Thanks very much! Doing some more search and found other dates, such as a patent filed for “Micrograph” in 1976 and info that it was being used for lead holders (actually mechanical pencils) since 1971 - likely via MARS-MICROGRAPH 0X 770 0X. And a patent filed by FC in 1976 for “TK-fine” as well.
2 Likes
Thanks to you. By the way, is there something like a 775 0x with a brass clutch and/or metal lead container tube? Is there a Staedtler pencil with a plastic body and 100% metal internals?
Edit: Does the MARS-MICROGRAPH 0X 770 0X have metal internals?
1 Like
Lead container tube definitely no… Maybe Micromatic but I know it’s not true 100% since a part of the mechanism is made of plastic, your best bet would be micrograph since that at least has brass clutch (drifand did disassemble his and say the 0.5 and 0.7 used a plastic one instead). I guess a 775 0X with brass clutch would be the P20X 
MARS-MICROGRAPH 0X 770 0X likely has a plastic lead container tube but brass mechanism, I think the mechanism would be brass because it belongs to the flagship “MARS” drafting line, would be good if someone did a teardown of this pencil. I tried to get in touch with the guy behind zeichnen lofter but even with google translate I couldn’t understand how. EDIT: its all brass
1 Like
10 Likes
It’s my pleasure! I hope one day you can fill the remaining gaps.
3 Likes
Forrequi, this is a terrific write-up on Staedtler. An excellent guide that I’m hoping you’ll be able to revise and append over time!
One thing I’m wondering about and hoping you might have some info, is original pricing. In particular, the 925-95 came out in the mid 1990’s. Is there a known sticker price. When it was retired in 2005 and the 925-85 came out that same year, did it resume the same price or was it lowered?
It also would be fascinating to learn about what drove Staedtler to change the design of the pencil… if there was some desire for an aesthetic change or if there was a production cost impetus to altering the design (such as the stepped nose cone being changed to a simple conical shape).
2 Likes
Hello Gary! I’m happy that this guide has been good for you, I’ve actually been compiling a list of pencils that I need to add and information that has to be changed… Any of these days when I get enough time I will do it!
PenEssay claims a price of 1200 Yen for 925 95 and a price of 1200 Yen that was later changed to 1400 for 925 85. I do not know their source for these figures, someone could try emailing them – or maybe emailing STAEDTLER.jp directly.
Many things can be behind a design change, maybe it’s because drafting pencils in general are “less desirable” than writing oriented models (you can maybe understand this as drafting x conical sleeve?) but honestly no one can know for sure. Maybe the 95 sold poorly or maybe it’s just a question about aesthetics like you said.
5 Likes
Microfix S, 1980-88 (last version). Haven’t seen a yellow one before so that’s neat! Grip grooves are apparently a bit different, could be yet another “version”.
2 Likes
What a fantastic resource that I’ve come to rather belatedly, many thanks for this huge achievement. After nearly 50 years of first accumulating, then more seriously collecting a small Staedtler fineline collection, it’s filled in so many gaps and hazy areas for me. In particular you’ve nailed the complexities of the S/SL evolution from Micrograph to Microfix, which had always confused me (I came to the S models after suffering the total loss of more than one 0.3 HS dropping on the floor at school, but they were hard to find even in the 1970s and shortly after that the 0.3 seemed to disappear from the range altogether, as you’ve explained).
Please can I ask you or the community about another area of confusion for me? I have a Micromatic 777 in black/silver (a really dreadful pencil even though as far as I can tell it’s working as intended – whatever possessed them to do away with the button altogether?). Presumably that pencil was Staedtler’s attempt to compete with the wonderful Faber Castell TK-Matic. But I was completely unaware of the Hi-Matic 774 15. You give the same dates for both – was the Hi-Matic a more budget model, and/or a predecessor? Many thanks again.
5 Likes
I am glad this can still be of help to people so much time after I wrote it up. I’ve been trying to update it over the years but never have the time. Thank you.
The Hi Matic appears to be an entirely different model, as far as I know the mechanism is different and there’s little mechanical/design relation between Micromatic and Hi Matic. So it’s not a budget version.
The thing with putting them at the same date is because both appear for the first time in the catalogues of those years and stop appearing soon after (likely discontinued). So in conclusion I’d say both are just different pencils and approaches STAEDTLER experimented with on tackling Automatic pencils: Micromatic as the ultimate, high tech and luxurious instrument (just like TK Matic) and Hi Matic a more general utilitarian approach (perhaps more similar to a Rotring Altro and other cheaper automatics) – even though it has its own “luxurious” version too in black and gold
5 Likes
Thanks - they do certainly appear different internally, judging by the photos (for which also thanks). The Micromatic has a solid brass cylindrical clutch mechanism (I could post photos but I’m assuming the experts here already know that?), not like the nylon of the Hi Matic although I guess the principle of operation might be the same. Judging by the shape of the slot, it looks like the later ‘Retromatic’ uses some sort of rotating ratchet action, a bit like a ballpoint pen click?
So I’d say (roughly speaking) that both the exterior and interior of the Hi Matic are more utilitarian than the Micromatic.
2 Likes
Those internals are from Kotobuki (Retromatic) and Micro (Hi-Matic) and were used in a lot of automatic feed pencils over the years. The Micromatic however uses their own design:
4 Likes
Thank you! I’ve been trying to figure out if the Continuum CT-5 was an actual automatic feed like it’s black and gold cousin the CD-5. And yes, that’s the Kotobuki mechanism.
3 Likes