Review: Alvin Draft/Matic DM03 0.3mm Automatic Pencil

What follows is my review of the Alvin Draft/Matic 0.3mm Drafting Pencil.  It was originally published at Associated Content.  I have edited the content for this posting.  I hope that it's not to dry for anyone!

Technical Data
Length: 142.4mm
Diameter (Body): 8. mm
Diameter (Grip): 8.5mm
Balance Point (From Push Button): 82.5mm
Weight: 17 grams
Lead Sleeve: 4mm, fixed
Lead Size: 0.3mm

Major Components: End cap/lead sleeve/grip, body with lead grade indicator, pocket clip, push button, eraser and the clutch assembly/lead reservoir sub-assembly.
Clutch assembly/lead reservoir sub assembly: Clutch assembly, lead reservoir, eraser holder/reservoir plug, end cap/body coupler and clutch-retaining spring.

Construction Type: Independent clutch assembly/lead reservoir and body.

Construction Materials: Plastic body, clear plastic lead reservoir. Metal clutch assembly, push button, pocket clip, lead grade indicator, end cap/lead sleeve/grip, eraser holder/reservoir plug, end cap/body coupler and the clutch retaining spring.

Colors: Yellow body, bright chrome lead grade indicator, pocket clip, push button, eraser holder/reservoir plug, end cap/body coupler, clutch-retaining spring.

Mode Of Operation: Ratcheting push button lead advance, 3-jawed brass clutch with brass over-sleeve.

Appearance: The DM03 is an attractive pencil with very clean lines. The bright yellow body has black imprinting which is very legible. The lead grade indicator is knurled and at the top of the body. The lead grade indicator window is rectangular showing the silver over gloss black lead grades which are H, 2H, 4H, 2B, B, HB and F. The bright chrome push button is the full over-sleeve type, which fully hides the chrome eraser holder. The bright chrome pocket clip rests below the lead grade indicator and is stamped with the country of origin, Japan. The chrome grip is nicely knurled in a diamond pattern and steps down twice to form the integral end cap/lead sleeve, squaring off before becoming the lead sleeve. The end cap/body coupler is seen only as a ring between the grip and the body.

Disassembly: Complete take down of the DM03 is not quite as simple as with other pencils and is NOT recommended.  To fill the lead reservoir first remove the chrome push button, then the eraser from the reservoir tube.  Drop in a few pieces of lead the put the eraser... Awe, come on!  You know the rest!  If you have to clear a lead jam you will have to remove the grip.  Simply unscrew the grip and slide it off the end of the pencil.

Clearing A Lead Jam: Refer to this article, Clearing A Lead Jam, should clearing a lead jam be necessary.  The link is on the front page of this blog.

My Opinion (for what it's worth): The Alvin is a heavyweight of a pencil with its balancing point being 82.5mm from the top of the pencil. This makes the Alvin bottom heavy, which helps it rest comfortably in my hand. The finely knurled diamond pattern on the chromed grip affords my fingers a good hold. Both features help make writing with the Alvin a delight to write with, it almost writes for me. Three clicks of the push button produces enough lead to write or draw with, a comfortable 1 mm. The lead reservoir is not cavernous, being small in diameter, but it will hold a couple of dozen leads. The lead grade indicator at the top of the body spins to freely and can move during normal handling. The bright silver characters of the lead grades are set against a gloss black background making them hard to read due to glare. However the push button can be replaced and the eraser used without causing lead projection.

Last Words: The Alvin Draft/Matic DM03 was designed as a drafting tool but serves well as a freehand drawing tool or as a fine writing instrument. Its balance and feel make it suitable for anyone who wishes to use it in either respect. So if you are in the market for a high quality writing or drawing tool keep the Alvin DM03 in mind as you shop.

Due to a glitch comments were not enabled on this post. If you would like to leave a comment please do so at my Guest Book. Just mention the pencil by name.

Does Size Make A Difference?

While browsing through a local Office Depot the other day I happened to see some Faber-Castell PITT Artist Pens. My eye fell upon the words on one of the packages: "Superfine Nib". Well that's all it took (for me to ask my lovely wife if I could spend the $2.00 asking price). Even before I got home I had the pen out of it's blister pack and was trying it out. It looked "Superfine" in the car but once I arrive home I immediately began to compare it to my other technical and non-technical porous point pens. That's when I discovered that "Superfine" wasn't as fine as I'd thought.

I was curious as to the actual line width of the pen so I hauled out all my other technical pens along with a few other porous point pens and started to do write with them all in an effort to determine the actual line width of the Faber Castell PITT. I was able to find out that it laid down a line similar to the Alvin TechLiner #03, The Sakura Pigma Micron #03, and the Pilot DR #03. The problem is the Alvin claims it makes a 0.3mm line, the Sakura claims it makes a 0.35mm line and the Pilot claims no line width at all. So which is it? Or am I splitting hairs? No matter. I drug out my trusty dial calipers and did some measuring.

I measured the diameter of the plastic coated fibrous tip in an effort to see what the relationship between shaft diameter and line width was. My results were surprising to say the least. It seems that in the world of porous point pens size is relative!

I measured 17 different pens and the
results are posted below. The pens tested were the Sakura Pigma Micron (SPM), the Pilot DR Drawing Pen (PDR), the Mitsubishi unipin Fine Line (MUP), the Kuretake Zig Millennium (KZM), the Alvin TechLiner Technical Drawing Pen (ATL), the Faber Castell PITT Artist Pen (FCP), the Saford Sharpie Pen (SSP), the Pilot V Razor (PVR) and the Sanford Liquid Expresso (SLE). Other abbreviations used, Line Width (LW), Tip Diameter (TD), Not Given (NG), Superfine (SF), Fine (F) and Extra Fine, (EF).


SPM #005, LW = 0.20mm, TD = 0.33mm. PDR #005, LW = NG, TD = 0.33mm. MUP #005, LW = NG, TD = 0.43mm. SPM #01, LW = 0.25mm, TD = 0.57mm. PDR #01, LW = NG, TD = 0.48mm. KZM #01, LW = NG, TD = 0.53mm. ATL #01, LW = 0.1mm, TD = 0.53mm. SPM #02, LW = 0.30mm, TD = 0.71mm. PDR #02, LW = NG, TD = 0.61mm. ATL #02, LW = 0.20mm, TD = 0.64mm. SPM #03, LW = 0.35mm, TD = 0.79mm. PDR #03, LW = NG, TD = 0.79mm. ATL #03, LW = 0.30mm, TD = 0.79mm. FCP SF, LW = NG, TD = 0.76mm. SSP F, LW = NG, TD = 0.79mm. PVR EF, LW = NG, TD = 0.76mm. SLE EF, LW = NG, TD = 0.76mm.

It appears that there is not much of a correlation between tip diameter and the size of the line the tip makes except that in general the greater the tip diameter the wider the line. With the notable exceptions of the #03 technical pens and the two Extra Fine non-technical pens none of the groups with the same reported size have the same tip diameter. The unipin, which has the finest line of the #005 pens has the largest diameter tip! In the #01 and #02 pens the Microns seem to have the largest diameter tip but lay down a line at least as equal in width as the others, if not finer.

As for the non-technical pens the Razor and the Expresso seem to make the same width line, while the Sharpie makes a slightly finer line. Yet the Sharpie has the larger diameter tip. There just doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to the size of the tip and the width of the line, at least in general. But tip width is only part of the story. It's the shape of the end of the tip that has a lot to do with the line width.

Two pens the same designated size can be and often are of different tip diameters yet they lay down the same width line, as we've seen. The reason for this is that the nose of the smaller diameter tip is blunter than the larger diameter tip, yet they booth have the same size opening in the plastic sheath that allows them to have the same line width. The advantage one design has over the other is debatable. One could argue that the larger diameter tip affords the tip greater strength yet the shaper nose is more easily crushed while the nose of the smaller diameter tip may be more crush resistant the smaller diameter tip is weaker over all. But in the long run, does it really matter? It might, as seen under the eye loupe some of the tips were considerably shorter than the others. This also has a factor in the over all strength of the tips.

So, does it really matter to you, the end user, if the tip on your porous point pen is larger in diameter than another of the same size? Or shorter? As long as they lay down the same width line then it shouldn't. But without a greater standardization of size designations I am afraid that we will be faced with slight variations in line width among the same size designation of pens for some time to come.

Two Of A Kind?

When I first saw the Alvin Draft/Matic DM03 I wondered just how like the Koh-I-Noor Rapidomatic 5633 it was. Well I was quite surprised to discover that the 2, while looking similar, were entirely two different beasts altogether.

In appearance they differ only slightly: the Koh-I-Noor has a hexagonal body while the Alvin has a round body; the Alvin has a ring between the grip and the body while the Koh-I-Noor does not; the end of the grip/beginning of the end cap and lead sleeve also differ slightly between the two; and the knurling on the grip and lead grade indicator is courser on the Alvin. But aesthetically they are definitely in the same family, if not siblings then kissin' cousins. But internally they are completely different! To see just how different please read my reviews of each pencil at Associated Content. Each is listed in the side bar just below the Alltop badge.


The Koh-I-Noor 5633


While the internal differences were striking the 2 pencils wrote very much alike as they were very close in length, girth and weight. I can't say which one that I like best. It's like having to choose between your two best girlfriends. A very difficult task to say the least. So pretty much the 2 cousins were alone in their close-but-no-cigar designs, snuggled within my pencil case for a while. I saw other pencils that seemed similar to the Koh-I-Noor, the Rotring 500 and 600 among them which is as it should be as they are owned and made by the same parent company. The Kokuyo TZ-PSP 503 is similar but lacks a lead grade indicator. I saw only one that looked like the Alvin, the Berol Rapid Design which has the lead grade indicator between the grip and the body. So I was pretty much satisfied that I had a representative of each design, but longed for the Rotrings (maybe one day). Then I saw the Ohto Promate PM-703.

A discontinued design of unknown (to me) era it looked very much to me like the Alvin, only in black and rubberized. I figured that it was a similar design on the outside with a different interior mechanism. I had learned form my experience with the K0h-I-Noor and Alvin that looks can be deceiving. Well as things would have it I was able to scrape up enough from my meager profits from my Associated Content publications to be able to purchase a copy of the Ohto. It arrived today, all the way from Japan via Russia! (the vendor who had it is in the Russian Republic). Well I wasted no time comparing it to the Alvin... lo and behold it's the Alvin's twin!

If the Koh-I-Noor is the Alvin's kissin' cousin then the Ohto is it's sibling! The differences in appearances are minor indeed. Aside from the color and the fact that the Ohto has a rubberized barrel the major differences in appearances are the fact that the knurling on the Avlin is courser than that on the Ohto and the way that the grips taper to the the lead sleeve. If one did not know that the two were of different makes one could hardly be faulted for thinking that one was just a slightly different model of the other. Both are really great looking pencils (except for the yellow color of the Alvin's barrel) and the stats on them both are almost exactly the same! The differences are minor and not worth mentioning and could be attributed to differences in tolerances if in fact they were of the same manufacturer. They even weight the same! But that's not where the family resemblance stops! Not by a long shot!

As much as the Alvin and the Koh-I-Noor differ on the inside the Alvin and the Ohto are the same. Almost exactly the same. Again the internal differences are so minor that once again they could just be considered different revisions of the same pencil. They are so alike that the parts from each are completely interchangeable with one another! If you were to strip the 2 pencils down to the 3 major components/sub assemblies and mix them all up, hand them to someone who has never seen the pencils before and ask them to reassemble them they would have no trouble assembling 2 complete working pencils despite the fact that both would likely contain parts from each other. Because the mechanisms are so similar they even project lead at the same rate. It takes only 2 clicks to produce enough lead to write with.

Someone else may feel slighted at having bought 2 almost identical pencils, but not me, and not any true pencilholic. It's the slight differences amongst all the sameness between the "twins" that make having them so interesting. As a collector/user and true pencilholic I think it's great finding two pencils from two different Japanese manufacturers that are so much alike! It makes me wonder, did one company clone the other's design (as if that's never happened)? Are the 2 companies owned by the same parent company? Did one designer sell the same design to both companies? Just what is the story behind these 2 pencils? I guess as time allows I'll just have to search the Net and find some answers.

And BTW, did I fail to mention that I really like the design of the "twins"? Well, I do... ;-)