprionate (mis-spelled in the attached article), made by Celanese Corporation only until 1952, when it switched to cellulose acetate.

http://www.dhub.org/object/242440

So if we adopt Forticel to more accurately describe the late vac-fil, fat Touchdown, etc. pens, then don't we have to determine what kind of plastic was used for the TM Touchdown, Snorkel, Skripsert, etc.? "Injection molded plastic" describes the whole gamut and will satisfy everyone who doesn't want to dig any deeper. Hard rubber gave way to celluloid, which gave way to injection molded plastic...

[Kirchh]

Kirchh, on 28 September 2010 - 10:24 AM, said:

For compactness, I would suggest trying "Forticel" instead of "injection-molded plastic". Shorter, and adds a bit of data. Also, I *think* you're naming segments of production, while I was naming varying durations all starting with the first post-war items.

--Daniel

After celluloid, Sheaffer's are typically injection molded plastics, so "injection molded plastic" works as generic term for a huge range of pen models and types of plastics.

I think polystyrene when I see the words "injection molded plastic", but Forticel is cellulose proprionate (mis-spelled in the attached article), made by Celanese Corporation only until 1952, when it switched to cellulose acetate.

http://www.dhub.org/object/242440

So if we adopt Forticel to more accurately describe the late vac-fil, fat Touchdown, etc. pens, then don't we have to determine what kind of plastic was used for the TM Touchdown, Snorkel, Skripsert, etc.? "Injection molded plastic" describes the whole gamut and will satisfy everyone who doesn't want to dig any deeper. Hard rubber gave way to celluloid, which gave way to injection molded plastic...

Exactly -- Forticel is more specific to the period under discussion. That's one of the reasons I favor it when labeling that period.

Note that the spelling is cellulose propionate, not proprionate.

The supplied page's claim that Forticel production ceased in 1952 is highly suspect, considering that, for example, Celanese began commercial Forticel production at its Belvidere, NJ plant in 1955 per an October 13, 1955 mention in the New York Times, and there are other later references to the material stating or implying production well beyond 1952.

--Daniel

[matt]

Ah, Grasshopper, the head-exploding factors are like footprints on rice paper. When you understand why, you may leave the temple.

The chrome-trim $2.50 bead-band pencils are indeed mates for the Cadet II pens; they are even called Cadet II pencils. But there is also a Utility pencil that matches -- the Cadet Utility II, and it comes in matching striated colors.

And the Minerva II pencil is indeed a wee thing -- the same size as the more expensive ($2.50) GF-trimmed Diana II pencil, but with chrome trim instead. What, you didn't know about the Diana II pencil??

--Daniel
P.S. Did I mention the Sovereign/Admiral/Craftsman Utility II pencil? Maybe I shouldn't...

Daniel,

Is the exposed-eraser pencil in the upper right of this ad a Utility (I or II?) pencil? And a Utility II to match the Socereign/Admiral/Craftsman would thus have gold trim instead of chrome? And they came in stripes, not just black? Oh, do I need one of each!

http://books.google...... 1945&f=false

As to the Diana II pencil, I've yet to even see a Diana, Minerva, or Milady, let alone their shorter pencils.