First of all, excuse me for reviving a old post, but I have a question. Uwe, you are a very experienced typist, how can you describe the typing action in the Hermes in comparison to other good machines like Olympias? Crisper, softer,...? I´m planing to collect a relatively cheap 1967 Hermes Media 3, but it's far from my home, and I want to get a better idea of what I'll find. Last week I saw and touched a 1966 Hermes 3000, but unfortunatly it´s plenty of rust, dirt, several hits, brittle platen... in these conditions it´s impossible to judge any typewriter.

Uwe wrote:

I'm cautious about making blanket comparisons. The type quality and performance of a typewriter can vary greatly from example to example because it's often determined by the condition of the specific typewriter being tested, the experience of the person testing it (their exposure to different makes/models - and even multiple examples of the same model), and the resulting opinions are often very subjective.

Uwe, consider making this quote the masthead of this site.

Thanks for the info!!, I hope can test it next week and take a decision. In case I buy it, I'll post the pics and review.

M. Höhne wrote:

Uwe wrote:

I'm cautious about making blanket comparisons. The type quality and performance of a typewriter can vary greatly from example to example because it's often determined by the condition of the specific typewriter being tested, the experience of the person testing it (their exposure to different makes/models - and even multiple examples of the same model), and the resulting opinions are often very subjective.

Uwe, consider making this quote the masthead of this site.

i agree. Uwe’s statement is a critical point. As the owner of two curvy Heremes 3000s, and two Olympias for comparisons, I can say with confidence that one can surely get the wrong impression from one typewriter of any model without others to compare them to.

If these typewriters we love were all new, it may be a different story; however, my ‘59 Hermes 3000 is not in the same league cosmetically with my ‘62, yet it has subtle differences all over the place in it’s operation and feel that are just not quite up to par with the ‘59 that is in perfect tune.

Likewise, my Olympia SM3 is a machine I truly love while my ‘62 SM7, which appears to be in near perfect cosmetic and functional condition is rather meh to me despite from what I’ve read about them being very similar mechanically under the skin. These 4 in my collection have made me at one with Uwe’s insightful message in this thread. 

I’m a believer in the idea that with used machines of a certain age, one’s experience and perception can be dramatically different by two of the same or similar vintage models. This makes it all the more fulfilling when we obtain a superior specimen in our searches and why I’ve already learned to be cautious about spending too much on a machine you are unable to test in person before purchasing.