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 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

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.