Ballpoint vs gel (revisited)
Jeff
durable line, it suffers from a short write out and you must take some care
as to the surface you're applying it to. Shiny surfaces, such as a glossy
magazine, almost repel gel ink making for a very long dry time and high
probability of smearing. Today's gel ink tries to hold up against water -
and does a fairly good job of it - but does blur and fade somewhat. Gel is
clearly an evolution in process... but just not quite "there" yet (IMHO).
The inexpensive Parker (Jotter) can be had at the same price as a Pilot G2
set or a single Q7 pen. For the same money, the Parker offers a much more
refined casing and retracting mechanism and the ballpoint has Parker's
renown micro texture which allows its oil-based ink to glide onto the page.
The Parker ballpoint holds up extremely well against water and holds its
line well. In contrast, the typical ballpoint is a piece of crud that skips
and drags.
As much as I've seen glowing reviews of the Pilot G2 (refills) in this
newsgroup, I just can't agree with their advantage over (even) the Parker
ballpoint's flow. The Pilot G2 drags its line across the paper - an effect
that is amplified when writing on a wooden surface. The Parker (gel or
ballpoint) floats by comparison. For me (a cost-conscious-over-the-counter
pen shopper), the comparison actually boils down to Parker gel versus Parker
ballpoint. And when it comes to a pen I carry in my pocket - one that needs
to be durable and able to write (and dry quickly) on any of the possible
writing surfaces I may encounter in my daily travels, the surprise winner
(for me) is the humble ballpoint!
I have to admit that I'm a little disappointed in my findings as I had high
hopes for this new (to me) gel technology. I'd be interested to hear anyone
else's opinions on this issue!
Jeff
KC
>
>I have to admit that I'm a little disappointed in my findings as I had high
>hopes for this new (to me) gel technology. I'd be interested to hear anyone
>else's opinions on this issue!
>
>Jeff
>
To each his own - for me it isn't about long write or lasting color -
but about the ease of the write and the comfort of the pen. Wide
grips on pens like the Dr. Grip ease the pain. Gel ink lays down with
less pressure (on paper - I don't write on any other surface to my
knowledge) than BPs typically require. There are always exceptions -
the Cross Ion gels are temperamental and seem to require more pressure
- so I use them only sparingly. The wonderful grip doesn't make up
for the pressure required.
Nothing beats a BP for pressing through carbon copies in my checkbook.
Gotta pick the tool that is most comfortable for you and fits your
priorities. My priority is comfort and the narrow barrel of the
Jotter is painful. Much as I like the *look* of it, it isn't
practical for me.
Sometime back someone grumbled about people who "use FPs for
everything". I'll say now as I said then - each serves it's purpose
and each has advantages and disadvantages which *to me* means that no
one of them is really "better" than any other.
Much like FP inks.. <SEG>****
KCat the Recalcitrant
****Dubiel-ic Disclaimer: Excluding carbon containing inks, of course.
john cline ii
"Jeff" wrote in part:
> While it's true that today's gel ink lays down a nice, rich and
fairly
> durable line, it suffers from a short write out and you must take
some care
> as to the surface you're applying it to. Shiny surfaces, such as a
glossy
> magazine, almost repel gel ink making for a very long dry time and
high
> probability of smearing. Today's gel ink tries to hold up against
water -
> and does a fairly good job of it - but does blur and fade somewhat.
Gel is
> clearly an evolution in process... but just not quite "there" yet
(IMHO).
There is a third option: rollerballs with so-called free ink (though
they charge you for it...it means the ink is free to frolic around the
inside of the barrel). Many are permanent, such as the Vision Elite
from Uniball. They write smoothly, have intense colours, and last
longer than gels. The Uniball Vision is another such choice. So is
Pilot's own Precise V7's and Deluxe Bolds (the latter of which are the
smoothest pen of any type I have ever used). The Precise V7 blue is a
deep, satisfying blue. The smoothness cannot be beat, in my opinion.
>
> The inexpensive Parker (Jotter) can be had at the same price as a
Pilot G2
> set or a single Q7 pen. For the same money, the Parker offers a much
more
> refined casing and retracting mechanism and the ballpoint has
Parker's
> renown micro texture which allows its oil-based ink to glide onto the
page.
> The Parker ballpoint holds up extremely well against water and holds
its
> line well.
Funny, I have seen test results in the past that claimed that blue
ballpoint pen ink was among the LEAST safe things with which to write a
check. The tests usually suggest using FOUNTAIN pens or rollerballs.
> In contrast, the typical ballpoint is a piece of crud that skips
> and drags.
Not my experience. BIC makes fine ballpens, at every lower price
level. Parker refills are hardly the best in the ballpen line. In
fact, I much prefer the much less expensive and less blobbing Schmidt,
which I get in boxes of ten from pencity.com.
> As much as I've seen glowing reviews of the Pilot G2 (refills) in
this
> newsgroup, I just can't agree with their advantage over (even) the
Parker
> ballpoint's flow. The Pilot G2 drags its line across the paper - an
effect
> that is amplified when writing on a wooden surface.
Are you using the 0.5MM perhaps? Because this is NOT my experience
with the 0.7MM. There seems no difference between the feel of the
Parker and the Pilot. Also, try the Zebra Sarasa, available at K-Mart
and the Office superstores... (..Max, ...Depot, and Staples). The
colours are MUCH more intense than Pilot, especially in the blue. And
they make a wonderful navy blue.
>The Parker (gel or
> ballpoint) floats by comparison. For me (a
cost-conscious-over-the-counter
> pen shopper), the comparison actually boils down to Parker gel versus
Parker
> ballpoint. And when it comes to a pen I carry in my pocket - one that
needs
> to be durable and able to write (and dry quickly) on any of the
possible
> writing surfaces I may encounter in my daily travels, the surprise
winner
> (for me) is the humble ballpoint!
Humble? At $3.35 a refill, I do not see the Parker refill as humble.
Nor do I see it as particularly worth the money. There are many other,
better choices. At the start of school, one can often buy as many as
70 Bic Cristal pens for the price of one Parker refill. The BIC writes
better, too, IMHO.
>
> I have to admit that I'm a little disappointed in my findings as I
had high
> hopes for this new (to me) gel technology. I'd be interested to hear
anyone
> else's opinions on this issue!
Again, I highly recommend you try two things: rollerballs with free
ink (especially those marked waterproof and archival), and Zebra Sarasa
gels. Even the Jimnie gel from Zebra is a great buy, and available at
most US Dollar General or Family Dollar stores (different chains, the
first has yellow signs, the last red) for about a dollar each. Sadly,
the pens are refillable, but the refills are not, to my knowledge, sold
in the not-so-green US.
john cline ii who hopes that helps
Jeff
I am merely trying to do the seemingly impossible; choose a single (type of)
pen that I can carry with me and use as my primary writing instrument. Like
I said in another post, had I not lost my trusty ballpoint a few weeks ago,
I would have never found myself plunged into the world of gel (and other)
ink.
In my daily travels, I can find myself writing on various surfaces. I've
found the need to write on paper bags, Styrofoam cups, magazine pages and
even standard, ruled writing pages and various grades of copier paper. I
don't want to trust finding a pen nearby and prefer to use my own - keeping
it handy wherever I go. For uniformity on these varieties of surfaces, a gel
or rollerball pen just wouldn't do. As much as I prefer the look of the
stark black line they lay down, I just don't feel secure leaving my
signature (for example) on something that might be smudged by the next
person in line or by the page placed on top of it.
I understand that (as KC thoughtfully and wisely pointed out) there is a
tool for every purpose but I am more apt to pick the all-in-one tool that
does it all - or tries to. Having to replace a favorite (ballpoint) pen is a
tougher job than I imagined. If I had just stuck to what I've been used to,
I would be simply happy with my Parker Jotter. Had that store shelf not had
an incredible array of gel pens to choose from, my curiosity would not have
been sparked. Woe to the man who has too many choices!
Jeff
"john cline ii" <jwciit...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:XxDh9.1375$t%6....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
KC
>John Cline, your opinions are well written and well taken!
>I understand that (as KC thoughtfully and wisely pointed out) there is a
>tool for every purpose but I am more apt to pick the all-in-one tool that
>does it all - or tries to.
how's about a Cross Matrix? :-) Ballpoint, pencil, highligher,
stylus and FP in one.
>an incredible array of gel pens to choose from, my curiosity would not have
>been sparked. Woe to the man who has too many choices!
Amen. It's why "we" spend too darn much money on pens...
we=me but I include hubby 'cause he makes the big bucks.
kcat
One of my favorite BPs is a Cross - Hubby found it in a desk he
inherited when he moved to a new office. It's plastic, a bit heavy
but well balanced and has a nice broad barrel (for me). I only use it
in the office for things that require copies or mailing forms that
need to stand up to international travel. But it's a good pen as BPs
go.
Jeff
as long as it's comfortable to write with. I agree with that statement up to
a point (no pun intended!).
How many of us (you) pen aficionados wear digital watches as opposed to
analog? An odd question in this newsgroup I would assume yet, if the
majority of us (you) chime in as wearing analog, I can assure you that it's
not because an analog watch is more functional. We wear what we wear
(clothes, hair, watches... and pens) partly because we feel these things are
an extension of ourselves. Popping out a plastic pen (such as any of the
Pilots) during an interview (for instance) wouldn't leave quite the
impression as clicking on a more elegant instrument. Naturally, I'm assuming
that other people actually care what I'm writing with - and who knows? I may
not be the only person in the room who actually pays attention to details
such as who wears what watch and uses what pen.
Jeff
I'm either going to seek out a good therapist or simply call myself a "pen
enthusiast" <grin>
"KC" <kca...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:vjleoukvtqs2t64jl...@4ax.com...
john cline ii
"Jeff" wrote in part:
> How many of us (you) pen aficionados wear digital watches as opposed
to
> analog? An odd question in this newsgroup I would assume yet, if the
> majority of us (you) chime in as wearing analog,
Somehow I doubt that "so what Satrap" will be surprised that I wear a
Casio digital watch because it is functional, and I care not one whit
what others think about it....The watch is for ME, not for them! :)
> I can assure you that it's
> not because an analog watch is more functional. We wear what we wear
> (clothes, hair, watches... and pens) partly because we feel these
things are
> an extension of ourselves. Popping out a plastic pen (such as any of
the
> Pilots) during an interview (for instance) wouldn't leave quite the
> impression as clicking on a more elegant instrument.
Depends on the interview and the interviewer! :)
> Naturally, I'm assuming
> that other people actually care what I'm writing with - and who
knows? I may
> not be the only person in the room who actually pays attention to
details
> such as who wears what watch and uses what pen.
True enough. Yet another reason to carry my trusty Bic Cristal! (and
a Pilot Vanishing Point and a Parker 51 with a stub nib and, and,
and.....
john cline ii who should have quit when he was behind! :)
Jeff
Why? Because I happened to see the backside of a paper I was writing on (in
ballpoint). It looked like a relief map of (insert your favorite mountain
range here). I compared it to a gel pen test page and - well, you folks know
what I'm getting at here. If I want to write at any length, a ballpoint is
going to give me writer's cramp no matter how I hold the pen. As far as the
water tests go, I don't think I'm going to give it a second thought. How
much of my work has been flushed? None of it - and envelopes will hold up
just fine against the elements until they reach their intended recipients.
Now that I've settled this issue (for myself), those fountain pens are
starting to attract my attention - AAAHHHH!!!!
Either I'm going to get myself a therapist or I'm going to resign to calling
myself a pen enthusiast : )
Jeff
"john cline ii" <jwciit...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1oOh9.1931$t%6.1...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
so what
>john cline ii who should have quit when he was behind! :)
>
get from back there!
Surprisingly, jwcii, I do not like wristwatches. I do not like digital time
thingeys. I have an *analog* timepiece which is attached to a big clamp.
satrap
who wonders if john cline ii is ever late for a roller coaster appointment
Shutterbug
<jwciit...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Somehow I doubt that "so what Satrap" will be surprised that I wear a
>Casio digital watch because it is functional, and I care not one whit
>what others think about it....The watch is for ME, not for them! :)
I usually wear a digital watch too, either a Casio or Timex. They're
accurate, have an alarm and stopwatch, the display lights up for night
viewing, and they don't suffer from that annoying "ticking" noise that
some watches are prone to. <G> Actually, I do have an analogue dress
watch for "formal" occasions (seems that whenever I need it though,
the batteries dead), and when I'm in a whimsical mood, a Mickey Mouse
watch. I get some strange looks when I wear that one, but who cares!!
>True enough. Yet another reason to carry my trusty Bic Cristal! (and
>a Pilot Vanishing Point and a Parker 51 with a stub nib and, and,
>and.....
Speaking of BIC, a couple of days ago I was going through some old
boxes and I found a lime green BIC Clic that I hadn't seen since high
school. I tried it, and darned if it didn't still write! And after
sitting in a box for 25 years! I'd like to see a Parker or Sheaffer do
that! Ya just gotta love those BICs!! <G>
Murray
Urban Fredriksson
john cline ii <jwciit...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Jeff" wrote in part:
>> The inexpensive Parker (Jotter) can be had at the same price as a
>Pilot G2
>> set or a single Q7 pen. For the same money, the Parker offers a much
>more
>> refined casing and retracting mechanism
I'll agree the standard G-2 looks cheap, but mechanically
I don't think a Jotter has an advantage really. You'll
have to up in price to a Rotring Newton or something for
that.
>and the ballpoint has
>Parker's
>> renown micro texture which allows its oil-based ink to glide onto the
>page.
>> The Parker ballpoint holds up extremely well against water and holds
>its
>> line well.
>Funny, I have seen test results in the past that claimed that blue
>ballpoint pen ink was among the LEAST safe things with which to write a
>check. The tests usually suggest using FOUNTAIN pens or rollerballs.
It seems like this has changed. When referring to its
ballpoint refills in the German FAQ, they say that ISO
12757-2 means it's "fälschungssicher" (forgery proof).
(<http://www3.pelikan.de/deutsch/pelikan/produkte/faq.php?fid=49&lid=0>)
The English version just says "water-proof".
(<http://www3.pelikan.de/deutsch/pelikan/produkte/faq.php?fid=25&lid=1>)
They also say "According to the standard, fountain pen
inks are not water-proof." (I'm almost sure a few would
be, if the makers bothered to have them tested/if ISO
bothered to have a standard for fountain pens.)
Today it seems like it's DIN 16554-2/ISO 12757-2
ballpoints and ISO 14145-2 rollerballs which would be the
recommended pens to use.
>> As much as I've seen glowing reviews of the Pilot G2 (refills) in
>this
>> newsgroup, I just can't agree with their advantage over (even) the
>Parker
>> ballpoint's flow. The Pilot G2 drags its line across the paper - an
>effect
>> that is amplified when writing on a wooden surface.
>Are you using the 0.5MM perhaps? Because this is NOT my experience
>with the 0.7MM. There seems no difference between the feel of the
>Parker and the Pilot.
Or at least not much.
>> For me (a
>cost-conscious-over-the-counter
>> pen shopper), the comparison actually boils down to Parker gel versus
>Parker
>> ballpoint. And when it comes to a pen I carry in my pocket - one that
>needs
>> to be durable and able to write (and dry quickly) on any of the
>possible
>> writing surfaces I may encounter in my daily travels, the surprise
>winner
>> (for me) is the humble ballpoint!
My No.1 choice is still the fountain pen, but except for
that, I'm starting to come to the same conclusion.
> Even the Jimnie gel from Zebra is a great buy, and available at
>most US Dollar General or Family Dollar stores (different chains, the
>first has yellow signs, the last red) for about a dollar each. Sadly,
>the pens are refillable, but the refills are not, to my knowledge, sold
>in the not-so-green US.
Intersting, as it seems the <http://www.zebrapen.com>
site is American, and it lists the JF-Refill which goes
into the Jimnie Retractible.
Well, here in Sweden most stores don't seem to know
there are black and blue G-2 refills either.
--
Urban Fredriksson http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/
A weapon is a device for making your enemy change his mind.
Curtis L. Russell
"Jeff" <n...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:TJLh9.308183$kp.10...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
...
> How many of us (you) pen aficionados wear digital watches as opposed to
> analog? An odd question in this newsgroup I would assume yet, if the
> majority of us (you) chime in as wearing analog, I can assure you that
it's
> not because an analog watch is more functional.
Perhaps to you or in your opinion. I 'wear' an analog fob (pocket) watch.
After years of doing official timing at bicycling events, including time
trials with 250 plus riders, each have their places. The digitals are better
at the precise timing for later calculations, but when you have five
cyclists crossing the line in 45 seconds or less and people checking on
whether or not they've caught their 30 second person, the analog is still
king. So I'll keep my fob watch with the sweep second hand and the large
face, along with the digital stop watch and the two or three backups...
There are times, though, that I miss the dual sweep analog Heuers (dual
watches, dual sweep seconds). Once you knew how to use them, you could do
more easier than you can with even the better digital stop watches. Multiple
analog sweep hands are easier to monitor than multiple displays IMO.
--
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, Maryland (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
Stephen Hust
> Actually, I believe an analog watch (or, to be more precise, an
> analog display) *is* more functional. It conveys at a glance not
> only the current point in time, but also the relative intervals
> before and after another point of interest, eg "20 minutes
> before ...", "a quarter past...", etc. It provides an immediate,
> intuitive answer to the question "how much time do I have left
> to get there?" A digital display requires arithmetic and
> interpretation.
I find analog watches easier to read at a glance, but I do like to
have a watch with a digital display with me when I'm on a trip so
that I can set an alarm for within the next 24 (and not just 12)
hours, or even program the alarm days in advance. But the digital
watch usually accompanies me along with, and not instead of, an
analog watch.
> I say digital timepieces are a humbug! :-)
You sure your name isn't Ebenezer? :-)
Years ago a girl on the street asked me what time it was. I simply
showed her the face of my analog wristwatch. "I can't read that kind
of watch," she said. So I had to tell her what time it was.
--
Steve
My e-mail address works as is.
so what
>Years ago a girl on the street asked me what time it was. I simply
>showed her the face of my analog wristwatch. "I can't read that kind
>of watch," she said. So I had to tell her what time it was.
>
So, it is not just my students. I have noticed that even *smart* kids cannot
read the (analog) clocks on the walls.
KC
>majority of us (you) chime in as wearing analog, I can assure you that it's
>not because an analog watch is more functional.
analog - watch ring though as a watch band is uncomfortable. so it's
mix.
>an extension of ourselves. Popping out a plastic pen (such as any of the
>Pilots) during an interview (for instance) wouldn't leave quite the
>impression as clicking on a more elegant instrument.
Too true. The opposite is true too - I recall a gentleman (using term
loosely) who pulled an MB out of his silk suit pocket and waggled it
in my face and said "This is a $500 Mont Blanc!" then proceeded to
give me my work instructions for the day.
woohoo. Hold me back. I'm so impressed. Not.
Sometimes one should make a statement without saying a word. (and when
I follow my own advice Hell will be suffering a blizzard.) He could
have used any pen brand and his theatrics would have had the same
effect - this is not a condemnation of MBs.
>Naturally, I'm assuming
>that other people actually care what I'm writing with - and who knows?
only because we care. I see pens on t.v. and say "that looks like
a..." and hubby just shakes his head.
>I may
>not be the only person in the room who actually pays attention to details
>such as who wears what watch and uses what pen.
or at least one of few... see above.
>I'm either going to seek out a good therapist or simply call myself a "pen
>enthusiast" <grin>
shhhhhhh.... my therapist doesn't know
KC
<shutt...@NOSPAMcanada.com> wrote:
>I usually wear a digital watch too, either a Casio or Timex. They're
>accurate, have an alarm and stopwatch, the display lights up for night
<nod> had Ironman (well... woman?) for work when I was working. Now
just have the watch ring. I like the watches on key fobs I've seen
but don't know how much abuse they can really take. And anything on
my keychain will suffer abuse.
>boxes and I found a lime green BIC Clic that I hadn't seen since high
>school. I tried it, and darned if it didn't still write! And after
>sitting in a box for 25 years!
isn't that wild? Though I must admit my similar story is of a
Shaeffer! I posted about it recently when I found an old Shaeffer BP
(1978-80). When my mum bought it for me the "big fat colorful plastic
pens" were kinda the new thing. I was thrilled to have a pen that
didn't feel like a toothpick in my hands. If I ever replaced the
refill in it, I don't recall doing so but it would have been only a
couple of years later anyway. So at least 20 years of working. Why
wouldn't I have used it if I liked it so much? Cause I stashed it
somewhere and continued to accumulate new pens over the years.
I wonder if the humid environment I've lived in these past 20+ years
has anything to do with the survival of the refill?
KC
>Years ago a girl on the street asked me what time it was. I simply
>showed her the face of my analog wristwatch. "I can't read that kind
>of watch," she said. So I had to tell her what time it was.
Geez. That's sad. Seriously.
JOrth51
>watches, dual sweep seconds). Once you knew how to use them, you could do
>more easier than you can with even the better digital stop watches. Multiple
>analog sweep hands are easier to monitor than multiple displays IMO.
Oh, I'd darn near kill for one of those stopwatches. Been looking hard, but
probably not hard enough.
Normally, I wear analogs just for the looks, but when I work at the racetrack,
it's a Nike Triax on my wrist, and I'm usually doing timing with my PDA, since
I can export it to Excel. I also wear digitals as "bumming around" watches, but
I'm a "chronophile(?)" and have way too many watches (digital and analog)
anyhow.
Back to the subject of pens, though. The one pen I've fallen in love with is
the best of both worlds (roller/BP) and that's the Parker Gel refills for BPs.
I have an Insignia with a blue refill that goes with me almost daily...enough
to make me leave my Vanishing Point at home. When I took notes in college it
was either a 51 Demi in fine, a Balance II, or the VP. But for the more
"rugged" life in the real world, it's a BP body/gel refill. Still has some
expression in the bold ink, and it's so convenient.
BTW, I like the Q7, but it always seems to have that gap in the middle of the
line. The Parker "precision" rollerball doesn't seem to have that problem --
wish it was retractable.
remove 'nospam' for an e-mail reply
Jeff
How long (write out distance, if known) does one of those Parker BP/Gel
refills typically last? I have a stainless steel Jotter (brand new) that I
love the feel of and more so with the gel refill but I'm deeply concerned
that I'll run out of ink (in the 3 to 5 times faster range) than my Jotter's
trusty BP refill.
Thanks so much for your reply!
Jeff
"JOrth51" <jor...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20020918210157...@mb-mi.aol.com...
JOrth51
run out yet.
Jeff
The more I write with them the more I find that the gel (rollerball) tends
to look sloppy when compared to the more controlled (almost "surgical") line
of a clean ballpoint. Although they do have a bad reputation, a good
ballpoint *does* lay down a fairly (if not completely dark) nice line.
I'll stop harassing this group now.
Jeff
"JOrth51" <jor...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20020919184712...@mb-fs.aol.com...
GA
others.
"Jeff" <n...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:2nui9.519515$UU1.86245@sccrnsc03...
Urban Fredriksson
>The more I write with them the more I find that the gel (rollerball) tends
>to look sloppy when compared to the more controlled (almost "surgical") line
>of a clean ballpoint.
Some of them sure do.
I recently got a couple of 1.0 mm Pilot G-1s, thinking
that they'd be really smooth writers. And they are. But
they don't exactly lay down a good line. At the same time
I also got a similar 1.6 mm ordinary ballpoint -- and
that's really something nice. Extremely smooth writing and
a pretty good line. It also seems like if I cut down the
refill a bit it'll fit in a Dr Grip Gel, I'll try that
when I run out of Zebra gel refills, because the XB
ballpoint really can compete with Pilot 0.7 mm gels.
--
Urban Fredriksson http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/
I must follow the people. Am I not their leader?
-- Benjamin Disraeli
Jeff
glide and solid (non-skipping) line. Add to that the fact that ball pens can
easily write on any surface, require almost zero dry time, last exceedingly
long between refills and are exceptionally inexpensive, and I have too many
reasons not to keep one in my pocket as my primary writing tool.
If I had to pick one (type of) pen to take with me to a deserted island, it
would be a ballpoint - probably a BIC crystal stick. Anyone here remember an
old commercial that showed a BIC stick piercing a metal can and then writing
directly afterward? I was 2 or 3 decades ago.
Jeff
"Urban Fredriksson" <gri...@canit.se> wrote in message
news:ameb5c$e...@uno.canit.se...
Urban Fredriksson
>If I had to pick one (type of) pen to take with me to a deserted island, it
>would be a ballpoint - probably a BIC crystal stick.
Don't you find the orange ones better? I don't have much
experience with them, but while they look similar and cost
practically the same, they aren't exactly alike in details
and I think the orange ones write better.
They're also among the few pens certificated as
suitable for archival use by the relevant Swedish testing
institute. (The Cristal ones aren't, but the M10 Clic
are in blue and black.)
That you can see the ink running out doesn't help much
if you can't pick up a replacement. (I also think the
Orange has a fine point but the Cristal medium, so
presumably the latter would run out first.)
--
Urban Fredriksson http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/
"In order to make someone a nervous wreck, apologize while they still
haven't used their best arguments." -- Runer Jonsson
john cline ii
"Jeff" wrote in part:
> If I had to pick one (type of) pen to take with me to a deserted
island, it
> would be a ballpoint - probably a BIC crystal stick. Anyone here
remember an
> old commercial that showed a BIC stick piercing a metal can and then
writing
> directly afterward? I was 2 or 3 decades ago.
* I do not know Jeff.
* I do not pay Jeff.
* Jeff makes a great deal of sense! :)
john cline ii, who just had to...(and who is staying home this weekend
to be with friends and family...and no, roller coaster season is not
over....that occurs just after they close the casket lid)...< Apologies
to Jeff, you have walked into the middle of a good-natured public,
private joke!..............A ruby yacht? I think not, I'll stick, with
BIC! >
john cline ii
Urban Fredriksson wrote:
<Jeff wrote>
> >If I had to pick one (type of) pen to take with me to a deserted
island, it
> >would be a ballpoint - probably a BIC crystal stick.
>
> Don't you find the orange ones better? I don't have much
> experience with them, but while they look similar and cost
> practically the same, they aren't exactly alike in details
> and I think the orange ones write better.
Me. too. In the US they are no longer available except as the hard to
find Grip version.
> They're also among the few pens certificated as
> suitable for archival use by the relevant Swedish testing
> institute. (The Cristal ones aren't, but the M10 Clic
> are in blue and black.)
M10's! :) Another fine pen BIC chooses NOT to make available in North
America!
>
> That you can see the ink running out doesn't help much
> if you can't pick up a replacement. (I also think the
> Orange has a fine point but the Cristal medium, so
> presumably the latter would run out first.)
You are correct, sir, and very wise...
BIC, *AND* Orange...What's not to like?
john cline ii who says see earlier apology, now added to Urban, too, in
this thread, and who just had to!
Jeff
Jeff - who sits nodding knowingly so as not to look foolish in the eyes of
others.
"john cline ii" <jwciit...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:nEDi9.546$ep5...@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
KC
<jwciit...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Dear Ms. So What:
get 'em, Satrap!
>* I do not know Jeff.
>
>* I do not pay Jeff.
oh sssssssssuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrre.. we believe you. How many more are
you corrupting, john?
Jeff
refills:
Ball pen write out expectancy: 13,200 feet (roughly 3 miles)
Gel pen write out expectancy: 1,640 feet
Conclusion: It would take about 8 gel refills to equal the write out
distance of a single BP.
Writing with wet ink is very expensive - not to mention potentially
embarrassing as you'll probably encounter a few instances where you'll need
to borrow a pen from someone who hasn't run dry.
Cross has similar information (see http://www.cross.com/refills_guide.asp)
on their write out estimates. To most of you here, this is anything but
news - I just thought it was interesting to actually get the numbers rather
than rely on the guestimates that are floating around.
Jeff - who is happy to be done with his research and will no doubt continue
to flip-flop on the choice of pen he carries but has today decided that a
ballpoint is the best all-round solution.
"Jeff" <n...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:rwuh9.123066$Jo.33085@rwcrnsc53...
> While it's true that today's gel ink lays down a nice, rich and fairly
> durable line, it suffers from a short write out and you must take some
care
> as to the surface you're applying it to. Shiny surfaces, such as a glossy
> magazine, almost repel gel ink making for a very long dry time and high
> probability of smearing. Today's gel ink tries to hold up against water -
> and does a fairly good job of it - but does blur and fade somewhat. Gel is
> clearly an evolution in process... but just not quite "there" yet (IMHO).
>
> The inexpensive Parker (Jotter) can be had at the same price as a Pilot G2
> set or a single Q7 pen. For the same money, the Parker offers a much more
> refined casing and retracting mechanism and the ballpoint has Parker's
> renown micro texture which allows its oil-based ink to glide onto the
page.
> The Parker ballpoint holds up extremely well against water and holds its
> line well. In contrast, the typical ballpoint is a piece of crud that
skips
> and drags.
>
> As much as I've seen glowing reviews of the Pilot G2 (refills) in this
> newsgroup, I just can't agree with their advantage over (even) the Parker
> ballpoint's flow. The Pilot G2 drags its line across the paper - an effect
> that is amplified when writing on a wooden surface. The Parker (gel or
> ballpoint) floats by comparison. For me (a cost-conscious-over-the-counter
> pen shopper), the comparison actually boils down to Parker gel versus
Parker
> ballpoint. And when it comes to a pen I carry in my pocket - one that
needs
> to be durable and able to write (and dry quickly) on any of the possible
> writing surfaces I may encounter in my daily travels, the surprise winner
> (for me) is the humble ballpoint!
>
> I have to admit that I'm a little disappointed in my findings as I had
high
> hopes for this new (to me) gel technology. I'd be interested to hear
anyone
> else's opinions on this issue!
>
> Jeff
>
>