Kind of funny to refer to Waterman as the "big competitor." Sure, they were once, but now Parker and Waterman are both owned by the same supercorporation.
@@jamesjacocks6221 I mean Newell Brands is pretty big. They're an international corporation and they own all Rubbermaid products, Parker, Waterman, Yankee Candle, Mr Coffee, Sharpie, and Expo markers to name a few...
@@highqualitywritinginstrument Okay, what I would call a semi holding company; a brand reseller if you will. This is where old, revered brands go to die.
Until 2011 Parker had its seat in Newheaven in UK and supposedly the Queen herself was a long time user of Parker fountain pens, including the original 51. Hence the Royal Warrant.
The three holes at the jewel are grooves in the inside of the cap. In case you swallow the cap you can then still breathe. You find the same grooves on other Parker models fx. the Sonnet
This doesn't make sense to me. If it allows air passthrough the cap wouldn't seal at all, and if it were a safety requirement all pen lids would have vents built in and anything other than ballpoints would be useless... unless I have misunderstood you?
Maybe that's just what you get now when a pen brand isn't really a pen brand anymore; more a label bought up by a multinational because it's a household name from yesteryear.
Lol, literally a household name. Broom, dustpan, trash can, iconic fountain pen. One of these things is not like the other. One of these things is just not the same. ...I need a singing Muppet.
Your company is big in the fountain pen market and the fountain pen brands do listen to you. Could you pass on some comments to Parker please? Pls tell them that their management needs to retire because they don’t know about fountain pens. I’m frustrated to see that they haven’t come up decent fountain pens in recent years (not design, not in nibs). The management team of Parker is ruin this brand. They can’t even make a proper reproductive pen. Their designers need to retire and hire someone new.... strongly recommend any fountain pen brands to consult big fountain pen sellers/stores first before releasing any pens ( you guys know the market better than them, pls tell them what the customers want to buy!)
Thank You for your review Stephen. The cap 'jewel' is vented for safety, not only on this, but on the Sonnet Pens. The clip could well be a modern Sonnet Clip as it carries the same three chevrons. The nib MAY be from a Jotter Fountain Pen which - unlike the original nib - is NOT tubular. I have purchased the stainless steel nib version and I'm delighted with it. I actually like the screw on cap! I own a 70 year old Demi size aerometric '51' and a Parker '61' cartridge converter. The 'feel' and quality of those pens against tthe new '2021' variant is almost identical. The barrel and cap are RESIN. The smoothness of the nib is superb. Brian Marsden. Sheffield. England
CORRECTION: The Barrel and SECTION are in RESIN, the cap is LUSTRALOY (Stainless Steel). Apologies for error in my earlier comments! Brian Marsden. Sheffield. England
Right, indeed. It's a modern incarnation, not a copy. One may not like the fact that the steel nib is from the Jotter. The cap has the trimmings (metaphorically and literally) of the modern line of Parker pens (i.e., as you say, from the Sonnet). The metal ring above the threads may be to protect the section from being scratched by the metal cap. The threads are to suggest a higher quality pen than a pen with a slip cap, probably distinguish it from the Sonnet, and may solve problems with slip caps that Parker has been having in the last few decades. (The Sonnet notoriously dries up over night and the slip cap is prone to unlodge the nib/feed arrestor that keeps them in the section.) None of the complaints about the pen (which is far from perfect, by all means) ring true in this very odd review. Neither does the praise of how well it writes.
I was suspecting that would be the case. I'm extremely disappointed that they actually used the Jotter feed and nib. That particular nib and feed combination really goes around. It's been in, IIRC, the Parker Jotter, the Parker Vector, the Parker IM, the Parker Urban, and now the Parker 51. I'll keep using my Wing Sung 601 flighter with its solid steel grip.
Thank you for your honest review and your facial expressions that tell more than a thousand words could. It is even worse that the 51's nib in the steel version, is the same as the $20 Jotter. I am not sure what Parker is doing here, but as as you acutely stated: they've cheapened the 51's heritage. I grew up in Greece in the 70's using a 50's Vintage 51 as my daily writer. I am happier using a $7 Hero 565 now, than an overpriced 'Jotter' 51.
Same here, I used 51s all through the 9th grade. I expected a cylindrical nib on the 51. This is Parker cynical marketing ploy to sell el cheapo Jotters.
I'd speculate that the reason for the threaded cap is that Parker decided not to go through the complexity of trying to recreate the proper cap clutch mechanisms of the original 51s. Whether the "window shade" clutches in the models up through the 50s that used friction on the metal clutch rings (which is poorly recreated in the nonfunctional trim rings in this version), or the later 'finger' clutch mechanism that grasped the sections (and which the Chinese manufacturers seem to have recreated in their 51 knockoffs) they require some precision in manufacturing that is maybe more complex than the simple cutting of metal threads inside a cheaply electroplated gold cap. After decades of using the originals, I'd be afraid to own one of these, because my physical instinct would be to try pulling the cap on/off, thereby stripping the threads even more quickly!
Informative and well balanced review. I purchased this pen, regrettably even at the ridiculously high price point for a gold nib version without having any bias from owning the Parker51 of old. Its a cheap and nasty little critter, threads misaligned on cap out of the box so it squeals like a stuck pig when uncapping. converter rattles inside the barrel despite being fully seated, and out of the box, hard starts and skipping on the B nib will require further tuning again...again....and at the aforementioned ridiculously high price point, unacceptable from what used to be a solid manufacturer.
Waterman and Parker are owned by the same company nowadays so one could hardly call them competitors. As for the pen, while it could be a nice pen, if one seeks a modern 51 remake then definitely Wing Sung 601 is the best choice, as it actually very faithfully replicates the 51 design and even makes slight improvements.
agree, and if you go one step further and go to 601a with an open nib, you can stick in a pilot #5 14k nib for a modern approximation of a parker vacumatic
@@johaneskrisostomus4863 The Pilot nib might not even be needed. Wing Sung themselves make a 601A with a 14k open nib. The 14k nib I have is quite nice, soft and smooth.
Speculation: The holes in the cap are there to ensure that if the cap is swallowed, then it can still provide some airflow and not choke you to death until you can get it removed. The screw on cap as well as the ring design is to differentiate the pen from the legacy 51, so that people do not simply buy a the new P51, take off the barrel, screw it onto a legacy P51 and sell it as a 'mint condition classic', same logic goes for the other half of the pen with the ring.
Thanks! Brutal honesty makes sense here. I happen to like my original '51 (as well as some other fountain pens I have) and I just don't see a Parker 51 here. The original P51 had a hooded nib, yeah, but the question we might want to ask ourselves is: "What is under the hood?" Is it the tubular nib, the long feed with the breahter tube and the collector with it's tremendous ink capacity (and yeah, the bloody thing can get clogged...)? No... it's just a repackaging of a current-day, everyday fountain pen for marketing purposes. Same goes for the screw-on cap. Why did the orginal had a slip cap? Well.. functionalist design, as everything about it back then: slip on is faster. The small band on the original has the clamps in the hood grip onto it, the 'new 51' has a band with no function whatsoever. From a designer's point of view this pen makes no sense. It's just something made to resemble an iconic pen from the past.
Parker is re-releasing, as you say, an iconic pen, yet the box is boring, there is no descriptive material, and there is one loose cartridge. It's lazy. The changes they made to the pen are mostly for the worse - the screw cap with metal threads that will destroy the plastic barrel threads, the mediocre jotter nib, the bad engraving on the clip. This is typical of Newell Rubbermaid, which has taken two of the greatest pen brands in history, Parker and Waterman, and reduced them to rubbish by either offering cheap, boring pens or offering the few remaining quality models over and and over in slightly different materials. It's rather sad really, to see these great brands so degraded.
I agree with you Stephen, the worst part is the plastic covering the nib, which looks cheap and nasty. I have a vintage Parker 51 and I'll stick with that.
Back around the millennium shift, Parker had a FP quality problem. Only the Urban and the stainless steel version of the Vector made it through unscathed. They're out of that now. But two things that modern era Parker are very good at, is 1: being very good writers, but at the same time, 2: giving you the feeling that you don't get much for your money. I'm 100% with sbrebrown here. It's as if Parker is out of touch with today's market. Their best are the 'office pens', Urban, Vector, Jotter, (my IMs are awful, but admittedly made around 2000), and these are really good practical fountain pens. Parker's cartridge is the best cartridge and Parker's deluxe converter is the best converter. No other brand can quite touch them on those components. Their feeds are good and they make stiff nibs better than anyone else. But they fail miserably at giving you something special, or any luxury satisfaction. Instead, there's a stink of "cheapness". The new 51/2021 is an excellent example. Instead of using the opportunity to do something nice, celebrating their 51 heritage, they throw a Jinhao 85 clone at you, at a much heftier price tag. Nothing really wrong with it as a pen, but plenty wrong with it as a "Parker 51". They should have called it "21" and taken down the price tag a bit.
Excellent review! I personally love my P51 special (was my late grandmothers), and I had been thinking about buying the new edition. Otherview reviewers had already disuaded me, and this only adds to it. For the money I'd be better off finding a different writer (or another vintage Parker).
This is Parker's "New Coke" moment! It messed with a beloved Classic, and it created a monster! :o The nib and hood design is terrible. It looks as if the nib is sprung. It certainly defeats the original 51 design of a hooded nib to prevent the ink from drying out into the air, and to lay down a juicy line of ink that was fast-drying. This new model moves away from that wonderful Parker innovation of 1939! A problem solved nearly 100 years ago is discarded, just so it looks "different"? No. This is retrograde technology, and it is an insult to the original designers of that great, innovative, history-changing Parker 51. I think it's like a parody of the Mona Lisa. Cheap, and cheapened.
I like that they’re trying, but, honestly, they are so plentiful on the used market that someone could still just buy a nice vintage once with gold nib for less than this new one with a steel nib.
Fabulous review. Well balanced and I agree with your criticisms. I’m one for modifying the pen. However, I’m not convinced the modifications are robust or nice looking.
This release is a seriously MISSED opportunity. I enjoy my Wing Sung 681 and Jinhao 51a pens. I’m a lover of the hooded and inlayed nib styles. I appreciate your dry, understated sarcasm.. good stuff.
Who is this pen meant to appeal to? It’s like they made a Parker 51 homage without talking to anyone who loves Parker 51s. Reminds me of the first generation repro Esterbrooks.
Your assessment is totally accurate. I own one Parker: the Parker “51” Special Edition Empire State design with sterling cap in Empire State Building etched design, highlighted by 23K gold plated clip, “gems” at both ends, and an 18K nib w platinum alloy point, and a beautiful turquoise blue barrel. While I really never liked hooded nibs, I could not pass this up for all it represents. It writes beautifully and is beautiful to the touch and to look at while writing. The latest iteration really does look inferior, so I will now cherish mine even more. Mary from Rhode Island P.S. Hooray, we are getting your Appelboom here, “right up the street” in Boston, taking over our multi-generation, storied pen store, Bromfield.
The cap jewel design you're mentioning likely serves the same purpose as everything else in this pen, which is cheapening the production. They've taken it directly from the Sonnet model, which by the way are very well known to dry up a fully filled converter within a week, because they're very literal holes, in a cap, without a slip and seal system. That also kind of explains why they picked threading over a slip on cap.
Only the early Sonnets dry up, mine is from 2011, after redesign and it has smaller holes and don't dry up. You're also wrong with the purpose, small holes are here to prevent the cap from forming a vacuum and sucking ink out when you take it off. Maybe because of that i don't have problems with pens with that design but i often have ink on grip section and on my hands using completely sealed pens...
Stephen, honest review as always. I think the issue here is that Parker wants to capitalize on the 51 name, and of course to the "purists" out there it may not work given the differences (although subtle or glaring) between the two.
Good stuff here, thanks for the candid assessment. As a Parker fan I have so many thoughts, many unkind. The cap appears to just be a slapdash repurposing of a Sonnet cap, gone are the crisp details and elegant proportions of the original P51 clips. The new nib is more of an echo of a Parker 45 with its pointy and elevated over the nib configuration. But why do that to a 51 - the 45 was a much less expensive, almost disposable pen, the snug hooded section was what defined the P51. Also annoying - no converter here. Not even for the gold version selling in the triple digits, just one lonely cartridge rolling around in the bottom of the box. Apologies for the harsh words, I get riled up sometimes...:-)
The 45 "almost [a] disposable pen"? Ouch. With a gold nib, at that. I take your point, but it's rough. Incidentally, the hood on the "51" (quotation marks indicating the 2021 version) looks a little bit more like that on the 45 than the 51. Also: the gold version does actually come with a converter. For whatever goodwill that 8,- gesture will do for a potential buyer... Ultimately it's prob. the nib that underperforms and makes this pen a little more ordinary than it could have been.
I think this new Parker 51 is more similar to a Parker 45 than to a vintage 51. Especially the point and the nib, very close to the Parker 45 shape. But this is only my opinion 😉
5:00 the metal ring was there in the OG version but much thinner, it was used for the slip cap mechanism. The OGs barel thread were plastic on plastic, here they did metal threads for some reason.
Thank you Stephen.. I recently was given two vintage 51's that a friend found in an estate sale.. they needed work that I completed and they look and operate very well. I can see the original appeal. I would not necessarily go looking for one now.. but I am happy to have them. I also have a Jinhao 51a, and a Wing Sung 618.. the 618 is well made and is a clear piston mechanism and that is cool. I've seen the new Parker.. considering that they continue to produce a lovely Duofold this rebirth of their icon in such a compromised manner is a shame. Oh, I have a Sonnet from 2006 that has a jewel with the same slots.. my vintage 51's are solid.. thanks man; the Gregorian chant was lovely.. Frank in Colorado
Realistically though, all of the modern pens have changed quite a bit from their vintage counterparts. That being said, I understand the frustration with how this was presented. Every high end parker pen has had a special card in the package explaining the significance of the model, yet I guess they just assumed we all knew the history of this one so they slapped it in a box and shipped it. It would have been nice if they produced a unique parker 51 case or something to differentiate it from just a plain copy. The general consensus I’ve heard is the steel one writes like a jotter but the gold one writes beautifully. The argument that it has the SAME nib as the jotter is a tough one. The theory runs dry when you realize the jotter does not have a gold nibbed version.
Who else is watching this review with a black and gold parker 51 in front of them? Mine happens to be an aerometric from 3rd quarter 1946 inked up in Iroshizuku Tsuki-yo. Thanks for the review. I agree with your criticisms of this current iteration. My biggest design issue with this pen is one I hadn't appreciated before your video - the fact that the "hood" is so much higher than the nib. It doesn't look quite right. Maybe I have gotten used to the vintage ones, and I have several. My only other reservation is the price. The GT version should be sub-£100 and the steel version sub-£50 instead of £180 and £75, respectively. Heck, my Platinum PTL-5000 (14k nib) was only £27 - I had to double check that, but it really was that cheap bought brand new from an AD.
I have a Sonnet that has those openings under the jewel and it adds to the tendency of the pen to dry out. If you Google you will find people doing all kinds of things to plug them. I stuffed silicone grease into them and now I don't have air come out through them if I blow into the cap. I don't know if I buy the choking/breathing explanation because I don't know of other pens whose caps have giant vents in the end like that so that water pours out or you can blow air through...
@@fiddletwist *shrug* beats me. :-) I've heard that there have been some regulations going around regarding "safety" of some objects, but all the regulations I heard about were related to "children friendly" things like fountain pens aimed at kids. No idea on this one. I'm sort of enamored of the old school but modern styling of the Parker 51, and so these new pens *do* interest me, but I'm not sure they represent sufficient refinement to justify the gold nib price, which is the one that I would be interested in, especially versus something like a Lamy 2000.
Thank you for your honesty. That's what I come here for. I think your choice of words was precise and apposite. Parker have definitely 'cheapened' the 51 brand, and this is not the homage the original deserves. It's a decent writer, sure, but it's an expensive way to get an ok-looking decentish fountain pen. The writing experience is not the same as the 51, from unscrewing the cap onwards. That said, it'll sell like hot cakes. Just not to you or me, of most of the pen folks I know.
I really like Parker pens; but I have to agree with most of the reviewers' criticisms about the new model. The Parker 100, in my opinion, is much better as a "homage" pen / modern version of the 51.
I think that the vents under the jewel are there to allow for breathing if someone (especially children) have put the pen cap in their mouth and accidentally had it stick in their throats. I notice this trend a lot with pens that have separate caps.
Thank you Dr. Brown for the review. What I seem to recall is that the gaps on the top of the cap below the jewel are there for a few reasons. One of them is a safety issue in case a person accidentally gets it stuck in their airway they are still able to breathe. A second is I believe to avoid litigation issues when such an incident ocurres. And to comply with international safety standards. Some many still remember when certain (I apologize) non fountain pens were manufactured up until the seventies without such holes. I have just purchased a new Parker 51 and I must say that the front portion sticking out so far gives the material of the pen a cheap look and feel to it. Maybe I will be working on obtaining the German counterpart of the Parker 51, the Lamy 2000.
If that's what the gaps are for, they could have just stuck with a slip cap. The gaps would've rendered the twist cap pointless anyway. The vintage 51 was a classic because its design was a case study on "form follows function". There was nothing superfluous because even its ornamentation served a purpose. Twist caps help keep the nib from drying out, but if it's already exposed to air, then the twist cap becomes pointless.
Great review and agree that the new incarnation looks cheaper than my original P51 aerometric. By the way there IS a silver clutch ring between the barrel and section on mine (and most others I’ve seen) so don’t believe this to be a new thing. The gap between the section hood and nib would drive me C-razz!
You are spot on with this review. Beyond issues of how faithful a replica this is the build quality is lacking. My sense is that all the Newell brand products are lessening in quality. Living off an old reputation...
It is my understanding that both Parker and Waterman are manufactured in the same facility. Given this, engineering/design choices such as the ill-conceived screw cap seem out of character.
Parker pens seem to be far worse than Waterman pens, is almost as if the Parker brand is being intentionally hamstrung for segmentation reasons. Waterman gets the good stuff, Parker gets the "cheap" stuff.
Always a pleasure to watch Pen review from Sbrebrown. Could the holes above the cap is a design feature for preventing vacuum. I do agree with your observation concerning clip length and ring.
I have a beautiful hand-turned wooden pen that someone made from a kit. Metal-threads-on-plastic-threads stripped it very quickly and now it won't even screw on anymore. I'll have to DIY some kind of thing to fix it. I'm surprised Parker did that too.
I am in my mother's Parker 51 and I believe it was purchased in the early 1950's. It is a wonderful writer. Recently I purchased the new model with a gold nib. I agree that the new 51 is of inferior quality. The new model skipped so I got contact Parker and the company said the pen must be returned to France for examination. Now the pen was purchased in March of 2021, I registered the pen on their website for an added two years on top of the regular 2 year warranty. A recent reply from France says I must pay for a replacement nib. Was I using this pen as a dart? As a pen collector I find this reply by Parker as a way to sucker me out of $92 for parts and $43 for handling.
Very helpful - thank you!!!! I wish they would have made the cap a slip off. That really matters to me. I'm glad it's a smooth writer but it should be in the price point it's in. :)
The original 51 feed was so carefully designed and constructed and housed neatly in the hood behind the nib, rather than under it. This new one has a stock feed - - and that's not cutting it for me. As for switching over to cartridge/converter, I'll beat the dead horse and punish them for that too - - MB, TWSBI et al utilize piston fillers and the aerometric converter in the original 51 is still used in some modern pens today. The threaded section defeats the sleek design and comfort and those slip caps were THE BEST. The original 51 is a near perfect pen, nay a near perfect creation of Mankind. If I had to quibble on something about the original 51, it would be that I wish it were eyedropper but I'm pulling strings here. I too have noticed Parker's cheapening on their pens in the last decade. TL;DR Avoid this dumpster fire of pen and treat yourself the sacred original. Regardless, thank you Stephen for the review :D
It really is a fantastic writer. I personally think having a beautiful pen that’s an awful, or basic writer is much worse. Anyway, I love writing with this pen, no doubt about it.
I was hoping they would at least keep one design element; the slip cap, or a proper hooded nib. They could have even gone for the aerometric filler instead of the converter - which is sold separately! I mean, at least with Jinhao, you get a CONVERTER with the pen!
Thanks fro the honest review. I expected way more from them, and was enthused that they would rebuild the original. To me, it looks really like Parker's trying to milk the Parker 51 legacy to sell a overpriced and modified Jotter. They could have redone the same design as the old one with newer materials and new converter but, they cut the corners and just rebuilt a 51ish body around a Jotter to buff the prices. It saddens me as I would have been keen to give it a chance to bolster the initiative and EU made products. BTW, Caveat emptor : the steel nib version doesn't even come with a converter.
I don't know why so many people are surprised by the metal ring on the section. It's painfully obvious why it's there - to imitate the look of the original 51. The original had a clutch ring which was part of the capping mechanism. The new one has a screw cap so that doesn't apply, but they put the ring there for aesthetic purposes.
The Jinhao 86 is actually the best Parker 51-2021 on the market. They fix the near, making it easier to write with, while not changing the visualization very much. That being said, I enjoy the Parker 51 because I don’t consider it or measure it against the old one. In reality, I actually like the Parker 21 better than the 51 but if I look at the pen by itself without the baggage of its name , I agree that it’s a pretty good writer and I now have five of them, maybe six, I don’t know. My only complaint is what I am writing I can’t see the nib and I have to guess a little bit. This is why I like the 86, it revisualizes and smoothes moves it out so nicely. I like when Parker is done with their lineup, and I think that the 51 is here to stay. I do believe that Parker is completely miss marketed it, but what do you expect from people who sell rubber home products. I think the 51 is the best attempt that the non people that Parker could make.
Nice honest review. Before you start talking, I was expecting to see the old Parker 51 appears exactly with the old design, thinking that perhaps I could buy one of the new batch but seeing that the several innovations takes the 51 to a corner, I will not buy one. I have several chrome Parker with that same cap, that have that same thin and not deep groves. I bought three of them but I must say they stuck on the flow of ink. So I am not using them, somewhat disappointed.
Dank voor de review Steven. Met andere woorden: laat deze pen (ook als “core” versie met rvs-punt) maar links liggen en ga voor de Jinhao 85 die ook net uit is gekomen. Of een Jinhao 51a/wing sung 601 die nog het meest met het origineel overeen komen voor een fractie van de prijs. Voor het geld wat ze voor deze 51 vragen zijn er betere opties... Overigens, Waterman is tegenwoordig van dezelfde firma, dus zulke grote concurrenten van elkaar als vroeger zijn ze ook niet meer... de inktkeuze is dus vergeven. ;)
That vent on the top of the cap might be required by safety regulations where the pen is manufactured or where it may be exported. It’s to prevent a chid from choking on a swallowed pen cap.
Hi Stephen, always love your reviews about pens. My take on this one is ... it is a Parker 51 in 2021 (modern) version, that’s why the subtle design changes. It is not a vintage PARKER 51 REISSUE.
The cap has holes because EU regulation requires it. It's deemed a choking hazard. The holes are there so the idiots who choke on it don't suffocate. It causes the nib to dry out. The workaround is to plug it with a few drips of wax.
I have seen so many reviews similar to this one, where people just shake their collective heads at what Parker have done. I can totally understand that. As for me, I'm not a "51 aficionado" and have never owned one, and I think it looks kinda cool. (please folks behind me in the comments, be careful with those pitchforks! lol) What I am pleased about is that you say it writes so well. That's the most important thing for me. What I'm curious about, though obviously this is something you cannot answer, is how does the steel nib version write? (as that's the one I can afford) Perhaps Appelboom could be convinced to send you a steel one at some point, assuming you'd be interested in find out; which you may not. Anyway, thank you Sir for your review....as always.
Stephen, a fine review, and as I own both pens, I can only underscore what you say in your review. The original Parker 51 was (and remains) an outstanding example of the art of pen making. The 2020 edition certainly writes well, and that’s where it stops. I hear my critics saying “you’re complaining about a pen that writes well?! What is your problem?” Well, my problem is that I have many pens that write well; it is, after all, what is expected of them. What I did not expect was that Parker would cheapen the quality of this latest version. In 1941 the basic model cost $12.50, making it an expensive pen, worth about $230 today. The 2020 version is a cheap pen. Too bad. Yes, as I said before, it writes well, but I have a Platinum Preppy that sells for under $5 that writes beautifully. True, it’s a cheap pen, but it does write nicely. Cheap or expensive, I expect a pen to do that. And on topic, the Wing Sung (noted above,) and the Jin Hao 85 cost about a tenth of the Parker, look like a Parker, and mirabile dictu, write very well. ‘Nuff said
I was excited by a sbrebrown review! And then all I thought was after reading the title :oh, that piece of shit pen” 🤣 I’ll watch it anyway because I like your videos.
Thanks for the facial expressions. Yes they are humorous and enjoyable as always. But sometimes they serve an even more important purpose. EXPENDITURE AVERTED. 😄
Oh, how sad. I so wanted to love this pen. By the 5-minute mark into the video I hated so many things that there was no possibility of me getting one of these. Not even at half the price. The steel nibbed one would basically be a hooded Frontier. No, wait, even the Frontier manages a nice slip cap. I fear the Parker Pen company is a thing of the past.
Perfect review about a lot of mistakes of the new design and construction. ...even chinese manufacturers know that metal parts destroy plastic threads...etc.
Has anyone else noticed the inside of the cap seems to have been designed to fit around the pen so that the threads are not touching the body of the pen when posted? Maybe I’m wrong.
Kind of funny to refer to Waterman as the "big competitor." Sure, they were once, but now Parker and Waterman are both owned by the same supercorporation.
And both are a mere shadow of their former selves.
I'm not sure about that "super corporation", um, it's about average size and a little light weight.
@@jamesjacocks6221 I mean Newell Brands is pretty big. They're an international corporation and they own all Rubbermaid products, Parker, Waterman, Yankee Candle, Mr Coffee, Sharpie, and Expo markers to name a few...
@@labibsaud8064 Darn shame.
@@highqualitywritinginstrument Okay, what I would call a semi holding company; a brand reseller if you will. This is where old, revered brands go to die.
It is strange that a pen with the British Royal Family's seal of approval is made in France.
Until 2011 Parker had its seat in Newheaven in UK and supposedly the Queen herself was a long time user of Parker fountain pens, including the original 51. Hence the Royal Warrant.
You don't mean to be mean? I actually thought you were graceful, as well as honest, in your critique. Thanks!!!
How many review requests did you say...?
Dude. This review is hilarious!!
Many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many many
Honest reviews are why I watch your channel. Thank you again. I’ve watched other reviews of this pen and they are comparable to yours.
100% this.
The three holes at the jewel are grooves in the inside of the cap. In case you swallow the cap you can then still breathe. You find the same grooves on other Parker models fx. the Sonnet
Makes me wonder why one would swallow a cap :) but thanks for the explanation
exactly, a contemporary requirement for safety
This doesn't make sense to me. If it allows air passthrough the cap wouldn't seal at all, and if it were a safety requirement all pen lids would have vents built in and anything other than ballpoints would be useless... unless I have misunderstood you?
@@Wreneagle The grooves are between the inner cap and the metal outer cap. They are not on the inside were the nib is.
@@kristianhn2479 So how does that help you breath if you swallow the cap? Trying to understand how that could work.
Stephen, your facial expressions and laugh are priceless. 🖋⭐
Maybe that's just what you get now when a pen brand isn't really a pen brand anymore; more a label bought up by a multinational because it's a household name from yesteryear.
Lol, literally a household name. Broom, dustpan, trash can, iconic fountain pen. One of these things is not like the other. One of these things is just not the same. ...I need a singing Muppet.
Boom
Thank you for another great review Stephen!
Your company is big in the fountain pen market and the fountain pen brands do listen to you. Could you pass on some comments to Parker please? Pls tell them that their management needs to retire because they don’t know about fountain pens. I’m frustrated to see that they haven’t come up decent fountain pens in recent years (not design, not in nibs). The management team of Parker is ruin this brand. They can’t even make a proper reproductive pen. Their designers need to retire and hire someone new.... strongly recommend any fountain pen brands to consult big fountain pen sellers/stores first before releasing any pens ( you guys know the market better than them, pls tell them what the customers want to buy!)
Thank You for your review Stephen. The cap 'jewel' is vented for safety, not only on this, but on the Sonnet Pens. The clip could well be a modern Sonnet Clip as it carries the same three chevrons. The nib MAY be from a Jotter Fountain Pen which - unlike the original nib - is NOT tubular. I have purchased the stainless steel nib version and I'm delighted with it. I actually like the screw on cap! I own a 70 year old Demi size aerometric '51' and a Parker '61' cartridge converter. The 'feel' and quality of those pens against tthe new '2021' variant is almost identical. The barrel and cap are RESIN. The smoothness of the nib is superb. Brian Marsden. Sheffield. England
CORRECTION: The Barrel and SECTION are in RESIN, the cap is LUSTRALOY (Stainless Steel). Apologies for error in my earlier comments! Brian Marsden. Sheffield. England
Right, indeed. It's a modern incarnation, not a copy. One may not like the fact that the steel nib is from the Jotter. The cap has the trimmings (metaphorically and literally) of the modern line of Parker pens (i.e., as you say, from the Sonnet). The metal ring above the threads may be to protect the section from being scratched by the metal cap. The threads are to suggest a higher quality pen than a pen with a slip cap, probably distinguish it from the Sonnet, and may solve problems with slip caps that Parker has been having in the last few decades. (The Sonnet notoriously dries up over night and the slip cap is prone to unlodge the nib/feed arrestor that keeps them in the section.)
None of the complaints about the pen (which is far from perfect, by all means) ring true in this very odd review. Neither does the praise of how well it writes.
Wing Sung makes a more faithful Parker 51 reproduction than Parker....
Agreed. My Hero 616's are in every way as good for cursive writing as my Parker 61.
Every cheap copy of Parker 51 in the history so far is better than this "new Parker 51"!
Anhone have an issue with the wing sung burping and how did they fix it.
I quite like my jinhao 51a's. And they kept the slip cap.
Agreed. The wing sung copy is an excellent pen.
I'm glad you lay down the truth. I saw the plastic on metal screw-on cap and thought "what the hell is that?".
The nib sticks out like that because it’s the nib and feed off the current budget Jotter FP albeit in gold in this case.
I was suspecting that would be the case. I'm extremely disappointed that they actually used the Jotter feed and nib. That particular nib and feed combination really goes around.
It's been in, IIRC, the Parker Jotter, the Parker Vector, the Parker IM, the Parker Urban, and now the Parker 51.
I'll keep using my Wing Sung 601 flighter with its solid steel grip.
Thank you for your honest review and your facial expressions that tell more than a thousand words could.
It is even worse that the 51's nib in the steel version, is the same as the $20 Jotter.
I am not sure what Parker is doing here, but as as you acutely stated: they've cheapened the 51's heritage.
I grew up in Greece in the 70's using a 50's Vintage 51 as my daily writer.
I am happier using a $7 Hero 565 now, than an overpriced 'Jotter' 51.
Same here, I used 51s all through the 9th grade. I expected a cylindrical nib on the 51. This is Parker cynical marketing ploy to sell el cheapo Jotters.
I'd speculate that the reason for the threaded cap is that Parker decided not to go through the complexity of trying to recreate the proper cap clutch mechanisms of the original 51s. Whether the "window shade" clutches in the models up through the 50s that used friction on the metal clutch rings (which is poorly recreated in the nonfunctional trim rings in this version), or the later 'finger' clutch mechanism that grasped the sections (and which the Chinese manufacturers seem to have recreated in their 51 knockoffs) they require some precision in manufacturing that is maybe more complex than the simple cutting of metal threads inside a cheaply electroplated gold cap.
After decades of using the originals, I'd be afraid to own one of these, because my physical instinct would be to try pulling the cap on/off, thereby stripping the threads even more quickly!
Informative and well balanced review. I purchased this pen, regrettably even at the ridiculously high price point for a gold nib version without having any bias from owning the Parker51 of old. Its a cheap and nasty little critter, threads misaligned on cap out of the box so it squeals like a stuck pig when uncapping. converter rattles inside the barrel despite being fully seated, and out of the box, hard starts and skipping on the B nib will require further tuning again...again....and at the aforementioned ridiculously high price point, unacceptable from what used to be a solid manufacturer.
Waterman and Parker are owned by the same company nowadays so one could hardly call them competitors. As for the pen, while it could be a nice pen, if one seeks a modern 51 remake then definitely Wing Sung 601 is the best choice, as it actually very faithfully replicates the 51 design and even makes slight improvements.
agree, and if you go one step further and go to 601a with an open nib, you can stick in a pilot #5 14k nib for a modern approximation of a parker vacumatic
@@johaneskrisostomus4863 The Pilot nib might not even be needed. Wing Sung themselves make a 601A with a 14k open nib. The 14k nib I have is quite nice, soft and smooth.
Speculation:
The holes in the cap are there to ensure that if the cap is swallowed, then it can still provide some airflow and not choke you to death until you can get it removed.
The screw on cap as well as the ring design is to differentiate the pen from the legacy 51, so that people do not simply buy a the new P51, take off the barrel, screw it onto a legacy P51 and sell it as a 'mint condition classic', same logic goes for the other half of the pen with the ring.
Thanks! Brutal honesty makes sense here. I happen to like my original '51 (as well as some other fountain pens I have) and I just don't see a Parker 51 here.
The original P51 had a hooded nib, yeah, but the question we might want to ask ourselves is: "What is under the hood?"
Is it the tubular nib, the long feed with the breahter tube and the collector with it's tremendous ink capacity (and yeah, the bloody thing can get clogged...)? No... it's just a repackaging of a current-day, everyday fountain pen for marketing purposes.
Same goes for the screw-on cap. Why did the orginal had a slip cap? Well.. functionalist design, as everything about it back then: slip on is faster. The small band on the original has the clamps in the hood grip onto it, the 'new 51' has a band with no function whatsoever.
From a designer's point of view this pen makes no sense. It's just something made to resemble an iconic pen from the past.
Parker is re-releasing, as you say, an iconic pen, yet the box is boring, there is no descriptive material, and there is one loose cartridge. It's lazy. The changes they made to the pen are mostly for the worse - the screw cap with metal threads that will destroy the plastic barrel threads, the mediocre jotter nib, the bad engraving on the clip. This is typical of Newell Rubbermaid, which has taken two of the greatest pen brands in history, Parker and Waterman, and reduced them to rubbish by either offering cheap, boring pens or offering the few remaining quality models over and and over in slightly different materials. It's rather sad really, to see these great brands so degraded.
I agree with you Stephen, the worst part is the plastic covering the nib, which looks cheap and nasty. I have a vintage Parker 51 and I'll stick with that.
Honesty is the medicine that makes some people get sick or get better.
Back around the millennium shift, Parker had a FP quality problem. Only the Urban and the stainless steel version of the Vector made it through unscathed. They're out of that now. But two things that modern era Parker are very good at, is 1: being very good writers, but at the same time, 2: giving you the feeling that you don't get much for your money.
I'm 100% with sbrebrown here. It's as if Parker is out of touch with today's market. Their best are the 'office pens', Urban, Vector, Jotter, (my IMs are awful, but admittedly made around 2000), and these are really good practical fountain pens. Parker's cartridge is the best cartridge and Parker's deluxe converter is the best converter. No other brand can quite touch them on those components. Their feeds are good and they make stiff nibs better than anyone else. But they fail miserably at giving you something special, or any luxury satisfaction. Instead, there's a stink of "cheapness". The new 51/2021 is an excellent example. Instead of using the opportunity to do something nice, celebrating their 51 heritage, they throw a Jinhao 85 clone at you, at a much heftier price tag. Nothing really wrong with it as a pen, but plenty wrong with it as a "Parker 51". They should have called it "21" and taken down the price tag a bit.
Excellent review! I personally love my P51 special (was my late grandmothers), and I had been thinking about buying the new edition. Otherview reviewers had already disuaded me, and this only adds to it. For the money I'd be better off finding a different writer (or another vintage Parker).
This is Parker's "New Coke" moment! It messed with a beloved Classic, and it created a monster! :o
The nib and hood design is terrible. It looks as if the nib is sprung. It certainly defeats the original 51 design of a hooded nib to prevent the ink from drying out into the air, and to lay down a juicy line of ink that was fast-drying. This new model moves away from that wonderful Parker innovation of 1939! A problem solved nearly 100 years ago is discarded, just so it looks "different"? No. This is retrograde technology, and it is an insult to the original designers of that great, innovative, history-changing Parker 51.
I think it's like a parody of the Mona Lisa. Cheap, and cheapened.
I like that they’re trying, but, honestly, they are so plentiful on the used market that someone could still just buy a nice vintage once with gold nib for less than this new one with a steel nib.
Fabulous review. Well balanced and I agree with your criticisms. I’m one for modifying the pen. However, I’m not convinced the modifications are robust or nice looking.
This release is a seriously MISSED opportunity. I enjoy my Wing Sung 681 and Jinhao 51a pens. I’m a lover of the hooded and inlayed nib styles.
I appreciate your dry, understated sarcasm.. good stuff.
Some insider is trying to sabotage Parker, I'm telling you all!
It's like among us
@@rohit_mohapatra Totally!
Who is this pen meant to appeal to? It’s like they made a Parker 51 homage without talking to anyone who loves Parker 51s. Reminds me of the first generation repro Esterbrooks.
Your assessment is totally accurate. I own one Parker: the Parker “51” Special Edition Empire State design with sterling cap in Empire State Building etched design, highlighted by 23K gold plated clip, “gems” at both ends, and an 18K nib w platinum alloy point, and a beautiful turquoise blue barrel. While I really never liked hooded nibs, I could not pass this up for all it represents. It writes beautifully and is beautiful to the touch and to look at while writing. The latest iteration really does look inferior, so I will now cherish mine even more. Mary from Rhode Island
P.S. Hooray, we are getting your Appelboom here, “right up the street” in Boston, taking over our multi-generation, storied pen store, Bromfield.
The cap jewel design you're mentioning likely serves the same purpose as everything else in this pen, which is cheapening the production. They've taken it directly from the Sonnet model, which by the way are very well known to dry up a fully filled converter within a week, because they're very literal holes, in a cap, without a slip and seal system. That also kind of explains why they picked threading over a slip on cap.
Only the early Sonnets dry up, mine is from 2011, after redesign and it has smaller holes and don't dry up. You're also wrong with the purpose, small holes are here to prevent the cap from forming a vacuum and sucking ink out when you take it off. Maybe because of that i don't have problems with pens with that design but i often have ink on grip section and on my hands using completely sealed pens...
Personally I’m glad that they went for the screw on cap
Stephen, honest review as always.
I think the issue here is that Parker wants to capitalize on the 51 name, and of course to the "purists" out there it may not work given the differences (although subtle or glaring) between the two.
Good stuff here, thanks for the candid assessment. As a Parker fan I have so many thoughts, many unkind. The cap appears to just be a slapdash repurposing of a Sonnet cap, gone are the crisp details and elegant proportions of the original P51 clips. The new nib is more of an echo of a Parker 45 with its pointy and elevated over the nib configuration. But why do that to a 51 - the 45 was a much less expensive, almost disposable pen, the snug hooded section was what defined the P51. Also annoying - no converter here. Not even for the gold version selling in the triple digits, just one lonely cartridge rolling around in the bottom of the box. Apologies for the harsh words, I get riled up sometimes...:-)
The 45 "almost [a] disposable pen"? Ouch. With a gold nib, at that. I take your point, but it's rough. Incidentally, the hood on the "51" (quotation marks indicating the 2021 version) looks a little bit more like that on the 45 than the 51. Also: the gold version does actually come with a converter. For whatever goodwill that 8,- gesture will do for a potential buyer...
Ultimately it's prob. the nib that underperforms and makes this pen a little more ordinary than it could have been.
I think this new Parker 51 is more similar to a Parker 45 than to a vintage 51. Especially the point and the nib, very close to the Parker 45 shape. But this is only my opinion 😉
5:00 the metal ring was there in the OG version but much thinner, it was used for the slip cap mechanism.
The OGs barel thread were plastic on plastic, here they did metal threads for some reason.
Thank you Stephen.. I recently was given two vintage 51's that a friend found in an estate sale.. they needed work that I completed and they look and operate very well. I can see the original appeal. I would not necessarily go looking for one now.. but I am happy to have them. I also have a Jinhao 51a, and a Wing Sung 618.. the 618 is well made and is a clear piston mechanism and that is cool. I've seen the new Parker.. considering that they continue to produce a lovely Duofold this rebirth of their icon in such a compromised manner is a shame. Oh, I have a Sonnet from 2006 that has a jewel with the same slots.. my vintage 51's are solid.. thanks man; the Gregorian chant was lovely..
Frank in Colorado
Realistically though, all of the modern pens have changed quite a bit from their vintage counterparts. That being said, I understand the frustration with how this was presented. Every high end parker pen has had a special card in the package explaining the significance of the model, yet I guess they just assumed we all knew the history of this one so they slapped it in a box and shipped it. It would have been nice if they produced a unique parker 51 case or something to differentiate it from just a plain copy.
The general consensus I’ve heard is the steel one writes like a jotter but the gold one writes beautifully. The argument that it has the SAME nib as the jotter is a tough one. The theory runs dry when you realize the jotter does not have a gold nibbed version.
Who else is watching this review with a black and gold parker 51 in front of them? Mine happens to be an aerometric from 3rd quarter 1946 inked up in Iroshizuku Tsuki-yo. Thanks for the review. I agree with your criticisms of this current iteration. My biggest design issue with this pen is one I hadn't appreciated before your video - the fact that the "hood" is so much higher than the nib. It doesn't look quite right. Maybe I have gotten used to the vintage ones, and I have several. My only other reservation is the price. The GT version should be sub-£100 and the steel version sub-£50 instead of £180 and £75, respectively. Heck, my Platinum PTL-5000 (14k nib) was only £27 - I had to double check that, but it really was that cheap bought brand new from an AD.
That sharp hood section looks very similar to my Parker 45
I have a Sonnet that has those openings under the jewel and it adds to the tendency of the pen to dry out. If you Google you will find people doing all kinds of things to plug them. I stuffed silicone grease into them and now I don't have air come out through them if I blow into the cap. I don't know if I buy the choking/breathing explanation because I don't know of other pens whose caps have giant vents in the end like that so that water pours out or you can blow air through...
A number of pens aimed at children have this, such as the Kakuno.
@@arcfide that makes sense, but a sterling silver Sonnet??
@@fiddletwist *shrug* beats me. :-) I've heard that there have been some regulations going around regarding "safety" of some objects, but all the regulations I heard about were related to "children friendly" things like fountain pens aimed at kids. No idea on this one. I'm sort of enamored of the old school but modern styling of the Parker 51, and so these new pens *do* interest me, but I'm not sure they represent sufficient refinement to justify the gold nib price, which is the one that I would be interested in, especially versus something like a Lamy 2000.
Thank you for your honesty. That's what I come here for. I think your choice of words was precise and apposite. Parker have definitely 'cheapened' the 51 brand, and this is not the homage the original deserves. It's a decent writer, sure, but it's an expensive way to get an ok-looking decentish fountain pen. The writing experience is not the same as the 51, from unscrewing the cap onwards.
That said, it'll sell like hot cakes. Just not to you or me, of most of the pen folks I know.
I really like Parker pens; but I have to agree with most of the reviewers' criticisms about the new model. The Parker 100, in my opinion, is much better as a "homage" pen / modern version of the 51.
I think that the vents under the jewel are there to allow for breathing if someone (especially children) have put the pen cap in their mouth and accidentally had it stick in their throats. I notice this trend a lot with pens that have separate caps.
Thank you Dr. Brown for the review. What I seem to recall is that the gaps on the top of the cap below the jewel are there for a few reasons. One of them is a safety issue in case a person accidentally gets it stuck in their airway they are still able to breathe. A second is I believe to avoid litigation issues when such an incident ocurres. And to comply with international safety standards. Some many still remember when certain (I apologize) non fountain pens were manufactured up until the seventies without such holes. I have just purchased a new Parker 51 and I must say that the front portion sticking out so far gives the material of the pen a cheap look and feel to it. Maybe I will be working on obtaining the German counterpart of the Parker 51, the Lamy 2000.
If that's what the gaps are for, they could have just stuck with a slip cap. The gaps would've rendered the twist cap pointless anyway. The vintage 51 was a classic because its design was a case study on "form follows function". There was nothing superfluous because even its ornamentation served a purpose. Twist caps help keep the nib from drying out, but if it's already exposed to air, then the twist cap becomes pointless.
Thanks for a honest, interesting and enjoyable review. You are the best!
Great review and agree that the new incarnation looks cheaper than my original P51 aerometric. By the way there IS a silver clutch ring between the barrel and section on mine (and most others I’ve seen) so don’t believe this to be a new thing. The gap between the section hood and nib would drive me C-razz!
It's a conventional pen dressed up to look slightly like a Parker 51.
You are spot on with this review. Beyond issues of how faithful a replica this is the build quality is lacking. My sense is that all the Newell brand products are lessening in quality. Living off an old reputation...
It is my understanding that both Parker and Waterman are manufactured in the same facility. Given this, engineering/design choices such as the ill-conceived screw cap seem out of character.
Parker pens seem to be far worse than Waterman pens, is almost as if the Parker brand is being intentionally hamstrung for segmentation reasons. Waterman gets the good stuff, Parker gets the "cheap" stuff.
So they "Broke things that were fixed". So disappointing. Thanks for the honest review.
Always a pleasure to watch Pen review from Sbrebrown. Could the holes above the cap is a design feature for preventing vacuum. I do agree with your observation concerning clip length and ring.
Thanks for your honest review Stephen. I was resisting the temptation so far. You have helped me decide. Thank you for all you do.
I have a beautiful hand-turned wooden pen that someone made from a kit. Metal-threads-on-plastic-threads stripped it very quickly and now it won't even screw on anymore. I'll have to DIY some kind of thing to fix it. I'm surprised Parker did that too.
The 51 from 51
I have my grandfather’s Parker 51 from 1952 in double broad
I have my mother’s 51 from 1957. She used it while at school in Cuba.
Good review, thanks.
I agree, Parkers are definitely not what they used to be.
I am in my mother's Parker 51 and I believe it was purchased in the early 1950's. It is a wonderful writer. Recently I purchased the new model with a gold nib. I agree that the new 51 is of inferior quality. The new model skipped so I got contact Parker and the company said the pen must be returned to France for examination. Now the pen was purchased in March of 2021, I registered the pen on their website for an added two years on top of the regular 2 year warranty. A recent reply from France says I must pay for a replacement nib. Was I using this pen as a dart? As a pen collector I find this reply by Parker as a way to sucker me out of $92 for parts and $43 for handling.
Any comment on price / value? Or not, because the 51 is primarily about identity / history, with no direct competition - except the knock-offs.
Very thorough review and I think you sum it up perfectly.
Thank you
Fortunately for you, Waterman and Parker are bother Newell. This pen was likely produced in France in the same plant as Waterman.
Very helpful - thank you!!!! I wish they would have made the cap a slip off. That really matters to me. I'm glad it's a smooth writer but it should be in the price point it's in. :)
The original 51 feed was so carefully designed and constructed and housed neatly in the hood behind the nib, rather than under it. This new one has a stock feed - - and that's not cutting it for me. As for switching over to cartridge/converter, I'll beat the dead horse and punish them for that too - - MB, TWSBI et al utilize piston fillers and the aerometric converter in the original 51 is still used in some modern pens today. The threaded section defeats the sleek design and comfort and those slip caps were THE BEST. The original 51 is a near perfect pen, nay a near perfect creation of Mankind. If I had to quibble on something about the original 51, it would be that I wish it were eyedropper but I'm pulling strings here. I too have noticed Parker's cheapening on their pens in the last decade. TL;DR Avoid this dumpster fire of pen and treat yourself the sacred original. Regardless, thank you Stephen for the review :D
It really is a fantastic writer. I personally think having a beautiful pen that’s an awful, or basic writer is much worse. Anyway, I love writing with this pen, no doubt about it.
I was hoping they would at least keep one design element; the slip cap, or a proper hooded nib. They could have even gone for the aerometric filler instead of the converter - which is sold separately! I mean, at least with Jinhao, you get a CONVERTER with the pen!
Welp, there is one I can check off the possible buy list. Thanks,
Thanks fro the honest review.
I expected way more from them, and was enthused that they would rebuild the original. To me, it looks really like Parker's trying to milk the Parker 51 legacy to sell a overpriced and modified Jotter. They could have redone the same design as the old one with newer materials and new converter but, they cut the corners and just rebuilt a 51ish body around a Jotter to buff the prices.
It saddens me as I would have been keen to give it a chance to bolster the initiative and EU made products.
BTW, Caveat emptor : the steel nib version doesn't even come with a converter.
I don't know why so many people are surprised by the metal ring on the section. It's painfully obvious why it's there - to imitate the look of the original 51. The original had a clutch ring which was part of the capping mechanism. The new one has a screw cap so that doesn't apply, but they put the ring there for aesthetic purposes.
so much agree with you...And I was waiting for it for years..
The good old days! Thanks for the vintage intro. It made my day.
Love your honesty. Thank you
The Jinhao 86 is actually the best Parker 51-2021 on the market. They fix the near, making it easier to write with, while not changing the visualization very much.
That being said, I enjoy the Parker 51 because I don’t consider it or measure it against the old one. In reality, I actually like the Parker 21 better than the 51 but if I look at the pen by itself without the baggage of its name , I agree that it’s a pretty good writer and I now have five of them, maybe six, I don’t know. My only complaint is what I am writing I can’t see the nib and I have to guess a little bit. This is why I like the 86, it revisualizes and smoothes moves it out so nicely.
I like when Parker is done with their lineup, and I think that the 51 is here to stay. I do believe that Parker is completely miss marketed it, but what do you expect from people who sell rubber home products. I think the 51 is the best attempt that the non people that Parker could make.
Bravo. 100% agree, just purchased one 3 days ago ... Like it, but underwhelmed
Nice honest review. Before you start talking, I was expecting to see the old Parker 51 appears exactly with the old design, thinking that perhaps I could buy one of the new batch but seeing that the several innovations takes the 51 to a corner, I will not buy one. I have several chrome Parker with that same cap, that have that same thin and not deep groves. I bought three of them but I must say they stuck on the flow of ink. So I am not using them, somewhat disappointed.
Thank you for your reviews, you really add so much value to the community of fp enthusiasts.
Cheers on the penmanship. I dragged my son from his PlayStation to see a man write a lovely script.
That is very kind, thank you for the compliment!
I recommend 100% Parker Quink ink. Thanks for this review.
Dank voor de review Steven. Met andere woorden: laat deze pen (ook als “core” versie met rvs-punt) maar links liggen en ga voor de Jinhao 85 die ook net uit is gekomen. Of een Jinhao 51a/wing sung 601 die nog het meest met het origineel overeen komen voor een fractie van de prijs.
Voor het geld wat ze voor deze 51 vragen zijn er betere opties...
Overigens, Waterman is tegenwoordig van dezelfde firma, dus zulke grote concurrenten van elkaar als vroeger zijn ze ook niet meer... de inktkeuze is dus vergeven. ;)
Nice review, I am not a fan of that weird pointed hooded nib either and the plastic threads on metal threads is a big mistake on parkers end.
That vent on the top of the cap might be required by safety regulations where the pen is manufactured or where it may be exported. It’s to prevent a chid from choking on a swallowed pen cap.
Hi Stephen, always love your reviews about pens. My take on this one is ... it is a Parker 51 in 2021 (modern) version, that’s why the subtle design changes. It is not a vintage PARKER 51 REISSUE.
The cap has holes because EU regulation requires it. It's deemed a choking hazard. The holes are there so the idiots who choke on it don't suffocate. It causes the nib to dry out. The workaround is to plug it with a few drips of wax.
I have seen so many reviews similar to this one, where people just shake their collective heads at what Parker have done. I can totally understand that. As for me, I'm not a "51 aficionado" and have never owned one, and I think it looks kinda cool. (please folks behind me in the comments, be careful with those pitchforks! lol) What I am pleased about is that you say it writes so well. That's the most important thing for me. What I'm curious about, though obviously this is something you cannot answer, is how does the steel nib version write? (as that's the one I can afford) Perhaps Appelboom could be convinced to send you a steel one at some point, assuming you'd be interested in find out; which you may not. Anyway, thank you Sir for your review....as always.
You can buy the $20 post-2018 Parker Jotter and find out yourself how it writes. The M nib is the same in both.
You can get a vintage 51 around 100$ or more.
why do great opportunities like this always end this way
in all practicality it doesn't seem much different than the jotter.
Stephen, a fine review, and as I own both pens, I can only underscore what you say in your review. The original Parker 51 was (and remains) an outstanding example of the art of pen making. The 2020 edition certainly writes well, and that’s where it stops. I hear my critics saying “you’re complaining about a pen that writes well?! What is your problem?” Well, my problem is that I have many pens that write well; it is, after all, what is expected of them. What I did not expect was that Parker would cheapen the quality of this latest version. In 1941 the basic model cost $12.50, making it an expensive pen, worth about $230 today. The 2020 version is a cheap pen. Too bad. Yes, as I said before, it writes well, but I have a Platinum Preppy that sells for under $5 that writes beautifully. True, it’s a cheap pen, but it does write nicely. Cheap or expensive, I expect a pen to do that. And on topic, the Wing Sung (noted above,) and the Jin Hao 85 cost about a tenth of the Parker, look like a Parker, and mirabile dictu, write very well. ‘Nuff said
You shold have reviewed the Parker 100 and compared it against this modern iteration of the Parker 51,
I was excited by a sbrebrown review! And then all I thought was after reading the title :oh, that piece of shit pen” 🤣 I’ll watch it anyway because I like your videos.
Parker seems to have ripped off the Wing Sung 618, without the piston....
Thanks for the facial expressions. Yes they are humorous and enjoyable as always. But sometimes they serve an even more important purpose. EXPENDITURE AVERTED. 😄
Lovely Sarcasm!
Great stuff - thank you
Threaded cap is a deal breaker for me, it’s just too weird. Love my Chinese jumbo knockoffs
Oh, how sad. I so wanted to love this pen. By the 5-minute mark into the video I hated so many things that there was no possibility of me getting one of these. Not even at half the price. The steel nibbed one would basically be a hooded Frontier. No, wait, even the Frontier manages a nice slip cap. I fear the Parker Pen company is a thing of the past.
It is a very honest and professional assessment on this new pen.
Perfect review about a lot of mistakes of the new design and construction. ...even chinese manufacturers know that metal parts destroy plastic threads...etc.
I already have mine, great video, i love it
the slots on the top is a safety measure to prevent choking .....other pens they to have holes on the top
Has anyone else noticed the inside of the cap seems to have been designed to fit around the pen so that the threads are not touching the body of the pen when posted? Maybe I’m wrong.