PDA

View Full Version : Conway Stewart Churchill Pressure bar cutting into new sacs help needed.



Paul-H
February 22nd, 2014, 03:16 AM
Hi all

I need some help PLEASE

I have just picked up a near mint condition Conway Stewart Churchill number 5xx of 1000 so just over halfway through the production run.

I quickly found the pen had an issue with its filling system as it would only take a tiny amount of ink, and sure enough when I took it apart to investigate I found the the ink sac was badly deformed just as it joined the nipple. It looks to me like its a design fault as the lever bends the top section of the pressure bar into the barrel so when operated the pressure bar only depresses the very top section of the sac and hence the damage to the neck of the sac.

I understand that Richard Binder used to offer a mod to this pen to fix the obvious design flaw but as he is no longer doing pen repairs, anyone know what his mod was.

Thanks for any help with this

Paul

Paul-H
February 22nd, 2014, 03:25 AM
This is a quick sketch to show what the issue is

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l312/Paul-80/Pens/ConwatStewartFiller_zpsc0be2b68.jpg (http://s99.photobucket.com/user/Paul-80/media/Pens/ConwatStewartFiller_zpsc0be2b68.jpg.html)

Mags
February 23rd, 2014, 04:36 PM
While I can't help on the fix or repair. I can say my Churchill fills so it's 28 drops of ink if you empty and count..... that is apparently the normal capacity. 2 days of writing in my experience.

Paul-H
February 24th, 2014, 05:34 AM
Thanks

That's a lot more than the 5 or so drops I am getting with mine.

Paul

Jeph
February 24th, 2014, 05:53 AM
I still do not know what the inside looks like, but if I have interpreted that correctly, the bent down section bites on the neck of the sac.
Could you not bend that portion into a pigtail to curve away from the sac and yet still not contact the inside of the barrel like this?
I have to agree that it looks like a pretty serious design flaw.

10165

The previous picture was what I was thinking, but this represents what I actually said and is probably even better if your sketch is reasonably accurate.
10166

Paul-H
February 24th, 2014, 06:50 AM
Hi Jeph

Thanks for that.

I was thinking along similar lines with this one by holding the end of the pressure bar by pulling it forward slightly so its held by the nipple, I have tried it and it does appear to work, just got to await delivery of another new sac as CS did not follow standards with their sac size selection, the nipple is sized for a #20 but the sac they fitted is more like a #23, so the #20 delivered today is far too small for the barrel diameter. The #23 should be delivered tomorrow so I will post back then if my idea has worked or not.

Paul

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l312/Paul-80/Pens/ConwatStewartFillermk2_zpsd69a8be4.jpg (http://s99.photobucket.com/user/Paul-80/media/Pens/ConwatStewartFillermk2_zpsd69a8be4.jpg.html)

maryburke
March 13th, 2014, 06:24 PM
Hi Paul,

I notice you have a similar thread on FPN. As I stated earlier, your pen was made and sold back in 2006.

Your pen is 8 years old, and unless you are the original owner, there is a possibility that the sac has been replaced by a person/company that is not an official CS pen repairer.

Can you please advise the retailer's name you purchased the pen from so that we can match the information with our records.

With kind regards,

Mary Burke
maryburke@conwaystewart.co.uk

Flounder
March 14th, 2014, 12:52 PM
How close is the lever's pivot point to the sac nipple? Jeph's idea of curling the end of the J bar seems a sensible solution.

edit - depending on the space available, you could mitigate the situation with an extra piece of J bar/cannibalise a strip from a cheap Chinese squeeze filler pen, lodged between the sac nipple and barrel wall. That way the sac would be less likely to be pulled off the section, is protected from tearing, and more of the top end of the sac would be squeezed as the lever travels.


10392

I've borrowed your picture, this presumes the main J bar is fully inserted to the end of the barrel, and does not itself occupy the space between sac nipple and barrel wall.

Paul-H
March 14th, 2014, 01:15 PM
Hi

I think the main problem is the use of a j-Bar rather than the tried and tested the original CS used and end is just far too close to the sac nipple so every time it's used it exerts too much pressure on the sac at the nipple where it cannot give under the applied pressure of the bar end.

I did try my method of tucking the bar against the barrel using the section and although this did work it made the leaver a touch to heavy to use and would probably result in premature failure of the lever.

You idea with an extra pressure bar sound promising, I will give it a go. I have stocked up on sacs of the correct size to replace them as they get damaged.

I have been reading quite a few posts about this issue on quite a few other Pen related forums and it is apparently quite a common fault that CS where well aware of but chose to do nothing about. Alegedly ;) or keep quiet about the fix if they did.

Paul

mhosea
March 14th, 2014, 01:45 PM
In the other thread you mention the possibility of using a silicone sac. You haven't mentioned it since, but I just wanted to note that silicone sacs cut/tear much easier than latex, so you need a well-designed filler for their use.

Paul-H
March 14th, 2014, 03:54 PM
Thanks Mike, and noted.

Paul

Paul-H
March 23rd, 2014, 04:39 AM
Hi all

Just an update

the pictures below show why the Design used by CS on their Churchill Pen is so badly flawed, had they used the tried and tested version used by the original Conway Stewart this would have been a faultless pen, as it should have been for the price.

How this design got past RD is beyond comprehension.

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l312/Paul-80/Pens/ConwatStewartFillermk4_zpsd6735fb6.jpg (http://s99.photobucket.com/user/Paul-80/media/Pens/ConwatStewartFillermk4_zpsd6735fb6.jpg.html)

Wile E Coyote
March 23rd, 2014, 05:54 AM
I don't know if it could be done; but how about reversing the lever box so the point of pressure application to the j-bar is further back in the barrel?

Paul-H
March 23rd, 2014, 06:40 AM
Thanks for the thought it might work, but not sure I want to risk damage to an replaceable part though, if I damage to box getting it out I would be stuffed, think I will be sticking with the keeping loads of sacs in stock route and changing it out as soon as the amount of ink taken when filled drops to an unacceptable level.

Thanks for all the tips though, they have all been most helpful, and hope this has been of help to others, either owners of Churchill'd or perspective owners. Is the Churchill the only lever will pen CS make now or are there others that we might need to watch out for.

Paul

Flounder
March 23rd, 2014, 12:32 PM
If you're committing to that route, I'd recommend smaller, necked sacs and a very generous application of talc.

I wouldn't give up though. If Mr. Binder found a solution, there must be one out there. Does someone have a photo of the pen? Is the lever that close to the section?

Paul-H
March 24th, 2014, 05:50 AM
Anyone know what Richard Binders Mod was?

I have also read elsewhere that a possible fix is to use a smaller ink sac, as the one CS fit is very large, a #23, if a smaller sac is used the J-Bar has more movement to make before it comes into contact with the sac. Obviously less ink will be taken up but less damage would be done to the neck of the sac.

I will give it a go when the new #23 on there at the moment gets damaged in time.

One other thing to note regarding ink sac size is that although CS us a #23 the nipple is sized for a #21, the #23 is just a push fit, and the sac I took out was the original, as the guy I bought it from had owned it from new and never had it fixed, he just through it in a draw when it stopped taking ink after only a couple of years light use.

Paul

Jon Szanto
March 24th, 2014, 10:53 AM
I'm just curious: I wonder what would happen if you were to sum up all of this information, including a good diagram or two, and send a letter to Conway-Stewart, just what their response would be. I certainly seems like a very inept design, *unless* there was an unusual pressure bar design that could be used. I find it hard to believe that something such as this, which seems to be destined for sac failure right off of the drawing board, would NOT be addressed by a company when brought to their attention.

I'm sure it must be frustrating, and isn't something that an end-user should have to deal with, certainly not in the technical manner that you have, Paul.

SteveE
March 25th, 2014, 02:57 PM
Well, guys, this is why my Churchill is a drawer-queen. I have one of the first production run pens, I think -- it is number 4XX/500 for the tobacco brown color. That pen has more frequent flier miles than I have, having been back to the US distributor (I think it went to visit both Don Yendl and Dick Egolf at one time or another) as well as to the factory more than once, and still it fails. At one point the factory offered to turn the pen into a c/c, but to me that was admitting defeat and it was too early in the battle. Also, one of the reasons I bought the pen was the lever filler and had it been a c/c, it would have been "just another c/c pen" and I might not have purchased it. My only regret is not sending it to Richard for his fix, but at the time his wait list was months long and I was impatient. If there was a viable fix for the problem, I could use the pen (or even sell it, but as it is I will not sell it).

I'll keep watching this thread.

Jon Szanto
March 25th, 2014, 03:14 PM
Paul, you may not be the most diplomatic of people at every moment of the day, but the way the parallel thread over at FPN was closed down sucks bowling balls. There just isn't any credibility at all to those C-S threads, and it is a disgrace. "Hi, we're a fan club, don't rain on our parade with reality!"

Paul-H
March 25th, 2014, 03:51 PM
Me not diplomatic, don't know what you mean, those who know me would say I can be as diplomatic as a brick in the face.

I still think there was a touch of over reaction on the other place, but that is to be expected I suppose, they have a reputation for that sort of thing and reputations have to be upheld, right ;)

Paul

Ernst Bitterman
April 3rd, 2014, 02:58 PM
Looking at the pictures (late, late late- why am I here so infrequently?), and from the pure academic place of having not had the pen or even model in hand, I'd say the best course is to haul out the original pressure bar and replace it with a short replacement. The ones I get (http://woodbin.ca/PenSacsAndPressureBars.html) have the secondary presser mentioned above already attached, so the only bodging required is making sure of the length... unless the pressure bar is connected to the barrel in an unusually firm way, like the early Sheaffers were.

Actually, that's the second best course; before that, I'd contact C-S and see what they say. This may be something under the same sort of policy as an automotive recall, something so embarrassing to have floating around they'll fix it even if you're not the original owner. The worst that can happen is they quote a vast amount to put it right and you say "no".

Paul-H
April 3rd, 2014, 11:44 PM
Thanks for that, I will look into it.

CS have refused to accept that there is an issue so will do nothing about it and for some reason known only to them are quite happy to accept any bad publicity associated with this pen. And a few minutes spent on Google show its not an isolated problem with this pen, there are quite a few owners complaining about it on various collecting forums that have pen sections. Which is a shame because apart from that its such a lovely pen, apart from the fact that it eats ink sacs that is ;) .

Paul

Daisy
April 9th, 2014, 05:24 PM
Hi Paul, sorry I'm late to the party, but it occurred to me that even though Richard Binder is no longer repairing pens himself, he might be more than happy to tell you himself what his modification was. I'm pretty sure his site has contact information (http://www.richardspens.com/info/contact.htm/) -- email, maybe even a phone number -- and it's not like you haven't tried everything else! If you email him, you could simply point him to this thread and ask him for his thoughts; he might well answer. He seems pretty generous with his knowledge. No guarantees, though, obviously. But it's worth a shot. And if he replies, you could post it here for others in the same sore dilemma as yourself.

What a shame about this design flaw; like you I hate to see an otherwise great pen go to waste. Good luck to you! :)

HughC
April 9th, 2014, 09:43 PM
Clearly a very bad design, fancy CS being so rude and dismissive of the problem.....opps...sorry .....I see it was you ,Paul, not CS that was in the wrong ...thanks to "Ghost Plane" for pointing out such gems as 1. "You got a personal response from the busy international rep of a pen company who may not have had time to read the whole thing", fancy overlooking who moderates and spruiks CS product in the FPN CS forum at every given chance as well as having obvious lead topics planted posted so she can. 2. "you may have found, as other people have, a low or no cost repair in return for letting the company have a look at the pen" overlooking you'd already been told to "go away" with this from the "busy international rep" with "pen is void of warranty because the pen was not sent to the factory or to an authorized service location". But the real gem is last " it is counterproductive to the international pen community to behave badly when a representative is responding with legitimate questions and offers of assistance", did I miss the any real offer to help? Does "Ghost Plane" now claim to speak for the "international pen community"? Talk about logic defying ego running rampant over reality. Fact is we're talking about a very minor pen company with a poor financial past and a reputation for poor quality control that sells expensive pens. CS should fix the pen, it's as simple as that or at least provide a pressure bar that works at minimal cost given it seems to have been a problem with a number of pens....probably all with that setup. Making absurd claims about being "void of warranty" when it's a design fault says a lot about the company, not offering any real solution says even more. Compare this to Dyson, we bought a column fan+heater and some 18 months later they contacted us and offered to replace it with a new model (the new one worked a lot better so some people must have complained about the original models performance), we accepted of course. That item has now been recalled, Dyson sent us a new box ( actually 3 boxes ???) with postage paid to return the item. That's true customer service.

I think Ernest may have offered the logical option to solve the problem btw.

Regards
Hugh

Paul-H
June 12th, 2014, 09:35 AM
Hi all

Its been a few months since the new sac was fitted and to be honest I have not used the pen that much so today after only its second filling I thought I would pull the section to see how the new sac is doing.

And as can be seen already it is showing signs of damage :(

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l312/Paul-80/2014-06-12162744_zps0a1c2b1e.jpg (http://s99.photobucket.com/user/Paul-80/media/2014-06-12162744_zps0a1c2b1e.jpg.html)

Jon Szanto
June 12th, 2014, 09:51 AM
You are aware of the flawed design. Were you expecting a different result?

Paul-H
June 12th, 2014, 10:00 AM
Nope, but there are those who don't accept the design is flawed so thought they might like to see it in action

Flounder
June 14th, 2014, 08:12 AM
What arrangement did you go with in the end Paul? It would be useful to know what hasn't worked this time, for future reference.

Paul-H
June 14th, 2014, 02:34 PM
In the end I had to go back to standard so no real surprise how quickly its been damaged I suppose. I did try it with the end of the J-Bar trapped by the section as shown in the picture and although it did work it needed so much force that I feared for the safety of the flimsy lever and pivot pin.

I have a new J-Bar on order from Woodbin which might help as his is a two part item so it should apply a more even pressure and if I fit a shorter one it won't be so close to the nipple either.

I will post back with the results once done.

I understand that Conway Stewart did modify the Churchill after this fault became known to them, but cannot get a reply from them regarding mine, even though its out of warrantee so I would have been expecting to pay for the modification myself.

Not after having it done for free even though they should have done as its their design fault after all.

Paul

Flounder
June 16th, 2014, 10:48 AM
Sounds good, hopefully that should help a lot.

SteveE
June 18th, 2014, 02:17 PM
I'll be watching here to see what they do. I, too, have a very early lever-fill Churchill that has been back numerous times for sac replacements, and I would have it modified if they have a fix to offer (even at a modest cost to me).

Paul-H
June 18th, 2014, 02:53 PM
Good luck getting them to respond to the problem, I have tried to contact them via their e.mail system and never had a single reply from them.

Which is why I am going down the repair it myself route, which I should not have to do with a £500 plus pen.

I am quite happy to pay to have my pen factory upgraded to the latest filling mechanism, I just cannot get a single reply from CS.

This obviously will now be my last CS pen from the new owners and sadly because of its faults I am stuck with it as it's quite worthless as a pen as it stands so I cannot pass the fault on to some other poor unsuspecting owner. It will also be worthless if I do get the woodbin J-Bar to work as it will no longer be original.

Paul

scrivelry
June 18th, 2014, 04:23 PM
Good luck getting them to respond to the problem, I have tried to contact them via their e.mail system and never had a single reply from them.

Which is why I am going down the repair it myself route, which I should not have to do with a £500 plus pen.

I am quite happy to pay to have my pen factory upgraded to the latest filling mechanism, I just cannot get a single reply from CS.

This obviously will now be my last CS pen from the new owners and sadly because of its faults I am stuck with it as it's quite worthless as a pen as it stands so I cannot pass the fault on to some other poor unsuspecting owner. It will also be worthless if I do get the woodbin J-Bar to work as it will no longer be original.

Paul

Well, it would at least be less worthless. That is, you are clearly an honest person who is not going to sell it as original or pretend it ever worked properly, so any money sunk into it will be staying there. However, if at least you manage to get it to take up enough ink to write with you will be able to write with it. That seems like a huge improvement to me.

I agree this is ridiculous for any pen, but really inexcusable in a pen that cost so much.

Bogon07
June 18th, 2014, 04:47 PM
Over on FPN, Mary Burke posted new contact information for CS.

While I love volunteering on FPN, as it allows me to assist the customers I adore, there is someone directly assigned at the factory with that responsibility and contacting her is MUCH faster and more efficient. Her name is Kayleigh Care, her contact info is Tel: 01752 776776 Email: kayleighcare@conwaystewart.co.uk and her global time zone is 8AM to 4PM GMT. With her 11 years of experience at Conway Stewart, I feel certain you will come to love her as we do, and you will find having a contact right there at the factory far more efficient than my long-distance efforts from Seattle, which is 8 hours, an ocean, and a continent away from the Conway Stewart factory.
http://www.fountainpennetwork.com/forum/index.php/topic/267973-conway-stewart-contactservice-information/?p=3014048

Paul-H
June 19th, 2014, 06:54 AM
Hi all

The new J-Bar arrived from Oddbin this morning and and was quickly fitted.

Although the basic function of both the original and the Oddbin turned out to be the same 2 part construction, where the Oddbin one scores higher is that when the lever is in the closed position the J-Bar is held flush against the barrel, unlike the Conway Stewart version which is held away from the barrel by about 2mm which was enough to jab the end of the J-Bar into the sac as can be seen in the above photograph.

I suspect all the problems will now be solved by the Oddbin part but will post back in a few months with an update. and thanks for recommending their part to solve this problem.

Shame Conway Stewart couldn't be bothered in helping me resolve this issue but glad it looks to be now sorted for only £3 as well.

Paul

Danimal16
October 29th, 2014, 05:56 PM
Paul,

How did this work out? Also, what size j-bar did you install?

Sincerely,

DanB

D Armstrong
March 22nd, 2015, 06:38 PM
I thought I would weigh in a year later, as I have just spent an hour banging my head on one of these with the same issue.

The j-bar is a single-piece one, and is indeed as Paul's diagram shows. The flaw is both in it's design, and in the fact that they chose the cheapest option, saving probably pennies on each bar.

The fix is fairly drastic, and not for the faint of heart or the novice:

1) The old j-bar is epoxied in place in the end of the pen. To replace it, you must carefully drill out the plug from the inside, then discard the old j-bar.

2) get the shortest of the two-piece j-bars (54 mm), as seen here at woodbin.ca (http://woodbin.ca): http://woodbin.ca/images/pen%20sacs/4%20bars%20for%20web.jpg

If you have properly removed the epoxy plug from inside, this j-bar should be the right size, and the right distance from the nipple to reduce the stretching and wear on the sac. And you won't need to re-glue the j-bar in place, as that was just silly in the first place.

I have three Churchills on the bench right now, all with filling issues. Because, of course, there is no longer anywhere to officially send an $800 CS pen when it fails after a couple of years of service.

What's the old adage about proof and pudding?

tandaina
March 22nd, 2015, 07:00 PM
And so the penny wise, pound foolish adage (on their part)

Mags
March 23rd, 2015, 04:45 AM
I thought I would weigh in a year later, as I have just spent an hour banging my head on one of these with the same issue.

The j-bar is a single-piece one, and is indeed as Paul's diagram shows. The flaw is both in it's design, and in the fact that they chose the cheapest option, saving probably pennies on each bar.

The fix is fairly drastic, and not for the faint of heart or the novice:

1) The old j-bar is epoxied in place in the end of the pen. To replace it, you must carefully drill out the plug from the inside, then discard the old j-bar.

2) get the shortest of the two-piece j-bars (54 mm), as seen here at woodbin.ca (http://woodbin.ca): http://woodbin.ca/images/pen%20sacs/4%20bars%20for%20web.jpg

If you have properly removed the epoxy plug from inside, this j-bar should be the right size, and the right distance from the nipple to reduce the stretching and wear on the sac. And you won't need to re-glue the j-bar in place, as that was just silly in the first place.

I have three Churchills on the bench right now, all with filling issues. Because, of course, there is no longer anywhere to officially send an $800 CS pen when it fails after a couple of years of service.

What's the old adage about proof and pudding?

Dear David,

I have one so when it fails.....you are my guy.