So no, its not noiseless?

Let me guess, it sounds exactly like any other typewriter.

ztyper wrote:

My girlfriend just gave this to me as a late Christmas present... And it's the exact same one I wanted!  ...
She's beat up, and the plastic bits are cracked (I put the tape there) but she's all here (mostly). Very dirty, and very, very heavy.

"ROTFLMAO" as they used to write - beak is right! It's your use of pronouns. 

I think you said you prefer the touch of this (not your girlfriend) to the Remington Noiseless. But correct me if I'm wrong, isn't that about identical to the Remington 10 Noiseless, even down to the shape of the plastic cover with the little gunsight thing on top, and the placement of the brand name on the front crinkle area? I'd be surprised if this were not one of those same design made under different brand things.

I've found that almost nobody has a nice thing to say about the touch of the Standard Remington Noiseless, so now I'm really interested to get it working just a little bit so I can find out for myself just how bad it is.  It's almost totally seized but does not appear corroded, so I have hopes that taking it outside for a good pollutant fest mineral spirits shower might get it moving. (I was wrong about parts missing from the line space mechanism. It's underslung, and it's there... and it's seized. )

ztyper wrote:

My girlfriend just gave this to me as a late Christmas present... And it's the exact same one I wanted!

She's beat up, and the plastic bits are cracked (I put the tape there) but she's all here (mostly). Very dirty, and very, very heavy. I thought the Underwood SS was dense, but this is something totally different. I like the touch, though some of the other functions on it are odd. Like the paper bail and alignment scales. Just need to find the serial number now.

nice looking Underwood Noiseless Standard there, ztyper! Here's where I found the s/n on mine.


 

Errata: "Precious" owner should read "previous."

ztyper wrote:

I said I like the looks of the Underwood Noiseless compared to the Remington Noiseless of the same era. I have no idea what the touch of the Rem Noiseless feel like. They are the same design, as far as I can tell, save some cosmetic differences.

Agreed. I misunderstood you, then.

And I quite like the touch of the Noiseless Standard. It's very light (without being too... puffy, if that makes any sense) and I can tell it's going to be lightening fast. I can see why people might not like it when compared to other typewriters, but I know what I'm going to be taking with me to collage.

I commend your judgement. Others may be taking their Zephyrs to a grassy lawn (as opposed to what kind of lawn?) to affect poetic thoughts, but you will be typing serious and voluminous papers on a standard that types like lightning!  

However, I detest the touch of the Remington Noiseless #7 Portable. It's too light for my heavy touch, and the keys don't go all of the way down for me to like it. If I'm too light, it doesn't print, and if I'm too heavy, it skips. On the other hand, I quiet enjoy the touch of the Underwood Noiseless Portable. It's a bit heavier than the Remington, but still very light. I feel like I'm typing on fluffy clouds, in a gale wind because that thing is fast...

Wow! I was going on about a chance alliterative combination, but there is a phrase, a very concept, that I feel must be new to human thought! I picture you typing on the shredding clouds while Boreas does his worst, your paper snapping like a flag as lightning dances underneath your machine. Farmers huddle closer to their fires and whisper to their sons that that is the sound of Tupos, great god of typing, writing man's fate!

But I deliquesce.  Enjoy your Underwood.