↑ Return to Conway-Stewart

Print this Page


Maker: Conway-Stewart

As mentioned in the page outlining the maker’s history, Conway-Stewart is one of the many pen-makers to undergo a very slow dissolution in the third quarter of the 20th century.  As a company struggled to carry on, an effort to cling to broad acceptance frequently appeared, and this appears to be one of Conway-Stewart’s efforts in that direction (another splendid example being Eversharp’s Ten Thousand Word).

The person from whom I got my examples of this pen thought it meant to compete with the Parker 45, while my initial impression was of a Parker 17.  However, with a little research I find that it predates both of those pens.  It thus seems to have been one of the legion of pattern-followers bobbing along in the wake of the Parker “51″, and one that was evidently having some trouble remaining buoyant.

This is not as flashy a pen as some Conway-Stewart produced, and the point follows that of the “51″ in being extremely firm, but it’s a pleasant enough pen.  The weaknesses lie in two places.  First is the filler, a “pressac”, which has the general external attributes of the Parker Aerometric but lacks a breather tube, preventing a complete fill.  The cap retention is the other big problem, as it is not all one might hope.

Production Run: 1959 – 1968

Cost When New: 15s. to 17s. 6d (decimalizes as £0.75 to £0.875, and if you want you can check my math; for modern value, try this calculator)

Size: With plastic cap 13.4 cm long capped, 14.5 cm posted, 11.9 cm uncapped.  With metal cap 13.0 cm long capped, 13.4 cm posted, 11.9 cm uncapped.

Point: I think gold, but have not dug one open to check.

Body: Plastic, likely polystryene.

Filler: Press bar of a very simple sort, capacity approx. 0.5ml

Conway-Stewart 106, all-plastic variant

Conway-Stewart 106, metal capped variant

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.

Permanent link to this article: http://dirck.delint.ca/beta/?page_id=860