Maker: Waterman.
The Maestro is yet another of the cylindrical pens Waterman offered in the latter part of the last century, following the pattern of the Le Man. Given its position in catalogues, it was evidently a slightly superior model to the Lauréat, but there is not much to tell between them in terms of performance and, except when posted, of size. On the subject of posting, one notable difference is the use of a gripper for posting, which results in a much shorter object in that configuration. This click-to-post feature is one seen in the Le Man, and is also suggestive of a higher rung on Waterman’s ladder for this model.
The other mechanical point of difference is the clip. Unlike the Lauréat, the clip of which is evidently tabbed into the cap, the Maestro’s is a simpler yet more reliable self-sprung type, much closer in action to those found on pens made in the company’s last decade in the US. This, in conjunction with the steel point, marks the Maestro as a step down from the Préface with its relatively complex spring-loaded clip.
As I mentioned earlier, the performance of this pen is much the same as any other of Waterman’s late 20th century steel-point pens; pleasantly smooth, perhaps a little bit of spring, and without any serious vices to generate complaint. The relative shortness moves the centre of gravity towards the hand, making for a slightly more comfortable pen than the Lauréat. This pen drops out of the line-up before the Lauréat, probably to clear some room for the Hémisphère or the Expert.
Production Run: c.1990 – c. 1995.
Cost When New: No data in hand at the moment, but it would have varied somewhat depending on the sub-model; there are examples of both lacquer and precious metal plate finishes.
Size: 13.8 cm long capped, 15.5 cm posted, 12.3 cm uncapped.
Point: Plated steel.
Body: Brass
Filler: Cartridge, capacity approx. 0.6 ml or 1.4 ml (international pattern).
Waterman Maestro; the limited annulation of the section is a quick identifier.
With the cap on, the tail-piece which grips the cap is evident.
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.