For more general notes, see the page for the Imperial line.
By means that no geneologist could approve of, the pen initially known at the Target became both the progenitor and the third example of the Imperial family. Unlike most members of that family, this pen did not bear an inlaid point, but instead used a short from of the Triumph point which had come into service with some upscale Skripsert variants. One assumes this was because there was slightly less work involved in the making of that sort of point and it could be sold at a lower price than the inlaid models.
The way this pen and the Imperial I , which was a relative late-comer, fall into the roster of Imperials suggests that Sheaffer had the plan for the roster sorted out well in advance, and were content to see it make a bit of a nonsense of chronology so long as it reflected trim levels and costs.
There are two points of difference between this pen and the Imperial II; this pen has a plastic rather than a steel cap, and the point has a two-tone mask. This mask is an inversion of Sheaffers general practice, as it is a gold plating on the lower end of the point rather than a silver (or to be correct, platinum) plating on the upper. Under that plating, the point is exactly the same as that found on the Imperial II.
Production Run: 1960 – c. 1973, using the Target name only in the first two years.
Cost When New: $8.75 (for modern value, try this calculator).
Size: 13.5 cm long capped, 14.3 cm posted, 11.8 cm uncapped.
Point: Palladium-silver with gold mask, annular.
Filler: Touchdown, capacity approx. 0.7 ml.
If you are relying on the preceding information to win a bet or impress a teacher, you should read the site\’s scholarly caveat. Remember, this is the internet, and it\’s full of bad information.