VP Nib unit not fitting in both of my VPs.

[KBeezie]

I have this VP with a Blue Carbonesque finish and a Fine Nib (14K unplated, A705 on the bottom).

Then I got an identical VP in Black Carbonesque with a 18K (thought it was going to be 14K, since that's what he offered in the trade) Medium nib says A908 on bottom and just below the A908 is an oval with some writing.

Under my 60x loupe, it's S1e in the top of the oval, then PP to the left, then a Pentagon shape, then a F to the right of the pentagon.

I didn't even notice a difference until I tried to put the 18K M into my Blue carbonesque, and I felt a scrape near the end of clicking, did it again slowly trying to figure out if it was the trap door or something.

Turns out the opening on my Blue Carboneques VP is smaller than the opening in the black one, since it was scraping the bottom of the 18K M's feed along the opening lip, so got a little scrape in the feed plastic there.

Other than the opening being bigger on the black one, they appear to be identical.

But I'm a little confused, were there VP units that were not compatible with each other on the nib units?





The Blue Carbonesque one came with a 14K Fine as a trade for my Pilot Falcon.

The Black Carbonesque one came with a 18K Medium (expected a 14K cuz he thought it was 14K).

The opening on the black one is larger and will take either nib unit, the blue one will only work with the 14K nib unit because it scrapes the bottom of the feed of the 18K.

Edit: I went and switched the nib directly onto the already inked (blue carbonesque one was already inked with noodler's black eel) nib unit to try it out.



Seems a little thick for a medium. (Edit: yea it was, because the tipping was never closed, they don't even touch).

Edit: I corrected the tipping on the medium and closed the tiping so they weren't wide open as the rest of the tine split. Whoever used it before must have sprung the nib, thus why it was so wet and broad-ish (for pilot).
*

[KrazyIvan]

The opening on the blue one looks unfinished.

[jar]

The 18K nib is newer than the 14K nib. It is very possible there was a design change that is not backwards compatible.

[KBeezie]

The 18K nib is newer than the 14K nib. It is very possible there was a design change that is not backwards compatible.

That would be really odd that they'd make the 18K nib units that wouldn't fit into VPs that came with 14K if it is indeed the newer models. Especially as there's no real way of telling the difference between a VP that only fits 14K and one that fits both other than to try it.

Edit: They had 18K Nibs in 1998-99 on Vanishing Points, and the Black Carboneques was launched in 2000.

[Jon Szanto]

The opening on the blue one looks unfinished.

Not only unfinished, but definitely has a different profile, flatter than the one on the right, which has a rounder bottom. The left/right bottom corners are more rounded on the one on the right, as well.

That would be really odd that they'd make the 18K nib units that wouldn't fit into VPs that came with 14K if it is indeed the newer models.

You say that as if companies never do odd things. Of course they do, especially over the lifetime of a long-running model. Also, I think being in these "pen communities" gives people a somewhat skewed view of the populace at large: I'm willing to bet that, as a percentage of the total number of people who buy pens like this, the number who sit around, swapping nibs is pretty low.

BTW: I don't have much experience with these pens at all, but from examination, are you certain that only the nib is different, or are there some subtle differences between other parts (the feed, for instance)?

Lastly: since the one on the left is flatter and rougher, leading to a smaller opening, is it possible that it had been dropped or abused otherwise? (Not by you, but it's a used pen, right?)

[KBeezie]

You say that as if companies never do odd things. Of course they do, especially over the lifetime of a long-running model. Also, I think being in these "pen communities" gives people a somewhat skewed view of the populace at large: I'm willing to bet that, as a percentage of the total number of people who buy pens like this, the number who sit around, swapping nibs is pretty low.

I just expected a little more documentation of it, especially as I initially thought 18K was only newer nib units (but discovered they were used around '98-'00 mostly in Japan, and the Black Carbonesque released as just 'carbonesque' in 2000).

Though I do agree, most people who buy one outright are mostly only going to get them with the nib they want to begin with.

BTW: I don't have much experience with these pens at all, but from examination, are you certain that only the nib is different, or are there some subtle differences between other parts (the feed, for instance)?

I never said only the nib was different, the feed with the 18K is thicker (ie: trying to put the 14K onto the 18K's original feed is extremely tight fit, but will go on, it would just take a lot of effort to get it back off). Also the "notch" on both nib units are the same height (which rules it out as being a Fermo unit), also on the 18K nib unit the 'notch' is rounded off, where as the notch on the 14K nib unit is more like an actual square with sharper corners.

Lastly: since the one on the left is flatter and rougher, leading to a smaller opening, is it possible that it had been dropped or abused otherwise? (Not by you, but it's a used pen, right?)

That is quite possible (even if it seems perfectly angled), but if so I'd expect that the feed of the 14K nib unit would also scrape along the bottom, but the feed itself shows no signs of damage or being scraped in such a manner.

Not only unfinished, but definitely has a different profile, flatter than the one on the right, which has a rounder bottom. The left/right bottom corners are more rounded on the one on the right, as well.

Also in my initial picture, the bottom of the blue one is flat, the 'fuzz' you may be seeing is the shavings from scraping the feed.

[jar]

The 18K nib is newer than the 14K nib. It is very possible there was a design change that is not backwards compatible.

That would be really odd that they'd make the 18K nib units that wouldn't fit into VPs that came with 14K if it is indeed the newer models. Especially as there's no real way of telling the difference between a VP that only fits 14K and one that fits both other than to try it.

Edit: They had 18K Nibs in 1998-99 on Vanishing Points, and the Black Carboneques was launched in 2000.

What I am saying is that there may well have been a design change between 2005 and 2008; would any 2009 nib fit in a 2005 pen?

[KBeezie]

The 18K nib is newer than the 14K nib. It is very possible there was a design change that is not backwards compatible.

That would be really odd that they'd make the 18K nib units that wouldn't fit into VPs that came with 14K if it is indeed the newer models. Especially as there's no real way of telling the difference between a VP that only fits 14K and one that fits both other than to try it.

Edit: They had 18K Nibs in 1998-99 on Vanishing Points, and the Black Carboneques was launched in 2000.

What I am saying is that there may well have been a design change between 2005 and 2008; would any 2009 nib fit in a 2005 pen?

I would not know, how does one know they have a 2005 or older pen or a 2009 nib?

[jar]

The 18K nib is newer than the 14K nib. It is very possible there was a design change that is not backwards compatible.

That would be really odd that they'd make the 18K nib units that wouldn't fit into VPs that came with 14K if it is indeed the newer models. Especially as there's no real way of telling the difference between a VP that only fits 14K and one that fits both other than to try it.

Edit: They had 18K Nibs in 1998-99 on Vanishing Points, and the Black Carboneques was launched in 2000.

What I am saying is that there may well have been a design change between 2005 and 2008; would any 2009 nib fit in a 2005 pen?

I would not know, how does one know they have a 2005 or older pen or a 2009 nib?

Look on the nib. A705 would be a manufacture date of July 2005 while A908 would be September of 2008.

[KBeezie]

And how about the body itself?

[jar]

Well they don't date mark the body but usually a pen comes with a nib made the same year. If you look at the two pens you can see that the shape of the opening is entirely different, the one with the 2009 nib having a very rounded bottom edge while the 2005 is smaller and flat. So that changed sometime between 2005 and 2009. The 2009 nib is designed for the greater clearance and so hits when used in the 2005 body.

[KBeezie]

Well they don't date mark the body but usually a pen comes with a nib made the same year. If you look at the two pens you can see that the shape of the opening is entirely different, the one with the 2009 nib having a very rounded bottom edge while the 2005 is smaller and flat. So that changed sometime between 2005 and 2009. The 2009 nib is designed for the greater clearance and so hits when used in the 2005 body.

So we're down to two possibilities:

1) The pen was dropped exactly on the bottom of the front causing it to dent closer to the opening (but with no stress marks, scratching or cracks around the corner, nor does it collide with the current feed or show signs that it did).
2) Somewhere between 2005 and 2009 they decided to make their nib units slightly larger in the feed (or thicker on the nib), and to accommodate the opening of the pen larger.

Both seem likely, and as you said most people when they buy one of those pens will still with the nib unit they have for them. Only way I could know for certain is to get a brand new nib unit and see if it looks like it would collide in the same way on the blue carbonesque body. (a new one may be in order anyways, really curious for a waverly XXF from RichardsPens, which if I like a lot I can sell the blue with the original fine nib and keep the medium and XXF for the black carbonesque).

[jar]

Well they don't date mark the body but usually a pen comes with a nib made the same year. If you look at the two pens you can see that the shape of the opening is entirely different, the one with the 2009 nib having a very rounded bottom edge while the 2005 is smaller and flat. So that changed sometime between 2005 and 2009. The 2009 nib is designed for the greater clearance and so hits when used in the 2005 body.

So we're down to two possibilities:

1) The pen was dropped exactly on the bottom of the front causing it to dent closer to the opening (but with no stress marks, scratching or cracks around the corner, nor does it collide with the current feed or show signs that it did).

That seems very improbable. Also, my even older VPs have the flat aspect like your 2005 one.

[KBeezie]

That seems very improbable. Also, my even older VPs have the flat aspect like your 2005 one.

Improbable now that you've confirmed that some are like that. #2 jumped a few points to being the possible reason.

Also there's this hinting at a design change in late 2005 (after the date code of my 14K nib):

http://carmenriverapens.com/Vanishing_Point_images/

In November 2005 Pilot Japan returned to the narrower barrel design and added new vibrant colors to create the Decimo line, and in September of 2006 they released the Fermo with a twisting barrel end.

While that seems specific to the Decimo, I can't help but wonder if they made changes to other lines as well, as minor as they may be.

[dr.grace]

Confusing. My Raden VP that I bought a few months ago has an 18K nib marked 713 and a flatter opening similar to your photo on the left. The nib unit does not scrape against the opening.

[KBeezie]

Confusing. My Raden VP that I bought a few months ago has an 18K nib marked 713 and a flatter opening similar to your photo on the left. The nib unit does not scrape against the opening.

K, so we have a 2005 with a flatter bottom, then a 2008 with a wide bottom, then a 2013 with a flatter bottom... and I'm presuming the nib came with the Pen and not obtained later.

[Jon Szanto]

I smell a conspiracy.

[KBeezie]

I smell a conspiracy.

I would not mind if you decided to elaborate a number of possibilities.

[Algester]

http://estilofilos.blogspot.jp/2012/...ibilities.html LALALA
I also posted this on FPN
the clue notches and nib shape and of course old nib units will not fit in the new frames and vice versa... WHEN I SAY OLD I SAY VINTAGE OLD :X 1970s capless models... and yes they arent Namiki

[KBeezie]

http://estilofilos.blogspot.jp/2012/...ibilities.html LALALA
I also posted this on FPN
the clue notches and nib shape and of course old nib units will not fit in the new frames and vice versa... WHEN I SAY OLD I SAY VINTAGE OLD :X 1970s capless models... and yes they arent Namiki

And I already pointed out the notches are exactly the same height on both units. That page shows the notches being different thicker heights. That's compared between the slim decimo and a fermo.

The Fermo came out in 2006, the Decimo in 2005.

Also as mentioned earlier my nib units are 2005 and 2008 based on their date codes.

Plus the Black Carbonesque body cannot be any older than 2000, and the blue carbonesque no older than 2002.