In April I posted about the wooden typewriter from Chinese model kit company ROKR. Easily believing Rokr's prominent warning that this is "NOT A TYPING TOOL," I took it to be a charming, though arguably somewhat kitschy, tribute to typewriters rather than an actual writing machine.
It turns out that the warning on Rokr's ad is overly cautious. Their typewriter does type!
Their website is less modest:
Assemble a real working typewriter you can actually use, complete with moving keys, a rolling carriage, an ink ribbon, and that familiar ding at the end of each line. Type your message on paper and experience this mechanical office staple from the not-so-distant past.
Numerous YouTube videos confirm that the device can type. OK, only in capital letters, and certainly not as smoothly and reliably as the Underwood that inspired it, but it does write. For $119.99, this is an affordable way to get a brand-new writing machine! Or at least, a way to type a few notes.
I haven't tried it myself, but so far, I am certainly more impressed with it than with the nonfunctional Lego typewriter and its imitations. Since it's a keyboard machine, it is also considerably more complex than the functional, 3D-printed neo-Mignon.
The device is made primarily of laser-cut wooden parts. (Early Remingtons successfully used wooden key levers.) Other parts are plastic or metal, including springs.
Austrian blogger Rodja Pavlik reached out to Rokr, and the company provided the following interview and facts. (The questions seem to have been posed by ROBOTIME to ROKR. I'm unclear on the relation between these two companies.) Thanks to Rodja for sharing this text! You can find his own reflections on this typewriter at Die Schreibmaschinisten (Google English translation here).
Principal mechanical invention credit for the Rokr typewriter goes to Yuzhen Wang, who worked with product designer Chaorui Guo and product manager Yifan Zhu.
The text below has a few quirks that show it was not written by native English speakers, but it's quite understandable. I've added a few comments in brackets.
Part I: Interview
Q：I believe that "Type is the rhythm of one's creativity", so my first question is, when you see a classic typewriter, or the model of one you’ve designed, do you ever feel an immediate urge to sit down and start typing? What was your first impression of it?
A: When I see a typewriter, I think of the scenes of typing in many movies and TV shows. The first one that comes to mind is The Shining.
Q: Yeah, The Shining came to my mind too.
Q：So what would you want to type? Maybe that classic line Jack Nicholson delivered in The Shining...
Q：“All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy”
A: I didn’t have any specific words in mind at the time, but I really loved the way the English letters looked so neat when typed.
Q: That’s right. Okay, My second question is: Was your first encounter with a classic typewriter through movies and TV shows, as you just mentioned? Have you ever seen an actual classic typewriter in real life?
A: Right, when we first started designing, we bought a relatively flat, modern typewriter. Later, we decided to go with an older model because, from my experience working on other products, I found that older designs are easier to work with and have a more classic aesthetic. So I searched on YouTube and came across the Underwood No. 5. It has a more retro look, and it holds significant historical importance. After all, it was the first commercially successful mechanical typewriter.
[Richard: This is not true, of course. That distinction should go to the Sholes & Glidden of 1874, which was followed by the Remington no. 2 and other pioneering designs such as the Caligraph, Hammond, and Crandall. The Underwood no. 1 (1895) was the most successful attempt to design a frontstroke typewriter, and it did have a huge influence in the 20th century.]
Q: Right, and that type of wood might be a better fit for our product: it has a more vintage look. How did the team decide to make a typewriter? Who came up with the idea?
A: It was our product manage's idea. He initiated the project, proposing to create a typewriter with a scale close to 1:1. However, at that time, we hadn’t yet determined its unique selling points or operating mechanics. As for why we chose this concept, one reason was that the product’s overall texture and the tactile feedback when typing aligned well with ROKR’s brand identity.
Q: Impressive. We’ve been receiving some truly touching feedback from users. In this era of digital office work, where AI is widely used, people’s typing postures essentially boil down to two things: typing on a keyboard or playing the piano. But our typewriter offers them a third option. They feel that its retro charm helps offset the monotony of office work and gives their bodies a new sense of posture.
I feel this is the most tangible feedback the typewriter provides to users: it breaks the monotony of their daily routines. I’ve noticed that in our brand marketing, we’ve often incorporated the interplay between pianos and typewriters, and the response has been exceptionally positive. I’d like to ask: how long did the entire development process for this typewriter take? Were there any bottlenecks during that time that you felt the need to overcome?
A: The entire design process took about a year and a half: it was indeed quite a long time.
Since I was essentially handling all the structural aspects on my own, what appeared to be a single, cohesive structure actually required me to repeatedly verify every single detail once it was broken down into its components.
Q: Were there any patent drawings or blueprints available for reference during the R&D phase?
A: There are two references: one is a physical reference, and the other is a video reference.
The physical images include 1:1-scale photos showing only the exterior, collected from the internet. The video reference consists of exploded-view (internal-structure) diagrams. Later I will show you.
[The team did inspect an actual Underwood, as becomes clear later on.]
Q: Gorgeous. Thanks.
A: However, during our previous meetings, we considered many options, such as a system where tapping the keys would display text on an electronic screen, or one where the keystrokes and text display were completely separate.
Ultimately, we decided that a realistic simulation would be more meaningful. On the one hand, it provides users with a hands-on STEAM experience, allowing them to understand the actual structure of a typewriter; on the other hand, it lets users immerse themselves in authentic typing experience.
Q: It feels like you’re bringing an old object back to life, or even making it better, and bringing it into people’s lives.
Q: I recall that LEGO released a typewriter model before, but it was purely a model and couldn’t actually type. One of the reasons the ROKR Typewriter has generated such a huge buzz in China is that it really can type: many people bought it specifically for that reason. It’s very difficult to build a model that can actually type.
When you first took on this project, were there any parts that gave you particular headaches, or that took you a long time to figure out?
A: One challenge was how to recreate the typing process as accurately as possible. In reality, typewriters involve metal keys striking the paper: a process that requires significant force and is quite strenuous, and the sound produced is quite loud. I spent a long time thinking about this, even going so far as to go into a dedicated room to test it out myself!!!
The solution I eventually came up with was to add a metal plate at the front. Initially, it was a circular surface striking another circular surface, but later I modified it so that the circular surface struck the entire flat surface, which provided a more complete tactile feedback. This idea was actually inspired by Alex, the head of our design department.
[If I understand correctly, this is what is called the "anvil" on a typical typewriter. Typebars don't hit the platen with full force—that would soon destroy the rubber. Instead, the typebar hits a metal anvil at a point that allows the type to move just far enough to push the ribbon against the paper and leave a mark. The click-clack of a typewriter comes from typebars striking the anvil.]
Q: That was really tough! And I see, the typewriter comes in two version. Both of them are unique and charming, one is the classic version and another is the magic version. What promote your team to design these two versions?
A: Actually, I started out working on the Black Gold (Classic Version) version, which I was more involved in. For the Magic Version, we enlisted the help of an illustrator and product team members to design the visuals, resulting in a stage-like effect.
This was partly to cater to a broader audience: one version targets a male-oriented market, while the other targets a female-oriented market. Depending on the home decor setting, the Black Gold version is suited for more formal spaces, while the Fairy Tale version works better in cute, whimsical settings.
Q: A real typewriter has thousands of parts, so our toy version can’t possibly be that complicated. There must be some simplifications or substitutions in the design, right?
A: Yes. While real typewriters come fully assembled from the factory and undergo a precise calibration process, our product is designed for users to assemble themselves, so we’ve simplified it. The main simplification involves the shift function.
If we were to include both upper- and lower-case characters, the entire type carriage mechanism would need to move up and down, which would make the whole unit very unstable. So we’ve omitted the lower-case function and retained only the upper-case function to ensure that a full sentence can be typed.
Q: Yes, it mainly involves omitting uppercase and lowercase letters. Have other parts been simplified as well?
A: We’ve also reduced the number of keys on the keyboard by removing the number row. Since the wood panel is 4 millimeters thick and we need to incorporate a metal plate, there simply isn’t enough space to fit all those keys.
Q: Apart from simplifying the design, given that the original mechanical structure was too complex, did you develop an entirely new mechanical structure to replace the original linkage?
A: In fact, we’ve focused more on recreating the original typewriter’s layout:where the keyboard is and where the type hammers are.
However, the internal mechanisms have been completely redesigned to accommodate our wooden components. This includes the key-press mechanism, the character-striking mechanism, and the line-feed mechanism.
Q: An original design?
A: Yesss! We have filed for invention patents for all three of these components. Since it is impossible to replicate them exactly (real metal structures do not require wooden boards), we designed these entirely new structures.
Q: Which agency has undergone the most changes?
A: Tapping mechanism. To ensure both accuracy and a realistic tactile feel, we made repeated modifications. While others use metal components, we opted for injection-molded parts.
We needed to balance precision with strength. Ultimately, we settled on a solution where metal counterweights are embedded within the plastic components to achieve the feel of a metal-on-metal strike.
Q: Assembling a finished product from a pile of parts is a lengthy process. Which step do you think is the most prone to errors, or the one that requires the most patience?
A: The trickiest part is installing the springs. A real typewriter with 50 keys requires 50 custom springs. We have 39 keys but only two types of springs. This makes hooking the typebars a bit more difficult, especially the springs behind the “hook,” which are particularly hard to install.
There’s also a spring mechanism. There’s a spring at the back that drives the upper transmission mechanism, and its mounting hole is quite small, making it very difficult to insert. I’ve heard that some top players [i.e. model assemblers] overseas have even pricked their fingers while trying to push it in with a screwdriver.
Q: Once users have finally finished assembling the product and completed the task, what action or feedback would you most like them to experience?
A: It’s the constant tapping, watching the parts above move in sync: that sense of orderly mechanical motion.
Q: What is the first reaction or the first thing you hope consumers will say when they see this work?
A: It’s just “Wow!” Earlier, an expert commented, “The designer is amazing: this isn’t something just anyone could come up with.” Hearing that really made me happy.
Q: This is an English-language typewriter, but we have many players from both China and abroad who aren’t native English speakers. Why do you think this typewriter still appeals to them?
A: On the one hand, English itself has a significant influence; on the other hand, for domestic users, Pinyin is a perfectly adequate substitute. Additionally, the influence of films, television, and popular culture has led to a broader appreciation of the aesthetic appeal of English typewriters. Emotions know no borders.
Q: Here comes our last question: Will the team consider recreating other classic vintage mechanical objects in the future?
A: Yes. In China, we’re interested in recreating a loom: it seems so cool, and we might collaborate with some local museums in Suzhou. Overseas, we’d like to recreate something like a mechanical calculator. That’s a bit more challenging, but we already have some ideas and will move forward with it.
Q: I really relate to that. As copywriters of ROBOTIME, we found ourselves in complete agreement after speaking with you. You’re building a product from the ground up, and our work on localizing the product is essentially the same: starting from scratch.
Take the specialized mechanism on this typewriter, for example. In Chinese, it’s called a “character carriage,” but how do we accurately describe it in English (Typewriter Carriage) so that players in the U.S. and the U.K. can understand it? It feels like both designers and our marketing team are working hard to convey this experience to more users, which is a truly meaningful endeavor.
Thank you very much!
A: You are welcome!
Part Ⅱ You May Want to Know
(1) Why did you decide to make a fully-functioning typewriter?
We wanted more than a display piece. A typewriter only makes sense when you can actually type on it. The tactile feedback, the sound, the rhythm of the keys: that's the whole point. Building one that truly works felt like the only honest way to do it.
（2）What does the typewriter mean to you?
In a world split between keyboards and phone screens, the typewriter offers people another way to sit down and create. It slows you down. It brings back a kind of intention that modern writing tools have quietly taken away.
（3）Who designed it?
The project was initiated by our product manager of ROKR: Mr. Zhu. The product design was led by our designer Mr. Wang and Mr. Guo, who spent about a year and a half on it. The Magic (fairy tale) version involved our illustration and product team. Our design director Alex contributed the key insight behind the striking mechanism.
（4）What was the biggest challenge?
Recreating the feel of a real keystrike. Real typewriters use metal on metal. We're working with wood and injection-molded parts. Getting that crisp, satisfying impact out of softer materials took countless rounds of testing. The final solution embeds metal counterweights inside the plastic hammers, and adds a flat metal plate at the point of impact.
（5）Did you have to study a real typewriter closely?
Yes, very closely. We referenced the Underwood No. 5, the first commercially successful mechanical typewriter. We studied physical units, photos, and exploded-view videos online. We can share some of this reference material with you.
（6）Is this really how a typewriter works, or did you invent new mechanics?
Both. The layout and interaction points stay faithful to the original: the keys, the typebars, the carriage. But the internal mechanisms had to be rebuilt from scratch to work in wood and plastic. Three core systems (the key press, the strike-and-advance, and the line feed) are entirely new designs, and we've filed invention patents for all three.
（7）Simplifications from the real thing?
Two main ones. We dropped the shift function, since moving the whole carriage up and down would compromise stability. And we removed the number row, since our 4mm wood panels simply couldn't fit that many keys alongside the metal components.
1.1 the Underwood No. 5
1.2 ROKR Mechanical Typewriter
（Classic Version）
1.3 ROKR Mechanical Typewriter
（Magic Version）
If any readers of this blog take the plunge and try assembling the kit, please let us know how it goes.
No comments:
Post a Comment