# Opinions wanted - When is a pen considered to be, "Kitless"?



## mbroberg (Sep 4, 2009)

Obviously a pen that uses no kit components is kitless, but what about those pens that do use some parts of kits but are so altered that they don't resemble the kits?  Is it, " cheating" if the internal parts of a kit are used but none of the external parts?  This newbee (or noob, as I have seen it written) is just curious what the opinions are.  When does a pen go beyond being just "modified" and qualifify as being "kitless"?  Maybe it is like porn, can't define it, but know it when I see it:smile-big: (not that I have ever looked:wink.


----------



## Greg O'Sherwood (Sep 4, 2009)

Excellent question. I had always assumed that a kitless pen was one that showed no kit parts, but could use them internally. 

Obviously, the mechanism is part of a kit, but I've seen lots of folks make a 'kitless' using one. Is the ink cartridge considered part of a kit?



.


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 4, 2009)

Mike , there is no set definition of "Kitless" . I consider any pen that did not use parts taken from a kit as Kitless . There are some components that are not easily made like transmissions and refills and FP nibs and feeds and must come from a manufacturer . Tubes are also more easily purchased then made . These parts are all available in bulk quantities .
The Kitless ballpoint pens I make use 7mm and cigar transmissions purchased in bulk . Some of the pens use brass pen tubes but most use aluminum tubing for a core tube .
I draw the kitless - modified line at any external components , the pointy thing that the refill sticks out through which I call a Nib and Clips and finials (if used) . If you make these parts then its kitless , if you modify a kit or break apart a kit for parts then it's modified kit pen.
Clips are a sticky point , you CAN buy clips separately and these can be used on modified kits and kitless pens .

As an example , the kitless pens I call "Telesto" are built with a cigar transmission (I buy these in bulk quantities of 50 or 100 at a time) on an aluminum core tube with a nib and centerband and clip made from brass or aluminum bar stock . 
As an example of a modified kit pen , I make a long , single barrel finial operated cigar pen and I call it a Modified Cigar pen . This pen looks nothing like a cigar pen and is finial operated but it IS a modified cigar pen .


----------



## RussFairfield (Sep 5, 2009)

I have always stayed away from this section because I have always had a problem with the "kitless" definition. To me "Advanced" means closed ends, recessed clips, and a whole bunch of other modifications. However, the "kitless" has beem emphasized, and I don't make kitless pens.


----------



## skiprat (Sep 5, 2009)

I think a truly 'Kitless' pen only has a refill and probably a spring
Of course, without a mech it would have to be a capped pen. 
FP's in general are outside most of our reach. But perhaps if you have the FP parts ( feed, nib etc ) especially made to your design, then that too would be kitless. These FP parts could be considered as the 'refill' 
Difficult question to answer really though. It's like describing any of our pens as 'Hand Made', when we use drill presses and lathes and other machines.:wink:

I also suppose that if we define a 'Kit' as a 'Standard set of parts to be assembled in a specified way', then any radical modification or mix of parts could therefore also be called 'Kitless'

Right, time for me to hit my little Rat Cave:biggrin: I have a Custom Kitless Handmade Personalised Woodchuck to try out:biggrin:


----------



## mbroberg (Sep 5, 2009)

I appriciate the responses.  "Kitless" is one of those terms that, in my opinion is thrown out there by some people that I don't think have really considered it's meaning.  The same can be said for the term, "Pen maker".  I for one have done some modified pens that I am very proud of but I would hesitate to label them kitless, even though less than 50% of the kit parts were used.

I was counting on Butch and Skippy to chime in on this.  They are pen makers who produce some fantastic looking pens that are undoubtedly kitless.  Thanks for sharing your thoughts.  There are others also.  Please feel free to chime in.


Mike
A penturner aspiring to be a pen maker.


----------



## hrigg (Sep 5, 2009)

I make a single body pen that uses the click mechanism from a Sierra, the nib and spring from a Cigar, and a tube from each.  I consider it an advanced design, but certainly not kitless.


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 5, 2009)

When I was running the "Kitless slimline challenge" there were several people who objected to the term "Kitless" but the only rule was to "use a Cross style refill" so is the refill what defines a "Kit" ? , where do you draw the line ? . As I said my definition is "if you open a kit and use the parts then it's a modified kit pen" .
Ok , how about this scenario . If I were to buy a transmission from the AT Cross company (if they would sell a transmission) or (take apart a Cross pen for the transmission) and get the refill from Staples , would the pen that I make from these parts be a "Kitless" or a "Modified Slimline" or a modified AT Cross" pen ? , no kit was opened to make the pen but a 7mm (cross style) transmission and refill WAS used , but most of the pen is being made by me WITHOUT a kit .
We as an active community of pen turners / pen makers have a chance to define what the term "Kitless" really means , so lets thrash it out and see where it leads .

This really is a fun topic and I hope that no one gets their noses out of joint about it .


----------



## its_virgil (Sep 5, 2009)

Well, since you asked. Personally, I don't care one way or the other. If I make a pen with one or two kit parts and want to call it a kitless pen then I will. If others want to call it a modified whatever pen then that is OK too and I'll not argue. Are parts intended for use in kits but never make it to the kit's collection of parts still kit parts? It's much more fun to make pens...kit pens, kitless pens, modified kit pens, modified kitless kit pens or custom pens than to talk about what to call them....at least for me.

Here is Richard Greenwald's opinion:
Richard's Rules for kitless pens.

1. There are two levels of kitless pens:
 Class 2, kit robbed for parts, including clips, nose cones, sections, finials, bands, ferrules, etc. Anything robbed from a kit can be used.

 Class 1, original work. The only things that can be robbed from a kit are mechanisms (transmissions) in ball point pens and pencils, and nibs, feeds, feed housings (not sections) and convertors in fountain pens.

2. Brass tubes are an option not a necessity.

3. Pens must be able to be taken apart for repairs. The need for special tools to do this is allowed.

4. Glue or epoxy may only be used to attach a permanent ferrule or coupling, that will never need repair, to a pen body; other than that, glue or epoxy is prohibited.

5. Nose cones, nibs, feeds, sections, clips, buttons, mechanisms, levers, are all repairable items and can not be glued, soldered, welded, or cast into place in a pen body.

6. Pens can be any size, large or small, but must be functional writing instruments, and refillable for continuous use.

do a good turn daily!
Don


This came from Richard's facebook pages at 
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=102114379226&topic=11065


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 5, 2009)

I can live with most of those rules , but I don't think that the use of CA or epoxy should be ruled out .There are certain situations that there is no other way to attach a part , I use epoxy to attach the finial ring that holds the clip in place on several of my pen styles , although I guess they could be threaded . These parts are still reversible/repairable with a little heat from a soldering iron applied to the right place .


----------



## its_virgil (Sep 5, 2009)

Those are not my rules so you'll have to talk to Richard about that:biggrin:.
Do a good turn daily!
Don



ldb2000 said:


> I can live with most of those rules , but I don't think that the use of CA or epoxy should be ruled out .


----------



## Texatdurango (Sep 5, 2009)

I don't know about anyone else but I started tossing around the term "Kitless" about 1 1/2 years ago, about the same time I starting the advanced pen making forum.  At that time, as now, there were never any rules to follow, the rules came about when some started contests, etc and started spelling out their rules to compete.

I started using the term "kitless" when I got bored with opening a plastic bag and dumping the parts out on a bench, gluing blanks to one or two tubes, turning those blanks on the lathe then pressing all the parts together.  To me, pressing parts together with a press does not justify calling one a "Pen maker", if a title is what one is after!

With that in mind, I think all the definitions and rules are a bit silly and meaningless!  Do you actually think it matters to a customer or a friend whom you give a pen, where the parts came from or whether they were pressed together or glued together?


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 5, 2009)

To the outside world (those outside the IAP) the term kitless is meaningless but to those here (and anyone who has made a kit pen ) it does have a meaning and it really should have some kind of definition , if for no other reason then just to differentiate between "kitless" and "modified kit" in our discussions here .


----------



## its_virgil (Sep 5, 2009)

We've had discussions for several years now without a formal definition for kitless, modified, or even what a nib is or isn't and we seem to know what each other is talking about. I'm not really tring to start an argument but I just don't think it's important. But, that's just my opinion and if a definition is needed for whatever reason, then I suppose a definiotion is soon to be offered.
Do a good turn daily!
Don


ldb2000 said:


> To the outside world (those outside the IAP) the term kitless is meaningless but to those here (and anyone who has made a kit pen ) it does have a meaning and it really should have some kind of definition , if for no other reason then just to differentiate between "kitless" and "modified kit" in our discussions here .


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 5, 2009)

its_virgil said:


> We've had discussions for several years now without a formal definition for kitless, modified, or even what a nib is or isn't and we seem to know what each other is talking about. I'm not really tring to start an argument but I just don't think it's important. But, that's just my opinion and if a definition is needed for whatever reason, then I suppose a definiotion is soon to be offered.
> Do a good turn daily!
> Don


 
Even though we know what each other is talking about , when we use the terms "kitless" and for that matter "Nib" it always seems to create a difference of opinion as to the definition of those terms . If no definition is needed then why is their use questioned when they are used . 
It is human nature to want to define the terms that we use in interacting with others . When a word or term has no definition then it's use is always called into question , so let's try to come up with a definition so we can sleep better at night :biggrin:


----------



## rherrell (Sep 6, 2009)

When Butch had his "kitless challenge" going I thought long and hard about how to make a truly kitless ballpoint. I wanted to take "kitless" as far as I could, which to me meant everything had to be hand made. If I could have made the refill I would have but I couldn't figure that one out.:wink:
Here's what I came up with......... 




















I made the PR blank and everything else was fashioned from the raw materials. All the brass was polished and powdercoated and the Delrin was sanded to a matte finish. It's really quite a bulletproof pen. Low maintenance also.
I used one of my old guitar strings for the spring.
It's not particularly appealing when it's in the retracted position but looks were secondary to me. It was more important that it be truly kitless.:wink:


----------



## Texatdurango (Sep 6, 2009)

In several local IAP meetings I was asked to demo my "kitless" designs.  I didn't focus so much on "how to make a pen without kit parts".  Instead I showed alternative methods to making a nice pen without the "traditional" methods of gluing blanks onto brass tubes then turning them round and pressing things together.  To me, it's not important if one uses a clip or center band from a kit or not but that they come up with their own designs using their own ideas much like Rick did above.

Like Don, I don't see why we need to differentiate between a modified kit pen or a totally kitless pen.  I would think it would more productive to spend our time sharing thoughts and ideas, helping those trying to figure things out and say "nice pen" now and then rather than hammering out definitons, terms and names.


----------



## mbroberg (Sep 6, 2009)

Texatdurango said:


> I don't know about anyone else but I started tossing around the term "Kitless" about 1 1/2 years ago, about the same time I starting the advanced pen making forum.  At that time, as now, there were never any rules to follow, the rules came about when some started contests, etc and started spelling out their rules to compete.
> 
> I started using the term "kitless" when I got bored with opening a plastic bag and dumping the parts out on a bench, gluing blanks to one or two tubes, turning those blanks on the lathe then pressing all the parts together.  To me, pressing parts together with a press does not justify calling one a "Pen maker", if a title is what one is after!
> 
> With that in mind, I think all the definitions and rules are a bit silly and meaningless!  Do you actually think it matters to a customer or a friend whom you give a pen, where the parts came from or whether they were pressed together or glued together?



George,


All you have said here is that you got bored doing kits so you started using the term kitless because the recipients of you pens wouldn’t know any better.

I suspect that there is a little bit more to it than that.  Maybe I’m wrong, but I doubt that you would post a photo of a slimline sans centerband, either here on your website and represent it to be kitless.  What do you consider to be a kitless pen as opposed to a modified pen?  I think that it is agreed that right now there is no definition so, as of right now, there is no wrong answer.  You say you started the Advanced Pen Making forum about 1 1/2 year ago.  That was before my time so bring me up to speed.  What did you have in mind?


This question has nothing to do with what the recipients of our work know or don’t know.  It is about what WE know.  As one of the new kids around here I am very interested in what the more experienced members know.  It is about those of us who wish to excel in the art of penmaking.   It's about setting goals and standards of excellence.  Just about every field of endeavor has levels of competency.  That is what allows the practitioners to advance in their fields.


----------



## mbroberg (Sep 6, 2009)

Texatdurango said:


> In several local IAP meetings I was asked to demo my "kitless" designs.  I didn't focus so much on "how to make a pen without kit parts".  Instead I showed alternative methods to making a nice pen without the "traditional" methods of gluing blanks onto brass tubes then turning them round and pressing things together.  To me, it's not important if one uses a clip or center band from a kit or not but that they come up with their own designs using their own ideas much like Rick did above.
> 
> Like Don, I don't see why we need to differentiate between a modified kit pen or a totally kitless pen.  I would think it would more productive to spend our time sharing thoughts and ideas, helping those trying to figure things out and say "nice pen" now and then rather than hammering out definitons, terms and names.



Well...........  it appears that while I was typing a post asking you for more of your insight, you were busy typing a post providing it.:biggrin:


----------



## RussFairfield (Sep 6, 2009)

"Kitless" is the name that has caught on for making your own threads in the cap and not using the center coupling from the kit.

If that is a wrong definition, it is too late to change it now.
That is how the meaning came across when this forum was started, that has been a popular topic, and that is how "kitless" is defined by those pencrafters I meet at meetings, symposiums, and shows. 

For myself, I am anything but "kitless". I use as many kit parts as I can because the pens are faster and cheaper to make and I can sell them at a reasonable price. The picture is an example. It doesn't look like the "kit pen", but every part of the kit is used except the black finial cap.


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 6, 2009)

Ok , so then that means that if it's not a Fountain pen it can't be kitless . That seems a little narrow in thought to me . Just because that definition of a "Threaded cap without a kit coupler" has been accepted since the forum started doesn't mean it is the ONLY kind of kitless pen anymore . The art of making pens has come a long way since this forum started , and I (I can't speak for anyone else but I'm sure I'm not alone) think it's about time that the definitions are changed to include the lowly "Ballpoint" as well , Why? because I'm a PITA and like to start trouble :biggrin: ...Ok ok , because this question comes up from time to time and no one can give a mutually agreeable meaning to the term "Kitless" . Does it really make a difference if we define the word ... no ... but why all the opposition to coming up with a definition ? 
Russ , your work is fantastic and was instrumental in teaching me how to make pens , both kit and kitless , and I thank you for the knowledge and the inspiration to get to where I am today .
George , your work is also fantastic and has been instrumental in helping me to go beyond the kit . So excuse me for wondering , why the opposition to creating a definition to the term "Kitless" . 
Again , I know that the need for a definition is not of earth shattering importance but humor me a little and help define the word .


----------



## Texatdurango (Sep 6, 2009)

Butch, In part you said..."why the opposition to creating a definition to the term "Kitless" ".

It's not so much the opposition, I just have to ask WHY, what's all the bother about?

Other than a forum contest now and then where guidelines are set forth, I just don't understand why there needs to be definitions of what goes into a pen.

If Joe wants to make a pen from a solid piece of titanium and mill his own custom parts while Fred wants to create his own masterpiece by using brass tubes and an end cap from a kit, who is to say who is RIGHT or WRONG and who is following the RULES?  

That's where I see the problem with this whole discussion, in that there is NO right or wrong and NO rules!  

Not wanting to make waves, I just don't get it or see the need.


----------



## its_virgil (Sep 6, 2009)

...nuff said!





ldb2000 said:


> Does it really make a difference if we define the word ... no ...




because, as you've said, it makes no difference.  Maybe some of us just don't see a need. Does that make us the bad guys here?


> but why all the opposition to coming up with a definition ?



So, if you want....define away. If others want to help...fine. If some don't...well, that is fine also.

Do a good turn daily!
Don


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 6, 2009)

There are no "Bad Guys" here , you are all awesome ! I'm just one of those anal orifices that likes to define the world around me . To me "Words mean things" and having definitions always help in communicating ideas . I really would appreciate your help in this but if you chose not to , that is your choice and respect your decision .


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 6, 2009)

George , in answer to "Why?" , all I can say is "Why not?" . This is just a study in "Balloon juice" but the question does come up from time to time and I just thought it would be nice to have a "Mutually Agreed" definition but at this point I guess I was wrong so sorry for ruffling anyones feathers .


----------



## traderdon55 (Sep 7, 2009)

I am a novice and have not put a lot of thought into the kitless subject however I think the only way everybody is going to be in agreement is if we all just agree to disagree.


----------



## its_virgil (Sep 7, 2009)

No feathers ruffled here. Nothing wrong with what you seek to do.  I just don't see a need but if you do and want to pursue the definition then go for it. I'll not interfere any more. I too apologize for ruffling your feathers.
Do a good turn daily!
Don



ldb2000 said:


> ...but the question[what is kitless] does come up from time to time and I just thought it would be nice to have a "Mutually Agreed" definition but at this point I guess I was wrong so sorry for ruffling anyones feathers .


----------



## RussFairfield (Sep 7, 2009)

Life was so much simpler when everybody made SlimLine pens, sold them for $20, and Hut PPP was a good finish.


----------



## Blind_Squirrel (Sep 8, 2009)

My definition of kitless is a pen that I make/made without breaking into a kit and using parts.  I have one to my name so far.  It uses a Cross refill transmission.  I bought a pack of transmissions. I bought the refill at an office supply store.

If I break into a kit and use some of the parts I call it a modified <insert name of kit here> pen.  

If I use all of the parts it is a <insert name of kit here> pen.

Here is my kitless pen:


----------



## davinci27 (Sep 8, 2009)

I really break it down into 2 categories.  Kitless and kitlittle.  Kit less is just that they don't use kit parts,  Kitlittle is everything else.  I've never made a fully kitless pen, but I've made several kitlittle pens that I was proud to show off.

I've toyed with the idea of kitless, but just haven't felt the urge to completely drop everything from the kit.  It's really easy to grab the threads and clip out of a kit.  I don't have the metal skills to make my own clips, and I can't find the patience to cut my own threads.


----------



## ldb2000 (Sep 9, 2009)

Even though whatever is defined here is only relevant to our little group , I think (IMHO) that we should draw the line between Modified kit and Kitless . If for no other reason then to avoid the question in any future contests here , and to show that Kitless pens are not made by some "Elite" group of penmakers but can be made by anyone whose willing to try .
The line between kit and kitless pens becomes more blurred when you consider that there are now vendors selling enough parts to make a complete pen without breaking open a bag and using parts from the kit . These parts can be purchased in bulk and you could mix them up anyway you want but in the end what kind of pen do you have ? There has to be a more definitive definition of "Kitless" , again if for no other reason then contests .
I love giving examples so just hang in there . 
Quite a number of the folks here have made both Modified kit pens and Kitless pens , but you don't even realize it . Both the kit and kitless versions of these pens look very much alike . Any ideas ?

Cartridge pens are either Modified kit or kitless pens . A cartridge pen that uses a real bullet is a kitless pen , one that uses a slimline or other kit nib is a Modified kit pen . Now I know someone is saying "If the kitless version uses a slimline style clip then it's not a kitless pen". But if you use a rifle clip or any other clip that you purchase in bulk then it is still kitless . 
Clips are not the easiest thing to make , yes they can be made but getting the right combination of Form , strength and resiliency (flex) is not easy and for this reason clips are not included in my definition of kitless .

So at this point it looks like the only kit type part not used in a kitless pen is the "Pointy thing at the end of the pen that the refill sticks through" or nib or nosecone or....oh that's another debate for a later time , the front section (the grip part) of a rollerball or fountain pen and ANY part stripped from a kit pen package (this one goes on the honor system since there is noway to tell if the part came from a kit bag or not) .

There's my definition of a basic kitless pen . There are more levels to "Kitless" depending on how many parts are made by the penmaker but a "Basic kitless pen" does not use the kit type parts , nosecone/nib or the front section (the grip part) on a rollerball or fountain pen , of a kit pen or any parts stripped from a kit pen package .

Ok flame suit on , have fun :biggrin:


----------



## Blind_Squirrel (Sep 9, 2009)

Butch, 

I think  you are trying to make a subjective definition into an objective  definition.  Many here simply will not buy into it.  Call it what you like, they will still have their opinion and no amount of coaxing will change it.

Also, new people may not take the time to peruse this or other threads to find "accepted definitions" and will still call pens by other than something that may or may not be agreed upon here. 

I suggest you come up with your definition of "kitless" and "modified", then use them in your conversations of the various threads.  If others are using the terms in a different way so be it.


----------



## dow (Sep 9, 2009)

While I'm certainly not a master pen maker (far from it.  I'm only a beginning kit building hack), this whole conversation reminds me of the title of one of William Shakespear's plays, *"Much Ado About Nothing."*

Happy arguing,

Dow 
_(Who, after stirring the pot, begins laughing maniacally and ducks for cover while donning flame retardant underwear)_:biggrin:


----------



## traderdon55 (Sep 9, 2009)

(While I'm certainly not a master pen maker (far from it.  I'm only a beginning kit building hack), this whole conversation reminds me of the title of one of William Shakespear's plays, *"Much Ado About Nothing."*)

Happy arguing,

I have to agree 100%


----------



## dogcatcher (Sep 10, 2009)

And another Texan adds, who really cares?  Only another pen maker will want to know.  Most buyers have no concept of how a pen is made.


----------



## DurocShark (Sep 12, 2009)

I was always under the impression that "kitless" was no visible kit parts, with the possible exception of feed and nib of a fp. 

Now, to add a bit o'spice to the discussion... Pentels aren't kits.


----------



## leehljp (Sep 12, 2009)

Butch,

You and others here are on the edge of expanding pen making and pen turning. It is great that you are attempting to define it. Of course some will challenge any attempts at defining "Kitless" and some will challenge the "degree" of Kitless, but that is reasonable "progress", and each person has the right to have their opinion heard. But in the end, it is the person on the cutting edge that usually defines it. 

The real conundrum is: 1. the creation of a new word, or 2. etymology of an existing word . . . when "change" becomes eminent and birth to a new category becomes evident. Do we modify an old word by expanding its meaning?  Or is it differentiated enough that a new word is necessitated? 

The same thing happened with the ball point pen. For ages the "Nib" was the metal point/end from which the ink flowed. Then enter the ball point pen. Should they have re-named the metal ferrel through which the ink tube projected, or was it close enough in use to be called a "Nib". We still argue over this today even on this forum.

And then there is the question of acceptance of the 'expanded meaning,' or the 'new name/word' by the general public or the craftsman/artisan community. This "community" acceptance or rejection is the basic reason for the word "colonel" being pronounced "kurnel".

Those on the leading edge get the choicest morsels! They get stronger for it . . . or die young - and I know that you are past that! :biggrin: Go For It!


----------

