I like trying new kits, so I bought some of the new Tanzo kits from Berea.
It makes a very attractive pen and the Berea website shows it off well.
The thing that gets me is the sizing of the single brass tube compared to the mating hardware.
The brass tube requires a 10mm hole ( = 0.3937") to be drilled in the blank.
The hole, therefore, is 0.394", near enough, while the finished blank where it meets and matches the hardware nib and center band is 0.456" (bushing outer diameter).
That means that at the ends of the finished blank, the blank wall thickness is 0.031" (or close to 3/4 of a millimeter). . That is extremely thin.
I cannot understand why Berea would design a new kit which results in such a thin finished blank wall thickness. . Yes, it is certainly doable, but it means that just about whatever acrylic blank (except jet black) which you might decide to use will require painting to prevent brass tube show-through. . It also means that many wood blanks are at risk of tear-out as you approach the required thin diameter in your turning.
This choice of wall thickness is entirely unnecessary in my opinion. . Berea could have designed for a 23/64" tube (0.359" hole) (0.048" wall), a 9 mm tube (0.354" hole) (0.052" wall), a 11/32" tube (0.344" hole) (0.056" wall), a 8 mm tube (0.315" hole) (0.070" wall), or other appropriate size, all of which will accommodate the Parker-style refill, and nearly all of which are commonly used in one kit or another. . Of these possible sizes, I would favor the 8 mm tube which is certainly very common in other kits and readily available as spare parts.
Can someone give me a good reason why an 8 mm tube would not be suitable ? . Am I missing something ? . A finished blank wall thickness of 0.070" would be much preferred over the poor choice of 0.031", IMHO.
An 8 mm tube would have been much superior because it leaves quite a bit of "meat" on the blank wall (0.070"), allowing the pen maker to do a little bit of creative turning, and eliminating the need to use paint on at least some acrylic blanks.
I just don't understand the reason why a pen kit designer would choose to make the finished blank wall thickness (at the ends) as small as 0.031" which is the case in this new kit design with the 10 mm tube.
I just don't understand why "they" do this to us when the rest of the kit design is so very attractive. . They are actually working against their own best interests and discouraging the adoption of this new kit.
Yes, there are other (older) kits with the same problem of thin ends on the finished blank. . Examples are the Sierra (wall thickness of about 0.040") and the Executive (wall thickness of about 0.032"), but I don't like them either and I avoid using them when I can.
It seems to me that some kit designers don't have much experience with actually making pens from the kits they design.
It makes a very attractive pen and the Berea website shows it off well.
The thing that gets me is the sizing of the single brass tube compared to the mating hardware.
The brass tube requires a 10mm hole ( = 0.3937") to be drilled in the blank.
The hole, therefore, is 0.394", near enough, while the finished blank where it meets and matches the hardware nib and center band is 0.456" (bushing outer diameter).
That means that at the ends of the finished blank, the blank wall thickness is 0.031" (or close to 3/4 of a millimeter). . That is extremely thin.
I cannot understand why Berea would design a new kit which results in such a thin finished blank wall thickness. . Yes, it is certainly doable, but it means that just about whatever acrylic blank (except jet black) which you might decide to use will require painting to prevent brass tube show-through. . It also means that many wood blanks are at risk of tear-out as you approach the required thin diameter in your turning.
This choice of wall thickness is entirely unnecessary in my opinion. . Berea could have designed for a 23/64" tube (0.359" hole) (0.048" wall), a 9 mm tube (0.354" hole) (0.052" wall), a 11/32" tube (0.344" hole) (0.056" wall), a 8 mm tube (0.315" hole) (0.070" wall), or other appropriate size, all of which will accommodate the Parker-style refill, and nearly all of which are commonly used in one kit or another. . Of these possible sizes, I would favor the 8 mm tube which is certainly very common in other kits and readily available as spare parts.
Can someone give me a good reason why an 8 mm tube would not be suitable ? . Am I missing something ? . A finished blank wall thickness of 0.070" would be much preferred over the poor choice of 0.031", IMHO.
An 8 mm tube would have been much superior because it leaves quite a bit of "meat" on the blank wall (0.070"), allowing the pen maker to do a little bit of creative turning, and eliminating the need to use paint on at least some acrylic blanks.
I just don't understand the reason why a pen kit designer would choose to make the finished blank wall thickness (at the ends) as small as 0.031" which is the case in this new kit design with the 10 mm tube.
I just don't understand why "they" do this to us when the rest of the kit design is so very attractive. . They are actually working against their own best interests and discouraging the adoption of this new kit.
Yes, there are other (older) kits with the same problem of thin ends on the finished blank. . Examples are the Sierra (wall thickness of about 0.040") and the Executive (wall thickness of about 0.032"), but I don't like them either and I avoid using them when I can.
It seems to me that some kit designers don't have much experience with actually making pens from the kits they design.