The actual capacity of Noodler's ink bottles

Still trying to finish a bottle, have too many, who cares about the ML
differentials, use and enjoy the ink, there are enough colors to hopefully
never finish a bottle anyway!

Enjoy!


"R. Paul Martin" wrote in message
...
Having finally finished my first-bought bottle of Noodler's Black ink
I decided to take up the issue I've seen raised elsewhere regarding
the actual capacity of these bottles. Well, the bottom line answer is
they hold 75 mL.

I've seen a posting about this issue of the capacities of the bottles
before, and I've seen others claiming that the bottles really contain
more than 75 mL. But in fact I measured up to the very rim of the
bottle and it's only 75 mL. I did this experiment three times,
emptying and refilling the bottle with water, and it came out the same
every time. And by "rim of the bottle" I mean that it is not
physically possible to put any more water, or ink, into that bottle.

These days Noodler's Ink bottles are said to contain 3 ounces by
weight. And by weighing the empty bottle and a full one it seems that
that's about right, for the weight. But the bottles also say that they
contain 90 mL of ink. This is not the case.

Now I like the Noodler's inks, in fact I have bought hundreds of
dollars of them from various vendors. But I'm a bit troubled by the "3
Oz. - 90 mL" bottle only holding 75 mL.

I don't know why this has happened. I wonder if maybe Nathan bought
the bottles and filled them never realizing that they didn't hold 3
fluid ounces of ink, and then later on had to claim it was sold by
weight all along. He had been touting that they held 3 fluid ounces
for a while (3 fluid ounces = 88.7 mL).

From this newsgroup (alt.collecting.pens-pencils)
Date: 04 Sep 2004 19:58:16 GMT
Subject: Speaking of Noodler's ink: my own ink tests

Nathan Tardif, posting as scaupaug1, wrote, "Also keep in mind that if
Aurora black (the ink many people used as a benchmark last year) were
in the 3 fluid oz./90ml Noodler's bottle it would retail for $20 to
$22 per bottle at current prices!"

and "Compare the costs per volume to Noodler's. It's a no brainer...
Noodler's is about 90ml per bottle - so factor in the higher volume
whenever you compare prices. Note also that the bottles are
chronically overfilled a little beyond 90 ml just to enhance the value
comparison beyond the label!"

Also, on http://www.noodlersink.com/ although there's a disclaimer at
the top of the page now which says that, "Noodler's Ink is bottled by
weight, 1, 3, and 4.5 ounces of ink per bottle," lower down on the
page it still says, "3 oz. (90 ml.) Bottle/MSRP $13.50," for the Polar
Black ink.

Various vendors in E-mails and on their Web sites have echoed this 90
mL capacity for the bottles.

So as one who did factor in the "higher volume" when comparing prices
for ink I am a bit disheartened by this discovery.

And there is also the question of the capacity of the "4.5 ounce"
eye-dropper bottles of Noodler's ink. As someone who's bought any
number of the "4.5 ounce" bottles I have to wonder how much ink they
really hold. Do they hold 133 mL? How can I calculate which size
bottle gives me the most ink for my money if I can't tell how to
compare their capacities?

If this posting gets back to Nathan Tardif, and I hope that it does,
I'd like him to know that I am a supporter of his ink products. I have
almost all of the Noodler's inks including the various
vendor-exclusive ones. And I'd like Nathan to know that I'd still buy
his inks on their merit alone. But I do wish he'd change the marketing
strategy of claiming he's selling the ink in 90 mL bottles. I wish
he'd state how much ink by volume is in the smaller bottles and also
how much the "4.5 ounce" bottles contain in mL.

I think that Nathan should also do this because he's liable to find
himself in violation of laws in some of the states or countries where
he's selling the ink.

Even at 75 mL per bottle Noodler's ink is still very good stuff and
the waterproof or "bulletproof" ink is great and alone in its field.