In fact, there are TWO versions of the original pen, not counting the decorative variations such as the well-known model with gold filled cap. The first of them is THE original model made in 1958-59. After that, a second batch was in production between 1963 and 1964. And there are some subtle differences between them.
The same pen, but not so much the same...
The original pen is slightly longer –just 3 mm longer--, does not carry any inscription on the cap ring, and is not dated on the barrel. In fact, we already know that those codes were implemented in 1960.
The caps have the same dimensions, but differ on the cap ring, and on the depth of the engraving on the clip. That on the 1958 pen is deeper.
The second edition pen has an additional engraving on the cap lip: PILOTR14K.
The second edition, on the contrary, does carry those dating codes starting either with a D, 1963, or an E, 1964, and has some inscription on the wider cap ring: PILOTR14K. The engravings on the nib and on the clip of this second model seem to be shallower than on the 1958 pen.
The engraving on the nibs have different depths, which is hard to notice if both pens were not side by side. And on the example of the picture, the differences are very minor. Closer to the camera is the 1963 edition.
The differences in the length of the pens lie solely on the length of the barrels. The filling systems are the same hose-filling system so dear to Pilot in the 1950s and 1960s.
Both editions implement the same filling system—the quarter-switch or hose system.
.1958 edition. |
.1963 edition. | |
| Length closed (mm) | 141 | 138 |
| Length open (mm) | 125 | 122 |
| Length posted (mm) | 151 | 144 |
| Diameter (mm) | 12 | 12 |
| Weight, dry (g) | 18.0 | 16.5 |
The table shows the dimensions of both pens.
All in all, these differences are minimal, but they are enough to show that the original model was a success and that it might have not been a big economic burden for Pilot. They also show the importance of small details when trying to date a pen. This stylographic archaeology is mostly irrelevant to the whole picture, but it is of great interest to the collector looking for that precise pen with no mixture of elements from here and there.
Yes, this is an otaku thing. But these differences might as well trigger some price differences between these two editions of essentially the same pen.
My thanks to Mr. Sunami.
Sailor Young Profit, music nib – Parker Quink Blue
Bruno Taut
Nakano, March 4th, 2015
etiquetas: Pilot
Bruno Taut
Nakano, March 4th, 2015
etiquetas: Pilot
4 comments:
Another great piece as always! Thank you so much for your fantastic input !
NIkolaos
Awesome post! I don't know how I missed this one. I have the second version....now I need the 1st (let me know if you come across one for sale). Do you know if these pens write any differently?
I think the nibs are fundamentally the same. It would be interesting to check the feeds, but removing them is no easy task. The first version, 1958, seems particularly difficult to find.
Thanks you both, Blake and Nikolaos, for passing by and commenting.
BT
Hi Bruno, I came across your website when looking up this pen and I think I have acquired one of each generation based on subtle differences you have noted but I have noticed some discrepancies as well.
On my earlier pen model (I refer to it as the "first generation"), the cap band has a thinner band of gold than the second generation, but both have the inscription of "PILOT R14K" just one in slightly larger font than the other due to the thicker band of gold.
I have also noticed that there is a difference in the feeds between the two, I did not take a photo, but I can do so when I next service the pens (I acquired them at different times and didn't realize the differences until having serviced the second). The first generation appears to have a one-piece feed and the breather hole for the feed is thus a uniform rectangular cutout, while the second generation has a two-piece feed and the breather hole is a rectangular cutout with a bit of a notch where the second piece interfaces with the main body. I have different inks in the pens but I do notice that the second generation pen with the two-piece feed seems to write wetter than the first generation pen, although neither of which are too wet.
I'm also not sure if this is just my pens, but on my second generation pen, I noticed that the inscription on the barrel which reads "PILOT SUPER 500" is also facing the opposite side of the nib (the "back side") vs the front side on the first generation pen.
Also, I couldn't find the date code on either pen, so could there have been an intermediate second generation pen prior to the introduction of the date codes but with the differences from the first production? It's such an interesting pen and there's unfortunately not that much information on them so I figured I'd leave a comment even on such an old post, thank you for your efforts in trying to catalog all the differences in these pens and publish them so that others may find them!
Post a Comment
Your comments are welcome and appreciated.