Waterman 32A-V Section/feed/nib oddity

[Sagebrush64]

Hi everyone,

I just finished disassembling a Waterman's 32A-V and came across something I've never seen before.

First of all, the visualated section was a bear to remove from the barrel. It took me the better part of an hour to methodically use dry and wet heat to finally pry it free...seems the previous re-sacker shellac'd it on.

Second of all, the feed was very stubborn and did not want to knock out...again, time/soaking and gentle prodding, it came out. The nib on the other hand was stuck hard! After a close examination it appeared the nib was wedged between the section and a sleeve that was inserted into the section.
I've dealt with these clear sections before, but the shape of the feed and the sleeve have me stumped. I've cleaned it all up but am a little apprehensive about trying to get this thing back together again....has anyone else encountered this?

TIA,

James

[Seattleite]

Hi James,

Fellow Puget Sounder here.

I dug around and was able to find a 32A (full length) which has a visualated section with sleeve. Same configuration as yours, I believe. The bottom of my feed has a flat face, assembled such that the round portion bears on the sleeve. I assume that this is done so that there is a sector of the visualated area that is not obscured by said sleeve. I have not, as yet, removed the feed from my section, but don't see any reason to deviate from a normal reassembly (don't force it). I'm not adverse to removing a bit of diameter from section bore, or feed if things are too tight. Celluloid sections shrink, rubber feeds don't.

My section is so heavily ambered that it is hard to see any difference when looking at it from the top or bottom. I doubt that it could have revealed much, even when new, with such a restricted viewing area. An understandably short lived innovation.

Do you ever make it to the Seattle Pen Club? I may have seen you there. I'll take mine to the Dec 16 meeting just in case.

Bob

[Seattleite]

For anyone who may stumble upon this thread, here are some examples of the late 1930's Waterman's pens being discussed. The Brown with Red filaments is a 32A (full length) and the Red with Green filaments is a 32A-V(est) with pencil thrown in. At some point the name changes to Thorobred for this series.

https://fpgeeks.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=36249&d=1512008811

A celluloid pattern of great depth that my photo fails to capture.

Bob

[Sagebrush64]

Hi Bob,

Thank you for your response....I'm still a little dumbfounded at this configuration....why, is the only question I have. I don't understand why that sleeve is in there...it separates the nib from the feed so that they only meet outside of the section. Mine is so tight that I can't even get the feed back into the section without muscle and risk of breakage. The nib is the same.

All that being said, I think I'll just source another "normal" visualated section/feed assembly. You are right about the clear section going amber, besides the sleeve defeats even further any chance of seeing anything.

I have not attended any Seattle Pen Club meetings yet. I live on the Kitsap side and it's hard for me to find the time to get across the sound and then that far north of Seattle. I think I will make an attempt this month though and I'll bring this thing and we can compare.

Thanks again and I'll hopefully see ya later this month!

James

[Seattleite]

Hi James,

I'm sure that I have a spare section/feed or two (of the non-sleeve variety) that I can bring. If the club doesn't work out, we can follow up here.

Take care

Bob

[Sagebrush64]

Hey Bob,

Thank you very much....I'll bring everything along so we can play around with it. I have been trying a few that I have but they seem to be a hair too small. Odd since they are from the same family.

You wouldn't by chance have a Esterbrook standard J section laying around would you? I just picked up a sweet little red for a steal, but the section has been pliared to death! I'll float this question on the board here and elsewhere.....

Thanks again,

James