# Gent/Statesman Jrnib compatibility, NOT.



## edstreet (Jan 23, 2014)

I have been informed today and even a quick call to to the company, CSUSA, confirmed that the Gent/Statesman Jr series is being changed out from manufacture A to manufacture B and no longer compatible on the thread from rollerball to fountain pen nibs, but once the move is complete and all of manufacture A's inventory is out of the mix it *'may'* be compatible once again.


----------



## The Penguin (Jan 23, 2014)

I believe someone else posted a thread about this very issue a few months ago.

Maybe "penman1" or "ed4copies"


----------



## edstreet (Jan 23, 2014)

I do recall reading some speculation posted before on this but nothing seemed concrete.


----------



## OKLAHOMAN (Jan 23, 2014)

I've talked to Josh at CSUSA about this and was told that is the case, they will not be interchangeable most likely even after the switch over. It seems the tail is wagging the dog as the new manufacturer I'm told has made them different  and CSUSA is just letting it be.


----------



## edstreet (Jan 23, 2014)

If I am right as for whom the new manufacture is then it won't matter what CSUSA says or does on the issue.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jan 23, 2014)

edstreet said:


> If I am right as for whom the new manufacture is then it won't matter what CSUSA says or does on the issue.


My guess is that the manufacturer you're thinking of is "A".


----------



## PR_Princess (Jan 23, 2014)

The Penguin said:


> I believe someone else posted a thread about this very issue a few months ago.
> 
> Maybe "penman1" or "ed4copies"



Shawn is this perhaps the thread you were thinking of?

http://www.penturners.org/forum/f56/need-help-machinist-115299/

Makes for interesting reading. Amazing how things have changed since October...


----------



## The Penguin (Jan 23, 2014)

yep, that be the one!


----------



## OKLAHOMAN (Jan 23, 2014)

Yes a lot has changed in 90 days, and I'll be the first to admit what I was told in October is not what I was told in January. 
CSUSA in October said the problem was fixed with Dayacom and now we're hearing that they changed manufacturers. If they changed manufacturers and have no control over them then I can only think I was told what they wanted  me to hear.
CSUSA up until now has always listened to us but after explaining why we think this is a problem the attitude was this is it you'll just have to live with it.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jan 23, 2014)

OKLAHOMAN said:


> Yes a lot has changed in 90 days, and I'll be the first to admit what I was told in October is not what I was told in January.
> CSUSA in October said the problem was fixed with Dayacom and now we're hearing that they changed manufacturers. If they changed manufacturers and have no control over them then I can only think I was told what they wanted me to hear.
> CSUSA up until now has always listened to us but after explaining why we think this is a problem the attitude was this is it you'll just have to live with it.


They had two things happening --- a technical problem and switching vendors.  They wanted to acknowledge the technical problem but didn't want it to be public knowledge they were switching vendors.  Seems they were kind of between a rock and a hard place.


----------



## edstreet (Jan 23, 2014)

Another note of worthy mention is perhaps one of the reasons for the change in threads is due to patent violations.  Manufacture B afraid that Manufacture A will sue them so they make changes to avoid that.


----------



## PenMan1 (Jan 23, 2014)

I wouldn't  count on them EVER being interchangeable again. THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM and as much as I like the customer service at CSUSA, this product is not one that I'll use in the future.

This whole "change over" mess has cost me much money, and frankly I think CSUSA has been less than forthcoming on what is going on.


----------



## Dan Masshardt (Jan 23, 2014)

PenMan1 said:


> I wouldn't  count on them EVER being interchangeable again. THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM and as much as I like the customer service at CSUSA, this product is not one that I'll use in the future.  This whole "change over" mess has cost me much money, and frankly I think CSUSA has been less than forthcoming on what is going on.



Out of curiosity, what will you replace them with in your lineup?


----------



## edstreet (Jan 23, 2014)

PenMan1 said:


> I wouldn't  count on them EVER being interchangeable again. THIS IS A HUGE PROBLEM and as much as I like the customer service at CSUSA, this product is not one that I'll use in the future.
> 
> This whole "change over" mess has cost me much money, and frankly I think CSUSA has been less than forthcoming on what is going on.



So Manufacture A could sell to another company in the US other than CSUSA and with Manufacture B being sold under CSUSA as gents but with another thread size that would essentially throw a HUGE monkey wrench into the machinery.


----------



## PenMan1 (Jan 23, 2014)

Lots of choices for replacement. Dayacom Major or PSI jr Majestic, Berea Triton, or possibly having my own hardware made.

There are TOO MANY alternatives to be STUCK WITH a product that doesn't meet my needs.


----------



## edstreet (Jan 23, 2014)

PenMan1 said:


> Lots of choices for replacement. Dayacom Major or PSI jr Majestic, Berea Triton, or possibly having my own hardware made.
> 
> There are TOO MANY alternatives to be STUCK WITH a product that doesn't meet my needs.



majestic is made by dayacom.  This should have been the red flag for the community but sadly it was overlooked.


----------



## Dan Masshardt (Jan 23, 2014)

edstreet said:


> majestic is made by dayacom.  This should have been the red flag for the community but sadly it was overlooked.



I just looked up the major and thought it looked a whole lot like the majestic.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jan 23, 2014)

edstreet said:


> Another note of worthy mention is perhaps one of the reasons for the change in threads is due to patent violations. Manufacture B afraid that Manufacture A will sue them so they make changes to avoid that.


Changing thread size wouldn't help them there Ed. The thread size can't be patented to begin with - they are standards.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jan 23, 2014)

Dan Masshardt said:


> edstreet said:
> 
> 
> > majestic is made by dayacom. This should have been the red flag for the community but sadly it was overlooked.
> ...


The Major is very close to a couple of others but I don't think anyone in the USA sells them.  I wouldn't go to the bank that Majestic is made by Dayacom.  It might have been in the past but I wouldn't take bets it is today.


----------



## mrburls (Jan 23, 2014)

I ran in to the same problem 5 or 6 months ago when I bought over 100 Jr. statesman and gents. I bought all roller balls because I had a number of fountain pen kits which I could switch out the nib if I needed. Well that didn't work  Called CSUSA and talked to them about it and even had them send me a few so called new style fountain pen ends. None worked and called them again. Seemed I knew more what was going on then they did.
It really messed up a few of my orders in which customer wanted to be able to switch from roller ball to fountain pen when they wanted.
Majestic Jr. is nice but Jr. Statesman is my best seller. Not sure what I plan on doing yet.
Keith "mrburls"


----------



## Josh@csusa (Jan 24, 2014)

*Message From CSUSA VP*

Hi all,  
  My name is  Ben Williams, VP Operations at  Craft Supplies USA.  
  I apologize for any confusion that this situation has caused you.  It seems I have not done a very good job of educating our technical staff as to what is going on with these pens.  As such, some misinformation has been passed along.  Hopefully, I can clear a few things up.
  It is true that we have changed manufacturers recently, but only for the Jr. Gentlemen’s II Pen.  
  The new manufacturer did indeed use a different thread on the nib, and we are working through the old stock.  Unfortunately, this will take a bit of time.  However, when we have worked through the old stock, the nibs will be interchangeable once again.
  The Jr. Statesman II Pen, Gentlemen’s Pen and Statesman Pen are all still coming from the same manufacturer.
  However, on the Jr Statesman II pen, the manufacturer DID change the nib threads about a year ago, and we are still working through some of the old stock.  We are through 99% of the old stock, but do have a few still here.  As such, some of the nibs are still not interchangeable, but will be within a matter of weeks.
  For 95% of our customers this is not a problem, but I recognize it has caused some real frustration for a number of you, especially those that sell the pens they make.  I apologize.  For those of you that this is an issue, my suggestion would be that you call in and place your order through one of our Technicians (now that they too understand what is going on).  They will be able to double check your order and can make sure that the threads are interchangeable.  Unfortunately, there will be some pens that we do not yet have the new thread styles in stock, but at least the Tech can let you know that before you finalize your order.  I realize this is a pain for you.  I wish there was a better way.  Unfortunately we just have to get through the old stock so that it is no longer an issue.
  If I can be of further assistance, I can be emailed at bwilliams@woodturnerscatalog.com
  We are grateful for your business, and your understanding.  Thank you for your time.


----------



## edstreet (Jan 24, 2014)

Josh@csusa said:


> Hi all,
> My name is  Ben Williams, VP Operations at  Craft Supplies USA.
> I apologize for any confusion that this situation has caused you.  It seems I have not done a very good job of educating our technical staff as to what is going on with these pens.  As such, some misinformation has been passed along.  Hopefully, I can clear a few things up.
> It is true that we have changed manufacturers recently, but only for the Jr. Gentlemen’s II Pen.
> ...



So I would like to correct my first post in light of what Ben Williams posted via Josh (not touching that issue with a 10 foot pole)  I believe I mentioned statesman jr's as well which seemed to be amended, so I stand corrected  

Secondly I have some real issues with this 99% and 95% remarks.  I see it very unlikely as to how anyone can come up with these numbers with certainty in light of a few things.  Those being the number of resale accounts, group buys, kit exchanges, kits being used for repair/amend and a slew of other avenues would yield inconclusive figures and a very compounded problem that was overlooked by the quoted post.

From this text I read that CSUSA did not want to deal with an exchange to the manufacture and deal with shipping and dealing with customs, again, for a botched order and decided to dump the problem on the community and keep quiet about things and hope it quietly goes away and is not noticed.  Opting to sacrifice top quality for sales is a very good way to degrade and devalue your reputation and business transactions.

Simply from the repair standpoint this is a very exponential problem; which means instead of having to replace just one coupler we are now forced to do a complete disassemble and replace the entire hardware set.


----------



## jfoh (Jan 25, 2014)

For most users of this kit this is a non issue. Only those who want to go back and forth have any problems. And I understand the need to move inventory to get the old out and the new in. Perhaps there is some way to check kits on hand to see what is the correct thread size before a kit is made. Then if needed exchange for the correct kit size. Most never have a problem because they do not convert.  Mark these kits as non convertible kits and the problem will end when the last kit is used up. And I do admit I do not have a dog in this fight but there just needs to be a middle ground that everyone can be made happy with. No seller wants dead kits he can not sell, no maker wants kits he can not use and the buyer who wants to convert will only buy what he wants.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jan 25, 2014)

My personal opinion is that since it was an unauthorized design change CSUSA should have raised some hob about it and pushed the manufacturer to fix the problem.  I can't believe they don't buy enough to do a little arm twisting.


----------



## RickLong (Jan 27, 2014)

The Penguin said:


> I believe someone else posted a thread about this very issue a few months ago.
> 
> Maybe "penman1" or "ed4copies"



Sad this is still an issue... This was my favorite fountain & roller style... I really pushed the jr gent II at the art shows I exhibited... I definitely do not push them as much now because you can't switch them anymore. Having the ability to sell either a roller or fountain nib, helps with landing the sales at shows. 

Here is a post about this issue almost a year ago (3/13):  Jr.Gent II Threads... 

Good Luck!

Rick


----------



## edstreet (Jan 27, 2014)

> I have several questions which are current unanswered by the chain email that was posted on IAP.
> 
> For starters how do we know when you have exhausted the bad thread kits that you have in stock.
> 
> Once the stock levels are exhausted and new shipments are coming in from the new manufacture will they be interchangeable with say emperor Jr’s.  Say I bought 4-5 Emperor roller balls and 4-5 gent fountain pens to offer BOTH roller ball and fountain pen on the Emperor jr’s.  My understanding is with your new manufacture they will not be compatible.



I sent this email this morning,  will be interesting to see what the reply is, if any.


Emperor Jr in fountain pen $74.
Emperor Jr in roller ball $57.

Gent II postable fountain pen in rhodium $24.
Gent II postable fountain pen in chrome $15.


So Emperor Jr in *BOTH* roller and fountain:
*) by buying TWO Emperor's = $131 kit cost.
*) by buying one Emperor and one Gent II (rhodium) = $81.
*) by buying one Emperor and one Gent II (chrome) = $72.

As we can see by going this route you are cutting the price in half and saving the stock levels of emperor's by scraping a Gent Jr for the nib.

If the new manufacture is unable to give the same threads as that of the Emperor then that will be a very bad arrangement.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jan 27, 2014)

I don't quite understand this question Ed.  CSUSA has not sold the Jr Emperor for over a year.


----------



## edstreet (Jan 27, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> I don't quite understand this question Ed.  CSUSA has not sold the Jr Emperor for over a year.



Question #1 was how will the pen turning community know when the stock levels are again 'compatible'.

Question #2 was will the new 'compatibility' be the exact same threading as it is with Dayacom's gent line, which is compatible and changeable with the emperor line.  OR will the new 'compatibility' be just for the Gents by the new manufacture they are using.

This more understandable?


----------



## Smitty37 (Jan 27, 2014)

edstreet said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't quite understand this question Ed. CSUSA has not sold the Jr Emperor for over a year.
> ...


I understand that.

I don't think anyone will promise compatibility between lines made by two different manufacturers even if they sell kits made by both.

The issue with the thread change will almost guarantee that the one with the thread change will not be interchangeable with any other kit. I'm guessing that will be a non-issue to most sellers. 

I think that it is no different than cigar kits. No own will promise the transmissions will interchange with those being sold by different companies even if they are from the same manufacturer.

Or Sierras and Clones with different threads on the grips. I won't promise the nib ends of kits you buy from me can be used with the threaded couplers from some other sellers kits. 

No seller that I know of will promise interchangeability of anything with kits sold by other sellers.   Even same diameter tubes can be different - change the wall thickness and the same size tube takes a different size press fit part.


----------



## PenMan1 (Jan 27, 2014)

For me, the most disappointing thing is that the Jr. Gent II was perhaps the only "standard" in the component arena.

Changing from RB to FP and vis versa was a simple task that could be done "on the fly". I do quite a few shows, and at almost EVERY show, someone will have a pen that is broken and for whatever reason is very special to them. In the case of the Jr. Gent II, I could repair almost ANY PROBLEM from ANY PEN MAKER in a matter of seconds.

Additionally, this product "doubled my inventory", because invariably, someone says "I LOVE this pen and I would buy it, if it were a fountain". Presto, chango, 30 seconds later, a sale.

I understand the need for change. I am also glad to hear that at some point in time, I will again be able  to interchange the FP and RB ends.

What distresses me is that in the past 12 months, there have been NO LESS than 4 thread and centerband  thread adapter changes made, and NONE of those are compatible with ANY of the others. Now, making a repair to a pen that I (or any other pen maker) made at previous time suddenly becomes a big deal. Without the availability of the parts that was used on the original effort, a repair could be a complete new pen.

Had the changes been limited to just the threads that screw the front section, NO PROBLEM! I could have simply rethreaded the bigger of the two sections and made them once again, interchangeable. BUT, INSTEAD, the center band thread coupler, the posting screws AND the front sections ALL changed. 

As I stated in previous posts, I have ALWAYS received exceptional customer service from CSUSA and i CERTAINLY understand that "things must change" in any business model. BUT, saying that 95 percent WILL NOT BE EFFECTED, shows that the entire scheme of business has not been evaluated. 

I feel that at SOME POINT, perhaps 50-75 percent of those who have made Jr. Gent II WILL BE IMPACTED BY THIS CHANGE.

At any rate,, I WILL MISS MY "STANDARD" COMPONENT SET!


----------



## edstreet (Jan 27, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> edstreet said:
> 
> 
> > Smitty37 said:
> ...




Logic fail, you are diverting this into a CYA liability issue which it is not.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jan 27, 2014)

edstreet said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > edstreet said:
> ...


 No Ed, I am being realistic.  You went beyond the issue of interchaneability of FP and RB of the same style by the same seller. I've already agreed that's a valid concern.

You started talking about interchangeability of parts in kits that are sold under differnt names and possibly made by different manufacturers.  That's a different issue entirely.  That's what I was addressing.

It might be sad but it is true that there is no "standards" that apply to everyone making a particular style.  Hence every manufacturer is free to use whatever turns them on for tube wall thickness, threads, plating thickness and other variables.  Buyers can specify each of these things when we make an order but unless we do we're going to get what the have manufacturers have on their specs.


----------



## sschering (Jan 29, 2014)

Hmm Sounds like I ran into this problem at Christmas.
I got a Venus RB and a Jr Statesman FP intending to swap nib ends and the threads didn't match but a Jr Gent worked fine.

I can't remember if the Jr Retro matched the statesman or the Gent/Venus.

I didn't have trouble with any of the cap threads.

Perhaps I should order all 4 again just to compare  yeah sure.. my wife will be fine with another $120 order of pen kits. :biggrin:


----------



## mikespenturningz (Jan 31, 2014)

The new kits are out, I got some about 2 weeks ago. They made some major changes too. I was surprised they would do what they did. It would be nice if the fronts were inter changeable I will check tomorrow as I have some of both.


----------



## Dan Masshardt (Jan 31, 2014)

mikespenturningz said:


> The new kits are out, I got some about 2 weeks ago. They made some major changes too. I was surprised they would do what they did. It would be nice if the fronts were inter changeable I will check tomorrow as I have some of both.


what else is different?


----------



## mikespenturningz (Feb 1, 2014)

The rings on the ends of the hardware are no longer a separate item they are integrated into the piece. I am not sure if the converters are as good as the schmidt converters or not but they are not the same. The spring on the fountain pens is not inserted or present in the kit (this is an improvement). The plastic part that has the threads is much smaller on the newer kits. I have some of the newer rollerballs here and the rollerball in fact screws into the fountain pen.. YEAH thanks CSUSA... This feature is much better than the old. Also did you happen to notice that CSUSA now carries Chrome in the Jr. Gent lineup. This was also great news for me as I had asked them to carry a few of the less expensive platings so I could have hardware for a less expensive pen. They did this actually very quickly (THANKS CSUSA) So I still have a few of the older style hardware sets and the tips are not interchangeable.. The older plastic does look more robust than the new I hope I can get them apart if I need to? Still my favorite hardware. The nice thing about this hardware is it is very simple. It doesn't take away from the work that we do as wood turners. I always want my part in the pen to be the main attraction.


----------



## edstreet (Feb 1, 2014)

Pics or it does not count


----------



## mikespenturningz (Feb 1, 2014)

I know the rules Ed you are so right. ;>)







OH YEAH BABY that's what I'm talking about......


----------



## edstreet (Feb 1, 2014)

Those are actually enough changes to warrant being called a new line entirely.  Say something like 'gent III' or something.

Interesting to note the plastic sleeve insert being longer is actually a superior design.  It has more to do with fountain pen ink than anything else.  We have seen these newer style sleeves elsewhere but I would have to get one in my hands to see.

The trim rings being integrated can be a big problem with certain blanks, most notable in disassembly.  That part of the blank is perhaps the most fragile and delicate.  Also worth noting one of the big major problems of the gent series (all the way up to the emperor/imperial/etc) is creepage from the coupler allows more threading room into the sleeve. which in the new style this is not going to happen.

could you do one more pic please?  Show the rollerball nib threads on the dayacom vs this new Chinese manufacture?


----------



## PenMan1 (Feb 1, 2014)

Please look on the back of the clip (if you get a Jr Statesman) and tell me if there are any markings.

Also, are there any words on the cap thread coupler? If so, what are the markings? Are any makings on the Jr Gent coupler the same markings as those of a Jr Statesman?

Inquiring minds want to know Thanks for all of your research!!!!!


----------



## philb (May 31, 2014)

Just noticed this thread after I've run into the same problem!

Bought a group of Rollerball pens, as I knew I had fountain sections spare and could easily swap over! Not so! The new section thread isn't even close to the old one, thought it might of just been debris in the threads as I've had that before, but it's just a completely different thread!

I really like the ability to interchange sections between Jr.Gents, Statesman and Retros. Customers like the ability if they want that one can be changed from a rollerball to fountain, and simply!

Does anyone know if there's a simple way to find out which kit is which before purchase! Also are the newer threaded kits no longer Dayacom, as I see people mentioning different manufacturers?

Cheers


----------



## sbell111 (May 31, 2014)

jfoh said:


> For most users of this kit this is a non issue. Only those who want to go back and forth have any problems.


That isn't exactly true.  

Anyone who has a pen returned with a maintenance problem is going to have a problem because they won't be able to get parts for any jr gent 2 that they've ever sold.  Given that the jr g 2 isn't a very robust pen, that's a considerable number of issues that everyone is going to have to deal with one way or the other.


----------



## ed4copies (May 31, 2014)

philb said:


> Just noticed this thread after I've run into the same problem!
> 
> Bought a group of Rollerball pens, as I knew I had fountain sections spare and could easily swap over! Not so! The new section thread isn't even close to the old one, thought it might of just been debris in the threads as I've had that before, but it's just a completely different thread!
> 
> ...




Hey Phil!!  I had the same thought, but then it occurred to me that every little baggie says "Dayacom" on it.  But I just checked our newest shipment, one plating says "Taiwan" but no longer says "Dayacom".

I suspect a transition is taking place.


----------



## Smitty37 (May 31, 2014)

philb said:


> Just noticed this thread after I've run into the same problem!
> 
> Bought a group of Rollerball pens, as I knew I had fountain sections spare and could easily swap over! Not so! The new section thread isn't even close to the old one, thought it might of just been debris in the threads as I've had that before, but it's just a completely different thread!
> 
> ...


The short answer to that is no!  Some sellers will tell you who the manufacturer is - many, if not most, will not.  And the truth of the matter is, *most* buyers don't care.  

There are hundreds of sellers many of whom will be buying from the same supplier(s), some will make modifications.  I sell several kits that are modifications of kits others sell.  Some of them can interchange parts, some can't but by looking you won't know that.


----------



## Smitty37 (May 31, 2014)

ed4copies said:


> philb said:
> 
> 
> > Just noticed this thread after I've run into the same problem!
> ...


I'd venture a bet you're right - but who is making the change???? 

Dayacom or your supplier?

On their own website Dayacom sellsl what they call unbranded kits (still marked made in Taiwan) but the packaging does not say Dayacom.  Those kits sell at a lower price and are said (to me personally by Dayacom) to be "essentially the same" as their regular kits.  I know that in some cases you have to make a very liberal interpretation of "essentially" to get there.


----------



## jsolie (May 31, 2014)

Another thing I noticed for the rollerballs, apart from the packaging not saying Dayacom anymore, is the inclusion of a Schneider refill instead of a Schmidt.  Also the feel of the little parts bags was different--thinner, less robust.  There was also some difference in the hardware that was pressed into the pen bodies, mainly the little trim rings.  The were affixed to end coupler and the nib coupler, not loose like in the past.


----------



## Smitty37 (May 31, 2014)

sbell111 said:


> jfoh said:
> 
> 
> > For most users of this kit this is a non issue. Only those who want to go back and forth have any problems.
> ...


I agree Steve, but part of this problem is cultural, western society has largely become "throw away" when it breaks.  Few things are built to last decades and many things cost much more to fix than to replace.  I'm afraid a lot of that has found it's way into pens (i.e. bic, papermate, etc designed to be chucked when they run out of ink.) and that is going to impact the manufacturer's attitude.  Some of the kits I sell are made by a manufacturer who also makes millions of the throwaway promotional varieties.  I'm not sure what we (pen turners) are going to be able to do about that.


----------



## edstreet (Jun 1, 2014)

Smitty37 said:


> I'd venture a bet you're right - but who is making the change????
> 
> Dayacom or your supplier?
> 
> On their own website Dayacom sellsl what they call unbranded kits (still marked made in Taiwan) but the packaging does not say Dayacom.  Those kits sell at a lower price and are said (to me personally by Dayacom) to be "essentially the same" as their regular kits.  I know that in some cases you have to make a very liberal interpretation of "essentially" to get there.



That answer has already been published earlier in this thread.





Smitty37 said:


> I agree Steve, but part of this problem is cultural, western society has largely become "throw away" when it breaks.  Few things are built to last decades and many things cost much more to fix than to replace.  I'm afraid a lot of that has found it's way into pens (i.e. bic, papermate, etc designed to be chucked when they run out of ink.) and that is going to impact the manufacturer's attitude.  Some of the kits I sell are made by a manufacturer who also makes millions of the throwaway promotional varieties.  I'm not sure what we (pen turners) are going to be able to do about that.



Social psychology values aside the truth of the matter on this is it's more advantageous to the manufactures from a socioeconomic standpoint to produce an inferior product made with low cost materials and low cost labor and yield high repeat purchases than to product fewer quantity, much higher quality and much higher value items.




sbell111 said:


> jfoh said:
> 
> 
> > For most users of this kit this is a non issue. Only those who want to go back and forth have any problems.
> ...



This has already been brought up earlier in this thread and even the company who's selling the product has weighed in on the matter.  The only real viable solution is to find another product and supplier(?) 




philb said:


> Just noticed this thread after I've run into the same problem!
> 
> Bought a group of Rollerball pens, as I knew I had fountain sections spare and could easily swap over! Not so! The new section thread isn't even close to the old one, thought it might of just been debris in the threads as I've had that before, but it's just a completely different thread!
> 
> ...



This to has been brought up several times in this thread with several voicing great concerns in that direction as well.

I have posted some very viable ways to finding out who makes each kit in another thread.


----------



## PenMan1 (Jun 1, 2014)

They could just as easily change the name on the bag from Dayacom to T.U.R.D. instead of Tiawan.

A Totally Unreliable Redesigned Disaster . They won't be getting any more of my money. 30 percent price increase, and a 75 percent quality decrease.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jun 1, 2014)

edstreet said:


> Smitty37 said:
> 
> 
> > I'd venture a bet you're right - but who is making the change????
> ...


*No it hasn't, my question and statement were in response to a specific post. And, Ed's post did not state which supplier he was referring to - he represents at least 2 and perhaps all three of the big guys.*

Ed I have no idea where in the world you get that idea, according to that thought, everything we buy that could be made cheaper would be - and that just isn't so, as anyone who has ever had a job in manufacturing can attest to.  Also, selling junk is a good way to reduce not increase sales, few things are purchased because we can't live without them, and personally I will happily live without anything that I think of as junk.  That does not change the throw away attitude...or the fact that fixing something might cost a lot more than replacing it.


----------



## sbell111 (Jun 1, 2014)

Ed-

Please don't attempt to be the arbiter of whether someone's comment has or hasn't been discussed as you aren't very good at that job.  As near as I can tell, neither my comment nor Smitty's was actually previously discussed.  If you'd rather not see all of these extraneous posts, find your way out of the thread, or put all of us on 'ignore'.


----------



## edstreet (Jun 1, 2014)

sbell111 said:


> Ed-
> 
> Please don't attempt to be the arbiter of whether someone's comment has or hasn't been discussed as you aren't very good at that job.  As near as I can tell, neither my comment nor Smitty's was actually previously discussed.  If you'd rather not see all of these extraneous posts, find your way out of the thread, or put all of us on 'ignore'.





Ok lets see here ....




edstreet said:


> Josh@csusa said:
> 
> 
> > Hi all,
> ...




I would suggest reading and UNDERSTANDING what is posted before making slanderous statements.


----------



## sbell111 (Jun 1, 2014)

edstreet said:


> I would suggest reading and UNDERSTANDING what is posted before making slanderous statements.


While we are making suggestions, I have two.

First, that you make the bare minimum effort to be less of a jerk.

Second, that you go back and take a look at my post in question.  I was responding to a poster who said that there was only one issue, but neglected all future maintenance issues.  I guess that I could have been a jerk and simply told him that he was wrong and that it had already been addressed, without even pointing out the issue or leading him to where it was (like you did).  Alternatively, I could do what I did and explain the issue to him.


----------



## sbell111 (Jun 1, 2014)

As I was making lunch for the kids, I thought of two more suggestions.

First, don't imagine that everyone hangs on every word that you type and that you are the only person who is allowed to discuss a topic.

Second, be careful how you throw around accusations like 'slander'.  Ironically, accusing someone of slander when they didn't actually commit slander could be considered slander in itself.  Isn't that wild?  Perhaps, it would be best if you retain an attorney to save you from making false accusations so you don't get yourself into trouble.


----------



## Smitty37 (Jun 1, 2014)

If I may make a suggestion...I suggest that everyone keep in mind that the first 40 posts in this thread were made between January 23 2014 and February 1 2014 and it was brought to life again on May 31 2014.  By my calculation that is 4 months give or take a day or two.  I, for one, and probably many others did not go back and read all of the posts made 4 months ago and might very well have reiterated things said then.  


Additionally there were probably some new comers to the thread who also didn't read all 40 of the earlier comments.


----------

