Offline
I'm envious -- been looking for one of these, and that's not a bad price.
Offline
Fleetwing wrote:
I'm envious -- been looking for one of these, and that's not a bad price.
Fleetwing,
I'm glad to hear someone say that about the price. I was thinking that I had paid a bit too much for it, considering how blown out of proportion the prices can be for these! Which is why I did not pay too much attention to them... good machine overall! A keeper.
Offline
It is close to being too much, but a two figure price seems a good deal to me. I see that you're in CT also -- so we may be plowing much of the same ground. I saw one on Craigslist not long ago for $60, not as clean as yours. That intrigued me, but it was a little too far away. However, that price was most attractive.
I saw another one today on CL for $10 (!!) but it's in eastern Mass., I believe. And it was one of the 1970s versions, which is truly one of the ugliest typewriters made. But handsome is as handsome does.
Offline
Fleetwing wrote:
It is close to being too much, but a two figure price seems a good deal to me. I see that you're in CT also -- so we may be plowing much of the same ground. I saw one on Craigslist not long ago for $60, not as clean as yours. That intrigued me, but it was a little too far away. However, that price was most attractive.
I saw another one today on CL for $10 (!!) but it's in eastern Mass., I believe. And it was one of the 1970s versions, which is truly one of the ugliest typewriters made. But handsome is as handsome does.
Fleetwing,
I thought it might be a little high, but I don't mind paying a little too much for a machine I am going to enjoy using than one that I won't. I've done that on my Remington No. 2 Portable and my Underwood No. 5, but they are keepers for sure.
I agree that the 1970s Hermes 3000s are not too nice. I saw one for sale at an 'antique' store not too far from me for around $75, but I passed on it because of the style.
Offline
OliverNo.9 wrote:
Just got this yesterday. 1964 Hermes 3000 ...
You might want to edit your comments in your galley page for the machine in the database. What you have is an example of the first generation 3000, not the second generation.
Offline
Uwe wrote:
OliverNo.9 wrote:
Just got this yesterday. 1964 Hermes 3000 ...
You might want to edit your comments in your galley page for the machine in the database. What you have is an example of the first generation 3000, not the second generation.
Uwe,
thank you for pointing that out. I had heard somewhere that the latching system for the case had changed in the early years to the one that is used on mine so I thought that this was the second. I will change it.
Thank you.
Offline
The first generation 3000 is the one that everyone wants. The second generation design, which I think was introduced in '66, was more compact and gave it angular lines. The third generation was even more squared off and had a recessed front panel. I used to think the third iteration of the 3000 was hideous too, but the more I looked at the machine the more I began to appreciate its design, and now I love it (possibly even more than the original).
Anyway, fun machines to own as you already know, and proof that as you collect your taste in models tends to evolve too.
Offline
OliverNo.9 wrote:
I had heard somewhere that the latching system for the case had changed in the early years to the one that is used on mine
The latching system for the case was different for the very beginning of the model. Before sometime in 1960, they didn't have the little latch holes on the machine to the sides of the space bar.
Offline
I picked one up for $80 as well, but I had to go through it a little bit. There was like hay or mown grass all in the bottom of the case, and I had to get a few keys unstuck. Removing that bottom plate was a little trickier than others
Not really a fan of the action though so I'm selling it, it does feel nice and solid though. And I like how easily it feeds paper without having to mess with the… Whatever that thing is called
Mine is a 1963.