Deoxidizing BHR

[creeder14]

Just picked up a beautiful Duofold Junior in jade celluloid from an antique shop. Sent it to Danny Fudge for basic repairs, but the hard rubber on the cap (the fillial? The word is escaping me right now) is oxidized. Used to be black, now it's brown.

I've heard there's guys who can reverse the process - who are they?

Thanks!

[Jon Szanto]

Just reading this makes me think of "The Hurt Locker". Bombs going off, mayhem. Yikes.

[KrazyIvan]

Yes, I've seen it. Apparently, it's a liquid that you soak the part in. After a few hours, the part is black again. I'll have to look it up.

[PaulS]

I think this link is possibly for the product you had in mind. http://www.lbepen.com/deoxidizer-instructions

[creeder14]

Yes, I've seen it. Apparently, it's a liquid that you soak the part in. After a few hours, the part is black again. I'll have to look it up.


I think this link is possibly for the product you had in mind. http://www.lbepen.com/deoxidizer-instructions

Richard Binder's website mentions a product he used to use that deoxidized the very surface of hard rubber, but the shiny black finish wears away pretty quickly. You guys know if this is that product, or if it goes deeper?

[FredRydr]

Mark Hoover has formulated a deoxidizer that actually works. It has been sold at pen shows the last two years. The newest version is much more effective and less sticky than the first iteration. The impact on mottled red and black hard rubber is amazing. Look at some of his mottled hard rubber pen listings to see.

Here is Mark's website: http://www.lbepen.com You might have to hunt around for the listing to order, but here's the instructions for the early version: http://www.lbepen.com/deoxidizer-instructions

Fred

[Farmboy]

I believe Binder used the G-10 process which is no longer available. That process most likely returned carbon black into the rubber matrix and potentially reduced the oxidized end groups in the process. The key component in the process is highly toxic.

I find the term deoxidized curious.

[PaulS]

not sure why the doubling up - Mark Hoover's details give in the earlier post?:)

'Deoxidized' probably as good a word an some others - and simple to say and write. May not be technically correct or cover the surface chemical change entirely, but without writing a convoluted sentence it's seem to be understood by most folk. I notice that Mark says ......... "you will notice the oxidation coming off on the rag" - all to do with the BHR losing sulphur??

[amk]

I use black leather dye. It's messy, but it works; I don't know how long it will last, but six months so far and the pens look okay

Warning, though - wipe them really well before you put your grubby mitts on them, because if your mitts aren't grubby... they will be :-)

[PaulS]

thanks for the advice - sounds though as if it might mess up my nice flocked pen trays from Gary Lehrer, so think I'll give it a miss.:) The problem here seems to be that we jump one of two ways.
Either a dye as suggested, with the possibility of impermanence, or removal of some ultra thin layer of the sulphurous surface of the pen, with perhaps some minute loss of imprint.
I've done it the long winded way using Micro Mesh creams and very fine w. & d. papers, and there's no doubt that doing it like that you do lose some of the pen's surface - you end up with a lovely glistening BHR pen, but the imprint - assuming you had one - does have a tendency to disappear or fade in appearance.

[Farmboy]

I would suggest that deoxidation involves removal of material.

[KrazyIvan]

@machinistpaul on Instagram has some impressive before and after pictures. PaulS, are you the same person? What you reference is what I was thinking about.

[PaulS]

no - unrelated entirely :) coming back again to Mark's comments in his instruction leaflet, he does say ............ *"It will not hurt the chasing or the imprints. *Often they are better when*the oxidation has been removed." Have to say that I've not tried his product - as Fred has commented very favourably on the newer version, perhaps he has used it, and might perhaps explain how it works.

[Jon Szanto]

No one has specifically mentioned this but... All of this is fine and good for your personal pens, and pens that you intend on keeping. The caveat is with collectible pens that may want to be sold in the future: I think the jury is definitely still out as to whether these kind of treatments enhance the item or if, in fact, they would tend to devalue it. I'm in line with what I think Farmboy is suggesting: the product is not transforming material that is in place, but removing it. There aren't too many scenarios where the removal of material from a valued antique is considered a good thing. One also wonders what the long-term effect on the rubber is of these treatments; Renaissance Wax was looked on as a trusted product in museum work for a while until a couple of studies found some quite problematic issues. I'm still not ready to treat any old HR pens this way... yet.

[PaulS]

Renaissance Wax I've used - both on leather when bookbinding and in my early days of pen refurbishment - I suspect many institutions still use it on leather and maybe other items, although I'm unaware of its use, professionally on f.ps. ................... it was developed specifically for certain historically important artefacts in public collections. The container states - ""a formula used by the British Museum and restoration specialists internationally to revive and protect valuable furniture, leather, paintings, metals, marble, ivory and many other surfaces both housed and exposed to weather etc. ""
For pens in good condition and without surface damage, it will give a high gloss shine, but.......... its down side apparently - for f.ps. - is almost the reason for its up side - it hardens on contact, and protects against fingers, water damage, and mild abrasion, by creating a protective layer that is difficult to remove fully. If you consider that sort of permanence a problem then obviously you wouldn't use the stuff, and habit wise there's now a shift away toward water based products that don't leave any kind of residue.
I don't see it as a problem unless having used it there is a subsequent need to repair the surface of a pen, when there might be a need to remove the stuff - but on balance I now prefer water based products anyway - but not because I've had a bad experience with R.W.
What route this wax took in order to arrive at f.ps. I've no idea - no doubt some bright spark was aware that it created a moisture barrier and gave a good sparkle at the same time.

I think it's wrong to compare R.W. with this deoxidizing product. The latter may well be intrusive and might, as suggested here, actually remove some material - what in particular were the museums' 'quite problematic issues' with R.W.?

[Deb]

I agree wholeheartedly with Jon Szanto's comments. The first rule of restoration is "do no harm." I am unaware of any re-blacking product or method that is completely harmless. Any new product must be viewed with caution because it may take months or years before any detrimental effect is shown.

The issues with Renaissance Wax were raised here some time ago. I no longer remember exactly what the problem was but it was reported by a trusted source. Waxes do not perform any valuable restorative function for fountain pens. They just provide an unnatural gloss.

[Jon Szanto]

I think it's wrong to compare R.W. with this deoxidizing product. The latter may well be intrusive and might, as suggested here, actually remove some material - what in particular were the museums' 'quite problematic issues' with R.W.?


The issues with Renaissance Wax were raised here some time ago. I no longer remember exactly what the problem was but it was reported by a trusted source. Waxes do not perform any valuable restorative function for fountain pens. They just provide an unnatural gloss.

This is the primary article (http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic35-01-001.html) I had sourced previously. It may be that my train of thought was a bit opaque: no, the blacking products and the wax are not identical situations in their initial use. I did not mean to compare them in that way. What I do note is that, in at least one study (and I believe there may be other evidence), the full effects on the artifact did not come to light for a number of years.

It would be a pity if in the rush to make an old pen look new, the owner ended up doing damage that won't show up until some point in the future. These products seem relatively new, and are not a lightly applied or benign product. If one has a beater pen or something for personal use I see nothing wrong at all with using such products but in my own practice, I would most certainly draw the line at any example with any sort of historic or collectible significance. Seems to me it would be an irreversible procedure, and that would be a shame.

[ac12]

Did Syd (aka Wahlnut)have something to reblacken old BHR pens?

[KrazyIvan]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that BHR could be re-blackened with bleach. I also remember that it was a rather controversial method that is temporary.

[PaulS]

oh gosh - you want me to read all of that link at this time of night:cry:

I'm a big fan of and have gallons of respect for Deborah who has probably forgotten more about f.ps. than I shall ever know - so I know she won't mind if I 'come clean' and admit that I took the link from her blog. I sense I'm perhaps being a tad mis-understood, possibly, but maybe not.:)
I wasn't promoting the product in that link - I've never used it, and probably wouldn't anyway since I'm rather tired of buying from the other side of the pond and then paying extra Customs and import fees on top of the purchase price. Like others here I suspect that, despite the sales pitch, there is some removal of material in order to expose the colour of the original BHR - but before I get sued for defamation of the product, at present this is my opinion only.
At the end of the day, if a BHR pen has a bad case of surface oxidation, then restoration in the old fashioned way with w.&d. papers and polishing creams, is going to cost you loss of chasing and imprint.

I don't think that R.W. is a new product - I'd suggest it must be something like 12 - 15 years on the market - and as I commented, it was created for products other than f.p. materials - so we mustn't slag off the makers just because it isn't suitable for our pens - it's more the fault of those collectors (not me) who crave that eye blinding shine on their pens. However, I do have a pot of the stuff, which I use on book leathers after binding, and it seems to do what it says on the tin. Like a variety of situations facing conservators and guardians of collectibles, fashions regarding preservatives and restoration techniques change in the light of experience - usually for the better - I'm not aware of any problems with those few pens that I treated to a coat of R.W., but if they disintegrate I promise I will come clean.:)
Perhaps beginners to f.p. collecting should be warned away from BHR pens that show oxidation.

[Jon Szanto]

Did Syd (aka Wahlnut)have something to reblacken old BHR pens?

Indeed he does (http://www.pensburymanor.com/pensburymanor/Pen_Potions_7,_9_%26_10.html); take a look at Pen Potion #9. Of interest is a bit of text at the bottom of that section of the page:


The Wahlnut says:

The choice to restore any antique object should not be taken lightly. Some antique and vintage items including Fountain Pens may be of considerably higher value if left in their original, aged, with respectable "patina", condition. If you have any concern about whether the item you are considering restoring is going to suffer a loss in value by being refinished, do not restore that item. However, there are many wonderful daily writers that will never become the most prized among collectible, investment grade pens, yet they bring pleasure to their users. The outward appearance of these delightful instruments however may need a boost so they are more "presentable" in public and more pleasurable to use.

What Syd says there is pretty much what I've said above as well, and it is the way I choose to approach these pens.

[Jon Szanto]

oh gosh - you want me to read all of that link at this time of night:cry:

Well, that's up to you! ;) I snipped the rest because if you *do* read the article you'll see what I'm getting at: I *know* that RW is not new and that was part of the point in the article - it took a few years for the problematic aspects of using it to show up. I am not comparing it's use on pens alongside the reblacker, I am noting that with a new product you may be in for some surprises down the road, just as in this case with RW. It is simply a good example of letting some time go by before you trust a valued object to some manner of alteration.

[Farmboy]

Potion 9 is a dye. Easily detected.

I have been offered deoxidized pens and I significantly discount my offer.

I prefer undeoxidized pens.

[kirchh]

The metals conservator at the British Museum told me they stopped using Renaissance Wax.

I don't recommend it.

--Daniel

[Jon Szanto]

The metals conservator at the British Museum told me they stopped using Renaissance Wax.

I don't recommend it.

Daniel, I've certainly had you in mind during all this. I've known your thoughts on RW from the past. Would you care to offer any thoughts on the issue of whether or not to treat BHR and if so, under what circumstances?

[kirchh]

The metals conservator at the British Museum told me they stopped using Renaissance Wax.

I don't recommend it.

Daniel, I've certainly had you in mind during all this. I've known your thoughts on RW from the past. Would you care to offer any thoughts on the issue of whether or not to treat BHR and if so, under what circumstances?

Here's my philosophy: What's the rush?

I will also say that the way I collect, I view pens as artifacts, and destructive facelifts are outside the scope of how I believe these objects should be handled. I suppose for more common pens that show considerable wear, one can tart them up as desired, but that rarely applies to a pen that I would acquire.

I worry that in a decade we will be awash in pens that anachronistically show 80 years of honest surface wear but have glossy black skin. And we'll regret it.

--Daniel

[PaulS]

yes, of course I shall read that link on R.W. - and today it will be:)

Lest it be thought I'm a philistine, I do agree with virtually all of the practical suggestions made so far - my bookbinding interest has taught me to tread carefully when approaching both the use and conservation of materials, and have to say that I wasn't aware of the B.Ms. current attitude to R.W., but they obviously know best.
In recent years there has been some change by institutions with a moving away from physical conservation of many 'antique' items, with the consequence that more sensitive materials are now simply stored in their 'as found' condition .............. as opposed the work practice of the 1950 - 1990s of tarting things up. I'm not gainsaying that habit, but it does have the down side insofar as presently some items cannot be handled whilst experts wait for divine providence as to the most suitable treatment, and it might be argued that the fear of making the wrong decision is now a phobia. In the meantime the public are unable to view older items as they are in boxes awaiting treatment.

A very good point, and I'd very much agree, with this fear of anachronistic appearance, whereby a 1915 e.d., over 100 years later, looks as though it's just come out of the factory - but remember there are shed loads of collectors out there who view appearance as everything, and routinely restore their pens - of whatever age - to pristine condition. Does this removal of all visible signs of the natural aging process show a lack of care for how an old pen should look?? Do we have the right to air-brush away the effects that make something look more naturally old? A lot of people think they do - just have a look at the higher value put on un-inked pens, and there's a part of me that groans when I find a good Parker that has more wear than I'd like to see.

So what do I do with a cabinet full of f.ps. that once were black and now are coated with this brownish/greenish skin.:bolt: only joking.

[FredRydr]

Daniel and I are pen show friends, and we've poked one another in the eye from time to time, usually on a forum where eye-poking is rampant. Daniel is a conservator with a substantial well-researched collection of writing instruments. I am a pen user with a relatively small but fun group of vintage and modern instruments that write. I don't like my BHR pens to be olive hard rubber, because I use them. My pens have to perform for me, and while they do that, I want them to look nice, not as new, but with that sense of history without having to be curated. If you ever collected antique cars as I have, you'd understand the term "driver" with a "frame-up restoration." That's what I want in a 100-year-old fountain pen.

Be aware that already oxidised hard rubber gets fugly fast when perspiration and oil from skin come into contact. Over the time that one fill of ink is used in my favorite Conklin writer, a 4NL, I can see the change in color when I write with it. Why? That pen already has a coating of oxidised hard rubber, especially on the barrel, that reacts far faster to my skin than does my "deoxidised" hard rubber pens. And in my eyes, it's ugly. So the 4NL will be treated to a bath in Mark's stuff.

Some comments above reference the old solution that was once heralded as the answer. I've never used it, but I once sent a Wahl BCHR pencil to Richard Binder, asking him to apply it to the pencil to better match a Wahl pen I sent along; he talked me out of it for reasons cited above. And I sympathised with the reasons. Now Mark Hoover has created a solution that doesn't harm or dye the hard rubber as do alternatives. (If it affects the underlying hard rubber, I'll be dead long before it manifests itself.) Yes, it does remove the oxidised material, but I can see the chasing and imprint better after than before. It does not leave a glossy surface; if you want that, you have to polish and wax which I am loathe to do. I wish Mark was more apt at presenting his products on the internet, in the fashion that we take for granted from Brian Gray. I can tell you that the latest version of the deoxidiser is not anywhere near as sticky as the first. It is more like a slow-flowing translucent cream. I've dunked caps and barrels, but I've also used the deoxidiser on a rag and applied like a polish when I didn't want to disassemble a pen. I followed up with mineral oil to remove the deoxidiser. The stuff works for me like nothing else; Daniel might be horrified. :boink:

My advice? Buy it and try it on a junker, or best, go to a pen show and Mark will demonstrate. Be forewarned that the stuff is made in small batches, so be prepared to wait.

Fred

[Farmboy]

Is applying mineral oil standard practice after deoxidization?

[FredRydr]

Is applying mineral oil standard practice after deoxidization?
With Mark's stuff, yes. See: http://www.lbepen.com/deoxidizer-instructions

Fred

[Hawk]

This is an interesting thread. While I haven't used mineral oil, some people have used it on their pipe stems. At smokingpipes.com, there is a thread that discusses restoring the black on pipe stems, some use Obsidian Pipe Stem Oil with good results. a product that they sell. I don't smoke or collect pipes so I can't vouch for either one. The term 'deoxidation' is being used on this thread and used improperly. The term is used in the making of steel by removing excess oxygen.

[PaulS]

don't doubt that comment, although it's a word that has fallen into common parlance, so is now used, by most pen folk, to describe a certain degraded surface appearance on BHR - and rightly or wrongly, we all seem to understand what is being discussed :)

So what word or phrase would be more correct/appropriate to describe the particular problem affecting f.ps. ?

[Deb]

Oxiidised is correct. That's what happens to BHR. Deoxidation is a fiction by those selling reblacking products. Once the oxidisation has happened you can't reverse it. You either paint it over with something or you remove a layer.

[Hawk]

Oxiidised is correct. That's what happens to BHR. Deoxidation is a fiction by those selling reblacking products. Once the oxidisation has happened you can't reverse it. You either paint it over with something or you remove a layer.

Thanks, Deb.

[Farmboy]

Oxiidised is correct. That's what happens to BHR. Deoxidation is a fiction by those selling reblacking products. Once the oxidisation has happened you can't reverse it. You either paint it over with something or you remove a layer.
There is a third possibility, you can do both.

[Hawk]

I read in an old telephone site where Thomas Handcock vulcanized rubber with mercury, slightly before Goodyear. The timeline and year of 1844 is OK but the mercury appears to be wrong; he used sulfur also. Further investigation said RHR was made with rubber using mercury. Any comments, corrections or more information. They also said mercury isn't used anymore since it is a heavy metal. As a side note, in high school chemistry we played with mercury with our bare hands. I also heated mercury oxide, a pounder and it transformed into the silver liquid. Sorry for the digression.

[PaulS]

To be fair, the word which was suggested as being used incorrectly, was 'deoxidation, and not 'oxiidation' as picked up in the last couple of posts. It is true that when we remove, by whatever means, the surface degradation, we aren't deoxidizing the BHR - we're simply removing material that according to Marshall & oldfield 'has become brittle and lost suphur' - the crud perhaps.
If 'oxidized' is what happens to the BHR (and I'm not arguing that) on exposure to light (presumably the uv part) - then it might be thought by the less well educated, like me, that if we 'deoxidize' the surface we are simply undoing the first process - hence the perceived act of 'de-oxidizing' - so whilst incorrect, the term deoxidizing has fallen into common and informal use by the technically ignorant.

So, we still do need a word to replace 'deoxidizing' - a word which is accurate in its description of the process of removal of the degraded oxidized surface material.

[PaulS]

now had a chance to read this link, provided earlier in this thread http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic35-01-001.html with particular reference to the ingredients (micro-crystalline and polyethylene waxes) of R.W. as used on the Benin Bronzes. As we've already said, the connection lacks sufficient relevance to pen materials to say with conviction that if used on our pens they might disintegrate in the near or distant future, but going on the premise that it's better not to use intrusive chemicals or at least those of whose long term effects are unknown, then better to be cautious and not experiment with them. Just as good results can be obtained using Micro-Mesh water based products, or similar.
I can't remember which of my pens I treated to R.W. - but flicking through the draws I've not been aware of any problems. Has anyone here, with certainty, found R.W. to be guilty of harming a pen?
Will ask the Brit. Lib. if they use the stuff on leather.

I'd maintain that used with caution, and only on pens that you know will never need any restoration or repair work, then you might try one or two second or third tier pens, just as an experiment - and to provide some sort of control sample - for future collectors. The main drawback - in the absence of anyone coming forward to advise of harm to their pens - is the almost impossible ability to remove these waxes, if the pen does at some future date need attention. As said above though, I now wouldn't use R.W. - it's expensive pound for pound, and doesn't really offer massive advantages over other methods. Mine is now kept for my books.
It goes without saying that we cannot treat our pens - for removal of micro-crystalline wax - using the same method as found appropriate for the Benin Bronzes.

All of this won't stop people wanting shiny black BHR pens, and so other folk will continue to 'blacken' them.

[Deb]

You can't "deoxidize" BHR. No such process exists. You don't need another word to replace re-blacking.

[Cob]

Well respect is diue to all the experts. However I recently purchased a terrible BHR Blackbird and also a bottle of Mark Hoover's horribly sticky product. I have to say that it works and the result may be seen in my photo which shows the barrel in its original state and the cap which has been "Hoovered". I should add that the Hoover product is not a black substance: it is a clear syrupy preparation.

32785

It is however a very sticky business. Hitherto I had had some limited success using Savinelli pipe-stem restorer.

Cob

[kirchh]

It's not clear to me that the fading we're discussing is, in fact, a result of oxidation, or that the discolored material is an oxide. Perhaps Todd (Farmboy) can educate us. My impression has been that the primary mechanism at work is the breaking of crosslinks in the elastomer that had been entrapping the particles of pigment, thus allowing those particles to be lost.

Todd?

--Daniel

[PaulS]

quote ............... "You can't "deoxidize" BHR. No such process exists. You don't need another word to replace re-blacking." If you re-read my post Deb., you'll see that is exactly the point I was making.
Many folk - although no doubt not yourself - have fallen in to the trap of using the word 'deoxidizing' to describe the act of removing the brownish/greenish crud, when in fact as was pointed out some comments back that word is wrong in the BHR pen sense, so I'm not disagreeing with you.

The quote from Hawk was simply .......... ""The term 'deoxidation' is being used on this thread and used improperly. The term is used in the making of steel by removing excess oxygen."" He's was correct regarding our pens - although I'm not clever enough to know about making steel - neither am I clever enough to know if kirchh's comments are valid. Oxidation is (possibly) what happens - and to get rid of it people have been saying deoxidation, when they should have been saying re-blacking.
Can't remember whether I've seen the word re-blacking being used in a general sense - is it adequate? or is there a sense that the absence of the 'de' prefix doesn't quite tell us enough?
I'm game for re-blacking - let's promote the word and see if we can change pen terminology for ever, and make it a little more accurate.:)

[Deb]

I think re-blacking is okay. Or maybe we could try "reducing pen diameter to restore colour." Or perhaps "valuing blackness over chasing." Just so long as we don't use pseudo-scientific terms to disguise what it is we are actually doing to the pens.

[Hawk]

To be fair, the word which was suggested as being used incorrectly, was 'deoxidation, and not 'oxiidation' as picked up in the last couple of posts. It is true that when we remove, by whatever means, the surface degradation, we aren't deoxidizing the BHR - we're simply removing material that according to Marshall & oldfield 'has become brittle and lost suphur' - the crud perhaps.
If 'oxidized' is what happens to the BHR (and I'm not arguing that) on exposure to light (presumably the uv part) - then it might be thought by the less well educated, like me, that if we 'deoxidize' the surface we are simply undoing the first process - hence the perceived act of 'de-oxidizing' - so whilst incorrect, the term deoxidizing has fallen into common and informal use by the technically ignorant.

So, we still do need a word to replace 'deoxidizing' - a word which is accurate in its description of the process of removal of the degraded oxidized surface material.

If one slightly (or whatever) removes the discolored surface, that is removing oxidation. i.e. exposing a new surface. Why not simply call it 'the removal of oxidation'. This thread has mentioned quite a few different coatings to apply on the BHR surface, thereby covering the oxidation. A mention of bleach or other liquid chemically removes the oxidation, possibly without removing as much as mechanical removal. The next thing to consider using this method is the short term and/or long term effects on the rubber due to a chemical reaction between the product and the BHR.

[kirchh]

If one slightly (or whatever) removes the discolored surface, that is removing oxidation

Do we know if the faded surface is oxidation?

--Daniel

[PaulS]

I think Deborah's suggestion of using 're-blacking', does provide some good direction for a more correct word, but Deb's alternatives, imho, are too awkward to use:):)

Re-reading the Marshall & Oldfield manual, they don't in fact use the words 'oxidation/deoxidation' - and really only make the point that this stuff degrades on exposure to light. They also add .......... "Washing can reduce surface acidity but there is no reversal of degradation."

Shows how difficult it is to settle on a technically correct term, and it would be easier to have a single word to use rather than a phrase - so in the absence of some genius help, I'm still in favour of Deb's 're-blacking'.

[Fermata]

I think that Eric Wilson has a technique for reblacking pens, the end result is to turn the clock back to when the pen was new.

Its personal choice perhaps, some people like a BHR pen to show its age, others like it was made yesterday. Another of my hobbies is selling very old and very good wine (not always the same!) to China and Japan. They look for pre 1960 wine in old scabby and dusty looking bottles with lables that look like they were from 2017. A 1950s bottle of Chateau Neuf du Pape will sell for $3000 in those markets, $150 at home.

Thankfully we in the pen world havent reached that level of obsession.:rolleyes:

In terms of natural reblacking, someone once told me to just use the pen and the natural oils in your skin will enhance the natural color of the pen.

I also meddle with vintage cars and some people use products with castor oil on the degraded tires and rubber parts on an old car or motorcycle and that really works, and better than commercially available products.

[FredRydr]

I really haven't a need for a single term or word to describe the various methods of treating discolored hard rubber. As stated above, there are different techniques, and the different words used to describe each are more specific than one term that, on its face, tends to apply to one technique more than another. Why foment confusion? Is it suggested that the pen community only refer to all these processes as "reblackening," notwithstanding those red, cardinal, blue & etc. hard rubbers that never were black in the first instance? This is silly.

As for me, I always understood the term "deoxidiser" in regard to our hard rubber pens never meant the removal of oxygen; it meant the removal of discolored hard rubber. If olive-colored hard rubber on my black and my mottled and woodgrain red and black hard rubber pens is not oxidised hard rubber, and the name of the substance created to remove that offending stuff is therefore misnamed, well...take it up with the manufacturer! As for steel production, I haven't a clue, but it doesn't matter anyway.

YMMV, etc.

Fred

[KrazyIvan]

I was researching the subject and came across a gun forum. The handles on some pistols are HR. someone uses "Armor All" to re-blacken the scales. I might actually try this on a small no-name ring top Franken pen I have. Oh, and the same thing came up about leaving them as is as the gun was an antique. :)

[Farmboy]

I believe there is more than one process at play. Loss of colorant (carbon black), oxidation of the sulfur cross links, and oxidation of the double bonds in the polymer backbone all play a role.

None of these is what I would call a reversible reaction.

You either add something black or you remove material to get to fresh material below the damaged layer.

??Does the HooGoo react with both red and black rubber in a mottled pen the same or is the black eaten away more?

I'll see if I have a paper or two on the subject later.

Putting oil (or ArmorAll) on the surface is just changing the reflectivity making it look dark.

more later

[RayCornett]

Contact Mark Hoover on Facebook. He has a deoxidizer that I swear by. Completely organic. You place the part in the solution, which is a thick sticky concoction, for about 20 minutes, wipe it off and rub vigorously, and in most cases it comes out pitch black. If not, you put it back in for about 10 more minutes. It is not a dye. I swear by the stuff.

[Wahl]

As a collector of vintage pens, I leave my more valuable HR pens alone.

But, if I come across cheaper pens which are brown/greenish (originally black), I will gladly clean, re-blacken and oil them.

[Cob]

Yes Hoover's product does work without removing material, so imprints and chasing remain as they were before the process.

I do not understand the "twenty minutes" claim. I have to soak the parts at least overnight, sometimes for two days; a friend who uses the product says the same. This Waterman's 52 was Café-au-Lait beforehand with an olive-green cap; now it is 70% cocoa bitter chocolate:38008

Cob

[kirchh]

Yes Hoover's product does work without removing material

I believe its primary mechanism of action is the removal of material.

--Daniel

[FredRydr]

Yes Hoover's product does work without removing materialI believe its primary mechanism of action is the removal of material.
You can actually see the migration of olive-colored matter into Mark Hoover's clear solution from the surface of the hard rubber. I'm not going to taste it to determine what it is.

[Zisi]

If we are not applying additional material (dye) then we’re taking some material off. I don’t see any other way that the colour is changing. I’ve used Hoover’s product, it’s great on some pens - very messy. It takes material off. Just like using a liquid abrasive would, or using micro mesh would. I tried those too, and they work fine as a method on pens without any imprints or chasing. I’ve tried the pmnr9 dye too, it requires skill that I don’t possess - worked well on one pen and never after.
No one method is best, IMHO. I use a mix for different functions. Hoover for pens with imprints or chasing, dye on cap crowns and blind caps, micromesh on pens without imprints or chasing.

[Farmboy]

Why color them black in the first place?

[Jon Szanto]

Why color them black in the first place?

Mick says so.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wCUlPNlQuA