Despite its price the Duofold was such an immense success that every pen manufacturer wanted to make one and every writer wanted to own one. There was honest influence in the appearance of many subsequent pens. Also, there were some in the US and elsewhere that were shameless copies. I remember a beautiful Lapis lazuli Macniven & Cameron that at first glance was a Duofold. It was only when you spotted the lever that you realised that it was a copy, down to the dummy blind cap.
This beautiful pen is an even more successful copy. Without examining it closely enough to read the writing, there would be no doubt in anyone’s mind that this was a Parker Duofold. The red Vulcanite is just right. The pen’s a button filler and the size is right. The quality is just as high. It was made by Langs in the early thirties, one of those pens that they named after London streets, in this case the Regent.
It’s a superb pen, owned by my friend Hans Gilliams. I’m trying hard to force down the envy. The nib is an 18ct replacement, a perfect fit and a nice writer so none the worse for that.
The Duofold influence went on for decades. Langs button fillers and Mentmore Autoflows continued to be in debt to the Duofold almost to the end. And then Parker made the 51 and the process began all over again…
6 thoughts on “An RHR Regent”
That is a lovely pen. I have a 1928 same color. My only complaint is the nib writes wet. I limit the ink to the Pelikan 4001 series as they are dry. I also have a 1941 Duofold, the model with the vertical sections (looks like a vaccumatic). I like the feel of this one better, it is thinner and more comfortable to hold, but as you mentioned the 51 arrived….
You can always fiddle with the distance between the feed and the nib, or close the slit in the nib a bit to reduce flow. Not that it always works …
Thanks for the advise, I’ll give it a go and hope for the best
Good luck with that, Danny
Wow. That copy — OK, “influence” — is good enough that I wonder if Parker sued them for patent / trademark infringement!
I don’t think Parker’s patent ran here. Mind you, there were some close copies in the US too and so far as I know Parker didn’t sue. It was Sheaffer that was really litigious.