68 replies to this topic

[brando090]

To paraphrase a drunk Reese Witherspoon, this kid is BEYOND.

[david i]

Well, need/want, both are debatable.

Any idea on value for that pen?

Which is why I have pointed out that you do not have a need in that regard.

regards

david

[Procyon]

Well, need/want, both are debatable.

Any idea on value for that pen?

Which is why I have pointed out that you do not have a need in that regard.

regards

david

touche'

[brando090]

Well, need/want, both are debatable.

Any idea on value for that pen?

Which is why I have pointed out that you do not have a need in that regard.

regards

david

Correct,

I was just curious. Given the value of the recent tapered snake Waterman at the Swann auction of $1500, is the pen worth more given its scarcity?

Edited by brando090, 15 May 2013 - 05:43 AM.

[david i]

SNIP

... because 1 in the hundreds column doesn't mean anything. ... SNIP

Although...

If ya go back to the 1890's, that proves not to be entirely true.

Beware the obscure...

Too bad this thread had to have such dysfunctional writing at its heart. A chat about the Waterman obscurata (sic!) has merit.

regards

david

[brando090]

SNIP

... because 1 in the hundreds column doesn't mean anything. ... SNIP

Although...

If ya go back to the 1890's, that proves not to be entirely true.

Beware the obscure...

Too bad this thread had to have such dysfunctional writing at its heart. A chat about the Waterman obscurata (sic!) has merit.

regards

david

I also hate it. I guess it could be said that I did it to myself.

[Procyon]

SNIP

... because 1 in the hundreds column doesn't mean anything. ... SNIP

Although...

If ya go back to the 1890's, that proves not to be entirely true.

Beware the obscure...

Too bad this thread had to have such dysfunctional writing at its heart. A chat about the Waterman obscurata (sic!) has merit.

regards

david

This is true, but the original 222 in question actually did adhere to the numbering system, and that was apparently at just the time Waterman adopted it - if the estimated date for the pen was correct. So I thought it was fairly safe to assume we were talking about the numbering system that held fairly steady until the late 1920's.

[FarmBoy]

Having looked at the vintage pens reference, can you determine if there is a Waterman pen identified with the codes 111 and 333? If such pens exist provide the decoded descriptions; if such codes are not plausible, state why.


Farmboy

The 333 was a guess, a really bad guess now seeing why the numbering system was posted :/ The 111, I suppose would be a 212 with a silver barrel overlay, eyedropper, and number 2 nib.

I am by no means an expert in anything Waterman and in particular early Waterman, but here goes my reading of the reference material.

333. This would not exist since x3x has no meaning though xx3 would indicate a solid gold overlay pen.

111. This would indicate a 1 sized pump filler, from the reference materials the designation would be 111P or 11P. I am unaware of a 1 sized pump filler or a 1 size pen in general.

I would like to hear from any of the Waterman collectors qualified to grade the quiz. It is ok if I do not receive a passing grade.

T

Sorry, you get an F.

I am not looking at reference material, but I know the numbering system. 111 doesn't really exist because 1 in the hundreds column doesn't mean anything. A 1 in the tens column actually means a cone cap, but came to essentially mean an eyedrop filler, because at first all of them were eyedrop fillers. The last number is always the nib size - a 1 nib is fairly rare but they do exist.

Does a 333 exist? Well, a 3 in the hundreds spot means a gold covered barrel - not gold filled - that would be a 03xx. However, a 3 in the tens column doesn't mean anything. Again, a 3 in the units column is the nib size, and while a #3 nib is hard to find, they do exist.

So basically, a 111 and a 333 don't really fit Waterman's numbering system.

I was hoping to have at least passed...good thing I do not seek early Waterman pens!
I do now see I wrote xx3 instead of 3xx for gold overlay. One really should proofread before posting.

Edited by FarmBoy, 15 May 2013 - 05:57 AM.

[Procyon]

I was hoping to have at least passed...good thing I do not seek early Waterman pens!

Well, I was always a tough grader! If you had shown the equations leading to your conclusion, then perhaps I could have given you partial credit.

Of course, I admit I am used to grading physics papers.

[david i]

This is true, but the original 222 in question actually did adhere to the numbering system, and that was apparently at just the time Waterman adopted it - if the estimated date for the pen was correct. So I thought it was fairly safe to assume we were talking about the numbering system that held fairly steady until the late 1920's.

Hi Allan,

Same early numbering system, as it evolved serially.

My recollection is that the "1" in 100's spot referenced fancy shaped rubber on taper cap pens. If a #4 nib taper cap was a code 24, but the barrel had, say, a cable-twist shape, the pen became a 124. I probably have an ad somewhere. Never owned one of the pens.

regards

david

[PatMorgan]

To paraphrase a drunk Reese Witherspoon, this kid is BEYOND.

It is not humorous Brandon, it is sad.

[Procyon]

This is true, but the original 222 in question actually did adhere to the numbering system, and that was apparently at just the time Waterman adopted it - if the estimated date for the pen was correct. So I thought it was fairly safe to assume we were talking about the numbering system that held fairly steady until the late 1920's.

Hi Allan,

Same early numbering system, as it evolved serially.

My recollection is that the "1" in 100's spot referenced fancy shaped rubber on taper cap pens. If a #4 nib taper cap was a code 24, but the barrel had, say, a cable-twist shape, the pen became a 124. I probably have an ad somewhere. Never owned one.

regards

david

Ha! I am sure you have got me there, David! Waterman's numbering system always seems to be logical, until you come across some exception! Because Waterman made a point of just using numbers to describe their models, I have always thought it important to learn their system. However, I am always running into something that doesn't fit - though it's usually at the beginning or the end of the use of their numbering system.

Although other pen companies used numbers as well they also usually gave the pens names so the public could remember them. Of course, Syd seems to want everyone to use numbers to designate Wahl-Eversharps, but I have resisted that so far.

Edited by Procyon, 15 May 2013 - 06:08 AM.

[FarmBoy]

I was hoping to have at least passed...good thing I do not seek early Waterman pens!

Well, I was always a tough grader! If you had shown the equations leading to your conclusion, then perhaps I could have given you partial credit.

Of course, I admit I am used to grading physics papers.

No problem, I graded chemistry exams.

I was referencing the information in the early numbering system as indicated by David N.

pump-filler = 1 in tens place or in both tens and hundreds place, P suffix

The xx3 vs 3xx is still enough to fail one on a two question exam.

[Procyon]

I was hoping to have at least passed...good thing I do not seek early Waterman pens!

Well, I was always a tough grader! If you had shown the equations leading to your conclusion, then perhaps I could have given you partial credit.

Of course, I admit I am used to grading physics papers.

No problem, I graded chemistry exams.

I was referencing the information in the early numbering system as indicated by David N.

pump-filler = 1 in tens place or in both tens and hundreds place, P suffix

The xx3 vs 3xx is still enough to fail one on a two question exam.

This pen seemed to be using the numbering system adopted in about 1898 and which was used up until about 1930, and in that system a pump filler had an 8 in the tens place. But I admit it is right on the leading edge of that time period. However, the 222 does fit into it.

[PatMorgan]

Not trying to sound stubborn, nieve, or ignorant, but I think I have pretty good English given my age. I do need to work on some things, learning more complex words (you guys help me out on that), making sure my sentences make grammatical sense, and making sure I don't confuse "their" with "there" which I believe is a common problem. I will work on the last one especially, as it seems to be the biggest problem.

Just to put it out there, I did score in the 99th percentile on the essay writing portion of the ACT.

Regarding the recession of 2009, I understand the devastation that many went through. Some of the biggest banks went into bankruptcy, car company's which America was once dependent on were hit hard and some filed for Chapter 11, and many homeowners and small businesses had to close just to put food on the table.

Regarding the last comment, the answer is easily no. And you read my life pretty good I must say

Brandon,

Instead of spending time collecting pens and learning about pens it would be better to take that time and improve your skills. If you do so, it will help more financially in the long run than owning silver overlays.

As far as the 99th percentile on the essay writing portion of the ACT, I find it difficult to believe.

[BrianMcQueen]

Not trying to sound stubborn, nieve, or ignorant, but I think I have pretty good English given my age. I do need to work on some things, learning more complex words (you guys help me out on that), making sure my sentences make grammatical sense, and making sure I don't confuse "their" with "there" which I believe is a common problem. I will work on the last one especially, as it seems to be the biggest problem.

Just to put it out there, I did score in the 99th percentile on the essay writing portion of the ACT.

Regarding the recession of 2009, I understand the devastation that many went through. Some of the biggest banks went into bankruptcy, car company's which America was once dependent on were hit hard and some filed for Chapter 11, and many homeowners and small businesses had to close just to put food on the table.

Regarding the last comment, the answer is easily no. And you read my life pretty good I must say

Seems like you also need to learn how to spell "naive" (not nieve), learn when to use "good" and "well" and learn how to pluralize the word "company" (hint, it's "companies" not "company's")

You most certainly do not have good English given your age. My 17 year old sister would laugh at your abysmal English. You don't need to learn more complex words. You need to learn how to use the ones you already know. Exercising sesquipedalian loquaciousness often contributes to confusion, and will look downright silly if used with otherwise poor grammar. Even worse is when you use a big word incorrectly. Read the following sentences and let me know which sounds better.

1. I trusted there erudition rather then execute independent research. If only I had preceding cognizance that they're information was incongruous, I could have done pretty good.

2. I took their word for it instead of researching the subject myself. If only I had known that they gave me bad advice, I could have done well.

Bonus points if you can point out the grammatical mistakes in the first pair of sentences.

Edited by BrianMcQueen, 15 May 2013 - 06:03 PM.

[brando090]

Not trying to sound stubborn, nieve, or ignorant, but I think I have pretty good English given my age. I do need to work on some things, learning more complex words (you guys help me out on that), making sure my sentences make grammatical sense, and making sure I don't confuse "their" with "there" which I believe is a common problem. I will work on the last one especially, as it seems to be the biggest problem.

Just to put it out there, I did score in the 99th percentile on the essay writing portion of the ACT.

Regarding the recession of 2009, I understand the devastation that many went through. Some of the biggest banks went into bankruptcy, car company's which America was once dependent on were hit hard and some filed for Chapter 11, and many homeowners and small businesses had to close just to put food on the table.

Regarding the last comment, the answer is easily no. And you read my life pretty good I must say

Seems like you also need to learn how to spell "naive" (not nieve), learn when to use "good" and "well" and learn how to pluralize the word "company" (hint, it's "companies" not "company's")

You most certainly do not have good English given your age. My 17 year old sister would laugh at your abysmal English. You don't need to learn more complex words. You need to learn how to use the ones you already know. Exercising sesquipedalian loquaciousness often contributes to confusion, and will look downright silly if used with otherwise poor grammar. Even worse is when you use a big word incorrectly. Read the following sentences and let me know which sounds better.

1. I trusted there erudition rather then execute independent research. If only I had preceding cognizance that they're information was incongruous, I could have done pretty good.

2. I took their word for it instead of researching the subject myself. If only I had known that they gave me bad advice, I could have done well.

Bonus points if you can point out the grammatical mistakes in the first pair of sentences.

1. Really bad, too many big words, don't even understand the sentence.

2. Sounds best.

[sloegin]

No.

Are you aware of how you personally learn things? Tell us, because everything seems to be beyond your grasp and people are trying to help.

[BrianMcQueen]

No.

Are you aware of how you personally learn things? Tell us, because everything seems to be beyond your grasp and people are trying to help.

Is this "No" in response to his answer to my English question, or is it in response to his original post about the numbering system?

[sloegin]

No.

Are you aware of how you personally learn things? Tell us, because everything seems to be beyond your grasp and people are trying to help.

Is this "No" in response to his answer to my English question, or is it in response to his original post about the numbering system?

Sorry for the confusion, it was in response to his answer to your English question. The multiquotes become tedious in my opinion, but understand they help with continuity; so it was a personal choice to omit them in my previous post.