Die Geschichte des als „Granate“ bekannten Handspitzers, der seit knapp 90 Jahren von Möbius+Ruppert hergestellt wird1, lässt sich bis 1892 zurückverfolgen2. Die Form hat sich über die Jahre nur wenig geändert3, wohl aber das Messer und seine Befestigung; der kürzliche Fund von zwei alten Varianten bietet die Gelegenheit für einen Vergleich.
Bis in die 1950er Jahre hinein wurde das Messer durch eine Rändelschraube und zwei Stifte gehalten. Um 1960 herum löste eine Schlitzschraube aus Messing die Rändelschraube ab (links); dies behielt man bis in die frühen 1970er Jahre bei. Dann fielen die beiden Stifte weg4 und ein paar Jahre später legte man das nun anders geformte Messer in ein Messerbett, um es gegen Verdrehen zu sichern (Mitte). In dieser Zeit – vielleicht sogar schon etwas früher – wurde die „Granate“ auch einen Millimeter kürzer. Als letzte Änderung ersetzte man in den 1980er Jahren die im Haus gefertigte Schlitzschraube durch eine aus kaltem Draht gepresste und zum Schutz vor Rost galvanisierte Kreuzschlitzschraube (rechts).
- Dieser Spitzer war in den ersten Jahrzehnten des letzten Jahrhunderts auch als „Granate 5“ im Sortiment der Vertriebsfirma Möller & Breitscheid, doch wer diese Variante gefertigt hat, konnte ich bis jetzt nicht herausfinden (Möbius+Ruppert war es nicht).↩
- Dem „Handbuch für Papier und Bürobedarf“ von 1949 zufolge kam die „Granate“ um 1889 in den Handel, doch dafür habe ich noch keine Bestätigung finden können.↩
- Hin und wieder sieht man die „Granate“ mit drei statt der vier typischen Rändelungen; dies ist die heute nicht mehr erhältliche Ausführung für dicke Stifte.↩
- Quelle: Katalog des Jahres 1975 von Möbius+Ruppert. – Diese Variante habe ich leider nicht; ich wüsste zu gerne, wie das Messer in Position gehalten wurde.↩
Thanks, Gunther! In search of the missing link (note – 4) now. It is like studying early fossils. So fascinating. Can you guess what the next version will look like? Simpler, other material? Eco-brass? Another metal, Stainless steel? Or do you consider Castor and Pollux part of this ‘evolution’ process? How about a prediction .. you are the expert!
I’m happy you like it too, Wowter! Yes, I am still looking for this variant which I call the third generation and of which I only have a picture from a 1975 catalogue.
I would like to know how the knife was secured against twisting because there are neither the old pins nor the new recess. However, I do not want to exclude the possibility that the variant offered at that time differed from this representation. Back then, they didn’t have the photorealistic possibilities that we have today but they might have photographed a prototype or an unfinished sharpener for the catalogue (which could well mean that the variant shown in the catalogue never existed and that there were thus only four instead of five generations of the “Granate”). – By the way, I think it is conceivable that if you look at the production you could identify even more generations (for example, on the left and middle variants in the photo I can’t see any traces of barrel grinding).
As far as further development is concerned I can only speculate. If you simplified the design it would no longer be a “Granate“, and the brass was – and is – a typical feature of this sharpener. Given these aspects, I would fear that any major change would eventually lead to the disappearance of this classic. And after 130 years, that would be very unfortunate. Maybe it is possible to switch to EcoBrass but that’s all I would do.
I do not consider Pollux and Castor to be a further development of the “Granate“ but “special use” sharpeners because their cones deviate from the standard (22°). The Castor is in the tradition of the long point sharpeners for stenographic pencils and the Pollux takes a special position with its curved blade which restricts its use to high-quality pencils.
It remains exciting!
Thank you, Gunther for such an elaborate answer in English. This third generation was, as you state, most likely just a short lived transient version. Extremely difficult to find I guess if produced for only a short period of time. How nice to see its picture though. I hope you will spot/find/purchase one!
I agree a grenade/‘Granate’ not made from brass is not a grenade/‘Granate’. Its weight can’t be matched properly with other substances. Stainless steel and ceramics can be metal/ceramic injection molded (within very tight tolerances) and sintered afterwards. If ever copper (main ingredient of brass) becomes too expensive there are alternatives for the evolution of a similar shaped tool (bullet/rocket/egg/walnut or different name). Time will tell!
My pleasure, Wowter! Thank you for your comment and the details.
I think you are very right in your assumption that the third was only a very short generation, perhaps only a brief transition. I will keep my eyes peeled!
I find that there are too many cheap plastic sharpeners with non-replaceable blades that produce poor results. And worse – even many a branded sharpener disappoints. A few years ago someone recommended a plastic sharpener from Faber-Castell to me. I bought it, tested it and threw it away because it not only produced comparatively thick shavings but also squeaked (!). A few years ago a friend told me that his Graf von Faber-Castell pencil sharpener (platinum-plated, about 80 Euros at the time) produces a thin peg at the tip which indicates faulty geometry. And at that price!
All this shows not only how good the M+R sharpeners are (I couldn’t help but promote them) but also that there is still a need for well-functioning, appealing and affordable sharpeners.
Give me the futuristic MIM sharpener! ;-)
Yes! We both agree! If only we were responsible for this type of tools .. All would be of the best quality at a fair price.
I don’t know if we could really do it better; I for one don’t think I could. An interest in sharpeners and some detailed knowledge are unfortunately not enough. Development, production, marketing, sales – all that is also part of it.
But I could imagine that in the future it will be even easier than today to manufacture special products in small quantities. Maybe this path will lead to new sharpeners, and maybe we will join in ;-)
You are so right! Making and selling good products, like these simple pencil sharpeners, is hard and requires skills I don’t have. A little bit of day dreaming made me write these sentences above! Yes indeed, Möbius & Ruppert is doing a remarkable job. Hard to do it better than they do. Easy to suggest alternatives but engineering needs budget and know how. So MIM or CIM technology will remain a fantasy. Unless someone with deep pockets and a bit foolish takes over the helm and invests a lot in something radically different (without being sure of the result in and acceptance by the market).
You have summarised the challenges very well.
I found our exchange of ideas very enriching and had great fun with our daydreams! It is not uncommon for good ideas to come out of the latter as well. And who knows what surprises the market will bring …
And as for the “Granate”, I can only hope that it will be around for a very long time to come!
I just thought that it might get a different name in the future. The name ‘Granate’ has something aggressive/explosive over it though it is just an inward directed knife container. I consider it a heavy friendly chunk. Maybe nut, acorn or pebble could introduce a friendlier accent. Or Jason! A friend of Castor and Pollux. But of course it still resembles a grenade. Well, what is in a name ..
That’s a very important aspect. The word “Granate” certainly doesn’t have a very positive connotation but the name has been in common use for this sharpener for over 120 years, is widespread and therefore probably here to stay (in English-speaking countries the sharpener is often called “brass bullet sharpener”, sometimes also “cartridge”). – By the way, the name was registered twice in Germany, namely 1901 and 1939; today there is no longer an entry.
I think it is important for a product to have a catchy name if it is to be successful, and I believe this is true of “Granate”. Would the sharpener have been so successful with its item number 14/I and later 604? Probably not. Perhaps the popularity of the sharpener and the familiarity of its name outweigh the negative aspects of the latter!
Your words are well chosen. I agree for most part of it! I am not sure however that it wouldn’t have been a success without such a catchy name. I do think its haptic feel (excellent weight and roughness) and functionality (sharpening very well) were most important.
On the other hand, there is no discussion about the fact that it is easier to familiarise with it given its current name than had it been a number or letter combination. In cars, I once read, there is a alternation in names (like Golf) and number/letter (e.g. ID-3) combinations. For marketing similar products (cars don‘t differ that much ;)) it is crucial, it seems.
Granate has survived all trends. An icon that deserves even more appreciation/ recognition. Humble, well-priced, long-lasting and effective.
You are right – a catchy name is not a mandatory requirement for the success of a product but it can contribute greatly to it. And I also think that the success of the “Granate” is based on its haptic feel, its utility value and of course its unique design. The latter alone gives this sharpener a special position and ensures sufficient product differentiation!
I have never been interested in cars, and so many look very similar to me. Snappy names don’t help me either ;-) But I think I can understand that for the marketing of very similar products you have to pay even more attention to the names.
The fact that the “Granate” has survived all the trends and is still so successful is very remarkable and deserves great recognition. Whoever created it did it very well, and all those who have improved it over the years also deserve respect.
Off to the next 130 years!
We do agree in all aspects. What a great recap on this discussion! I enjoyed the exchange of ideas and opinions. 130 years of existence: Hard to imagine they will evolve in the future. They reached perfection already.
‘Granate’ and Pollux are my favourite pencil sharpeners. You introduced me to their qualities. Thanks for that notification through Lexikaliker too! Keep on telling great stories.
Wowter, I have enjoyed our discussion very much too! It was very inspiring and made me think about different aspects. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!
Yes, maybe this is the secret of the “Granate”: It’s been perfect for a long time now.
I’m happy to hear that the “Granate” and Pollux are your favourite sharpeners. It was a pleasure to show both here, and will continue to do so. And the next stories are already in the making!
To revive this hymn of the glory of ‘Granate’, a short follow-up .. How wonderful you researched the name of its inventor by tracing back its origin/conception in a Swiss patent (see later posts in this formidable blog). It is Ewald Breitscheid. More than 130 years ago: 1890 for its application. The story, apart from its first manufacturer, is now complete. Long may ‘Granate’ live.
Thank you for your kind words, Wowter! This has been an exciting journey but there is still much to discover. One detail that I have only ever mentioned in passing so far I will present in more depth shortly.
Here’s to the next 130 years! ;-)
Ich bin wie immer interessiert. Schlagwort/‘Tag’: „Granate“ funktioniert sehr gut. Dies bietet einen guten chronologischen Überblick.
Das freut mich zu hören! Der Überlick über das Stichwort „Granate“ fasst zwar alles zusammen, zeigt aber leider nur die Reihenfolge meiner Funde und Beiträge zu diesem Spitzer, nicht jedoch dessen chronologische Entwicklung. Aber ich habe auch schon an eine Zeitleiste gedacht ;-)
Interesting! Will you post a chronological summary? So many details were recovered over the years you posted. How about a book? Great photographs and such a long history.
I have already started with a chronological overview, if only to give myself an overview. A book – or at least a booklet – would of course also be nice but for that I should perhaps not have published everything here. But who knows what else will come up …