User login

Club News

Due to the current ongoing situation, the June 2020 DTCA AGM, did not take place.  We will try to reschedule for later in the year once matters are clearer.

 

New Comments

--30g Caravan trailer (1936-50)

15 hours 12 min ago

--23g, 233 and 208 Cooper-Bristol Racing Car (1952-64)

1 day 10 hours ago

--23e and 221 'Speed of the Wind' Racing Car (1936-56)

4 days 9 hours ago

--23e and 221 'Speed of the Wind' Racing Car (1936-56)

4 days 10 hours ago

--23e and 221 'Speed of the Wind' Racing Car (1936-56)

4 days 13 hours ago

--23e and 221 'Speed of the Wind' Racing Car (1936-56)

4 days 14 hours ago

--23e and 221 'Speed of the Wind' Racing Car (1936-56)

4 days 16 hours ago

The Journal.

6 days 11 hours ago

The Journal.

6 days 15 hours ago

The Journal.

6 days 19 hours ago

--39d Buick Viceroy Saloon (1939-50)

1 week 6 hours ago

--39d Buick Viceroy Saloon (1939-50)

1 week 1 day ago

-998 Bristol Britannia Airliner (1959-65)

1 week 1 day ago

--27b and 320 Halesowen Harvest Trailer (1949-71)

1 week 2 days ago

--27b and 320 Halesowen Harvest Trailer (1949-71)

1 week 2 days ago

The Journal.

1 week 2 days ago

New arrivals

1 week 3 days ago

New arrivals

1 week 3 days ago

The Journal.

1 week 3 days ago

New arrivals

1 week 3 days ago

New arrivals

1 week 3 days ago

--27b and 320 Halesowen Harvest Trailer (1949-71)

1 week 3 days ago

New arrivals

1 week 3 days ago

New arrivals

1 week 3 days ago

-480 Bedford 10-cwt Van 'Kodak' (1954-56)

2 weeks 1 day ago

-480 Bedford 10-cwt Van 'Kodak' (1954-56)

2 weeks 1 day ago

-480 Bedford 10-cwt Van 'Kodak' (1954-56)

2 weeks 1 day ago

-571 and 971 Coles Mobile Crane (1949-66)

2 weeks 2 days ago

-571 and 971 Coles Mobile Crane (1949-66)

2 weeks 2 days ago

New arrivals

2 weeks 5 days ago

New arrivals

2 weeks 6 days ago

New arrivals

2 weeks 6 days ago

New arrivals

2 weeks 6 days ago

New arrivals

2 weeks 6 days ago

New arrivals

2 weeks 6 days ago

Visitors

  • Total Visitors: 1628716
  • Registered Users: 232
  • Published Nodes: 1528
  • Since: 11/19/2020 - 06:31
19 posts / 0 new
Last post

Dinkinius's picture
Dinkinius
Offline
AustraliaDTCA Member

-480 Bedford 10-cwt Van 'Kodak' (1954-56)

In June 1954, Meccano announced the release of a new model, a Bedford 10-cwt Van with the sales number of 480. Until 2012, I thought the model was only issued in its own individual yellow box, but along came the Vectis Auction held on 19 January 2012, and there it was, a trade box containing six examples!

So I just had to add it to my collection! Although at a cost I would not like to talk about!

The models are not 100% mint, but that does not matter! The base of the box shows it to have been quality inspected in October 1954, so for at least four months, apparently the model was only sold out of trade boxes. It would be nice to know when it finally gained its own box.
This brings out another question - was the 621 Bedford 3- ton Army Wagon released simultaneously with the 480 also issued in a trade box?

dinkycollect's picture
dinkycollect
Offline
DTCA MemberFrance

Bruce,

This is a very scarce item, there are very few type 6 trade boxes. They were used for models that were never sold in yellow boxes such as the motorbike combinations 44a, b and d, some accessories 773, 786, 788 and 797, the aircraft 70a and c.

I know the type 6 boxes for :

139d Jaguar XK 120.
271 Patrouille motocycliste TS /TW.
480 Bedford Kodak.
673 Scout car.
687 Trailer for 25 pdr. gun.

One can expect to find also these boxes for :
172 Studebaker Land Cruiser. I think that David Cooke has one.
470 Austin A 40 van "Shell - BP".
623 3 ton amy wagon.
674 Austin Champ.
and may be more.

The models in your box are probably not the original ones as the model which is out of the box is of the second casting, it should be of the first. How are the other five ?

Any further information about type 6 boxes will be welcomed.

Dinkinius's picture
Dinkinius
Offline
AustraliaDTCA Member

Jacques

A bit late but better late than never!

You wrote over a year ago "The models in your box are probably not the original ones as the model which is out of the box is of the second casting, it should be the first."

The artwork on the subsequent individual box is that of the first casting.

Do you know the date when the second casting was introduced?

Bruce

Dinkinius's picture
Dinkinius
Offline
AustraliaDTCA Member

Yep, that is Lot 2241!

buzzer999's picture
buzzer999
Offline
DTCA MemberUK

I remember it well Bruce I was bidding against you!!!!

I am just really glad it went to a good home where it is appreciated as a fine example of Dinky rather than something of value.

This, and the one for the 157 Jaguar, must have been amongst the last Trade Boxes produced. (I exclude the Trade Packs which contain individually boxed models)

Dave

dinkyfan's picture
dinkyfan
Offline
DTCA MemberUSA

Bruce
What more can I say....just lovely! There is something neat about seeing a full trade box, with those little treasures nestled inside. Thanks for showing!
Terry

Dinkinius's picture
Dinkinius
Offline
AustraliaDTCA Member

Thanks Dave and Terry for your most appreciated comments. Dave - you owe me something!! Were you aware at the time that the contents were not all original, or some were? Does anyone have three Type 1 castings in similar condition that I could arrange a swap in the hope of bringing the box contents back to what it should, now that has been brought out!! :laugh:
I have mentioned this before, but things are starting to get out of hand when models are being included in boxes in which they do not belong. I include here for special treatment are Dinky Supertoys, and a number of Dinky Toys packaged in lidded boxes. :angry:
Bruce

janwerner's picture
janwerner
Offline
DTCA MemberNetherlands

Stunning item, Bruce. It would have been an even bigger surprise if the box was of the earlier type and showed both the planned catalogue number (32c) and the final number 480!
In the same way I have always been speculating if a trade box might exist for the no. 673 Scout Car of November 1953, possibly also showing its initial number 153b ...
Kind regards, Jan

Dinkinius's picture
Dinkinius
Offline
AustraliaDTCA Member

Dinkinius wrote:
"Thanks Dave and Terry for your most appreciated comments. Dave - you owe me something!! Were you aware at the time that the contents were not all original, or some were? Does anyone have three Type 1 castings in similar condition that I could arrange a swap in the hope of bringing the box contents back to what it should, now that has been brought out!! :laugh:
I have mentioned this before, but things are starting to get out of hand when models are being included in boxes in which they do not belong. I include here for special treatment are Dinky Supertoys, and a number of Dinky Toys packaged in lidded boxes. :angry:
Bruce"

Greetings All!

I am bringing this Thread back to page 1 of the forum, repeating what I asked way back five months and one week ago:

"Does anyone have one, two or three Type 1 480 castings in similar condition that I could arrange a swap in the hope of bringing the box contents back to what it should contain?"

Kind regards

Bruce

dinkycollect's picture
dinkycollect
Offline
DTCA MemberFrance

Sorry Bruce, I do not have even one type 1 Kodak van. I wish that you will be able to find three more but they are rare.

Good luck.

Jacques.

Dinkinius's picture
Dinkinius
Offline
AustraliaDTCA Member

Hello all

On 28 October on this thread I requested Jacques, but in fact anyone who can advise me when the amended casting for the Bedford Van was introduced/created. (I wanted to copy and paste what I wrote but apparently it is more complicated than first thought, unlike the old website!)

Hopefully what I have written now will bring my question back to visibility as #3 in reply to #2 has now become buried and is no longer readily visible.

Bruce  #150

21 November 2015

 

Dinkinius's picture
Dinkinius
Offline
AustraliaDTCA Member

Hello all

Almost one year ago on 28 October 2015 in this Topic I requested Jacques, but in fact anyone else who can advise me when the amended casting for the 480 Bedford Van was introduced/created. I raised this question as Jacques wrote on 21 August 2014 The models in your box are probably not the original ones as the model which is out of the box is of the second casting, it should be of the first. How are the other five?”

I recently pulled out all the models, and only one is of the first casting, all the others are of the second casting. However, of the six models, all have 480 on the base plate with a solitary second casting with no sales number.

In the absence of further guidance from anyone, I decided to see if something can be fathomed of the contents of this trade box. Turning to The Great Book of Dinky Toys, by Mike and Sue Richardson, I found on page 194, beside 480 Assembly Drawing Number 13879 and 13879A within the “Significant Changes” column:

23.8.54 Ovaltine added.

29.12.54 Sales Nos 480, 481 deleted. (This no doubt referred to the number on the base plate.)

There were apparently no other significant changes on the subsequent drawings, 13880, 13881 and 13890. Not even a mention of the casting variation protruding below the body-line over the rear wheels on both sides.

However, with the information that was already available in TGBDT it is abundantly clear that prior to 29 December 1954 (although the exact date when the drawing resulted in action on the factory floor is unknown) the base plates for all the Bedford “Kodak” vans incorporated the sales number. As this is applicable to five of the six models in my Trade Box, it is quite conceivable that my Trade Box which was quality inspected in October 1954 does in fact contain five of the correct type of model either first or second casting.  Only one model does not comply so it is apparent this has been added to the contents by a previous owner to complete the Trade Box set.

Here is a picture of the base plates for all the Bedford vans in this trade box. The odd one out is on the left, middle row. (The image is now available elsewhere within this Post.)

So, having written in Post #9, "Does anyone have one, two or three Type 1 480 castings in similar condition that I could arrange a swap in the hope of bringing the box contents back to what it should contain?" is in essence completely unnecessary as I consider that the contents of my trade box is appropriate except for a solitary example!  Sorry about that Jacques!

One final matter that has also been partially solved as a consequence of my Trade Box, is a possible time-frame when the casting variation protruding below the body-line over the rear wheels on both sides came about. As my trade box has four of the later casting variation and only one of the first casting, and that my box was quality inspected in October 1954, it is highly probable that the variation occurred during that month.The box would have been filled from models available to the packer, and obviously one early casting was still mixed in with the later castings.

I like it when a mystery or two has been solved – especially without any help!

Bruce   (150)

20161012/1001/1125

I intended using the alternative method of uploading the image within the body of the text, but for some unknown reason, this method still does not work that results in an error notice appearing.

 

 

janwerner's picture
janwerner
Offline
DTCA MemberNetherlands

You can consider the puzzle solved indeed, Bruce. And, even if there were one or some disturbances of the contents of your box in the past decades, I would not try to correct that retrospectively in order not to make things worse (if you replace 'wrong' models by 'correct' ones the latter have never been in this box from the start either). Now these anomalies simply make part of this box's history, combined with your very plausible explanation and conclusions. 

I can never stop criticizing the fate of the Meccano factory drawings. What are 'Significant changes' in that column in the GBofDT? Long ago I started scanning and downloading many factory drawing images, wherever they came from and even unreadable as they may be - and I still do, for my own and others' researching. The one attached is job no. 13880 of 12/12/1952, auctioned by Christie's in October 2000, from the Mike & Sue Richardson collection. The 'significant changes' column on page 194 of the GBofDT says: 'none'. Well, then I would be very eager to know what the unreadable data on the lower left and right do tell us, 'significant' or not. Everything on those drawings is significant!!!

Kind regards, Jan 

Dinkinius's picture
Dinkinius
Offline
AustraliaDTCA Member

Jan 

What a thoughtful response – and many thanks for your most valued comments. You hit the nail on the head – everything in all those factory drawings is significant.

Digressing slightly, my last fulltime job was curator of Modern History at the National Museum of Papua New Guinea. History starts the same day – what happened in the morning is history that night. In 1979 I obtained on behalf of the Museum, the country’s first prime minister’s first official car, a 1976 Daimler Sovereign. At the time, people queried why I was preserving a car that was only three years old and worth a considerable sum of money. In 10 years time, PNG will celebrate 50 years of Independence, and at that time, they will be able to put on display a very historical car. The lesson? Preserve what you have today as tomorrow it will be history! But back to those Meccano drawings.

I was aware of the drawings for the Bedford Van that were auctioned at Christies, but my scan of the image in the catalogue is similar to yours – virtually unreadable, except the protuberance below the body is shown in the drawing, but like you the details in the box may have in fact provided a date. With that, I decided to proceed with what was recorded.  If only that drawing and all the other drawings were included in those copied by the DTCA.

Although Mr and Mrs Richardson are regrettably no longer with us, and perhaps I should not write ill of the departed, but I am afraid I am extremely disappointed with them for a number of reasons. Just with this auction alone in October 2000, Christies sold on behalf of the Richardsons approximately 766 factory drawings which netted the former owners quite a nice little sum of £11945 less the seller’s premium. The lot containing the Foden drawings brought the sum of £646 but the crème de résistance was Lot 350 19 drawings of racing cars which had many competitors vying for these which finally achieving £940 closely followed by Lot 324 of 33 drawings associated with the Jaguar XK120, Austin Atlantic, Rolls Royce Silver Wraith, Rover 75, Hillman Minx, Singer Gazelle, Ford Zephyr etc brought the sum of £881, with the next high achiever being Lot 354 consisting of 31 drawings associated with aircraft at £822. Of the total drawings of 766 quite a number covered transfers, etc, but these would still involve well over 700 drawings that would be vital for anyone studying the history of Dinky Toys produced by Meccano during the post-war period. It is gratifying to see that the DTCA was generously provided with the opportunity to copy just 104 of these drawings. How magnanimous of the Richardsons – or did they in fact offer a considerable quantity perhaps more than the 766 mentioned above, (a further quantity of earlier and late issue drawings have also been sold) but only a fraction was copied by the DTCA due to the immense task involved, so an easy and more selective way was chosen? But it does seem inconceivable knowing the reputation of this couple and the high regard they had towards the preservation of the history of Dinky Toys that only a small percentage of the drawings they had saved would have been made available to the DTCA for copying.

The other disappointing matter concerns the publication in their last huge tome on Dinky Toys, a complete fabrication concerning the 175 Hillman Minx.

However, with this topic, what a terrible shame we do not have access to the two drawings that were auctioned in 2000 on the Bedford Van. A pity I was unable to have joined that auction, as I am sure I could have bettered the £111 that it achieved then! Jan, like you, I would very much like to see the notations in the reference panels in the lower left of the drawing 13880.  You are quite correct – the reference panel is more than significant as these are of inestimable importance in relation to the drawing itself, without which the drawing is basically meaningless.  That may be a harsh conclusion, but if I can refer you to the Richardson’s other tome “Dinky Toys & Modelled Miniatures” in the Hornby Companion Series where the authors included tantalizing, but harshly edited drawings from the factory. They looked nice but not great and in their edited version they were entirely meaningless and just filled space on each page. I could never understand as historians why they did this, leaving so many unanswered questions when so much could have been gained had the entire drawing been reproduced – they did this with the Studebaker Tank Wagon, and most surprisingly for the platform of the B.E.V. Truck, the never produced, Bedford Articulated Tanker and two other never-produced models.

There is so much one can learn from the Meccano drawings as I have come to realise.  For instance, my Post on the 173 Nash Rambler discussed a number of important findings that was contained in that single drawing of the base plate for the model. One can only speculate the number of other important issues that may have been contained in the other drawings for the Rambler.

Thank you again for your most valued and appreciated comments.

Kind regards

Bruce H.   (150)

20161113/1039/0214

dinkyfan's picture
dinkyfan
Offline
DTCA MemberUSA

Bruce--I join you in wondering why the Richardson's were so apparently short-sighted in their treatment of those drawings. As Dinky Toys enthusiasts and also students of their history, one would like to think they would have grasped the importance of those drawings......and copying and preserving them. There should have been high resolution scans of them for study and reference, and the actual drawings should have been archived and properly stored. One cannot be sure if they just overlooked the importance or were very much in need of the money gained by selling them, but the end result is the same........a tragedy for sure.
Best regards, Terry

janwerner's picture
janwerner
Offline
DTCA MemberNetherlands

Hi Bruce and Terry. Mike and Sue had personal reasons, which I cannot explain here. Still, I agree with Bruce that it wasn't worth while the lousy little sum of money the documents fetched in the end. I bought some too (of my favourite subject, the articulated petrol tanker and many factory lists) in order to save them for prosperity and I will donate them in a few years time from now to a Liverpool museum (the same as I know at least one other owner does) in order to make them publicly available. One should not forget that the physical drawings themselves give more information than the scans. Many of them - when looking through them or using flood light - unveil interesting details that are not visible with simple scanning.

Sue was very happy and satisfied with the sale. In a letter to me of 6 April 2001 she wrote i.a." ... we have listed all the known drawings in our latest opus [= the Great Book of Dinky Toys]. The group [= all those who saved this material from the factory and used it for writing the Hornby Companion Series Books] considers that, by publishing the information, we have done our best by the archive. We decided to sell our part of it so that other collectors beside us could have the pleasure of owning an original drawing. We have had several letters ... with people being so pleased to own one that we are very glad we decided to sell them. We have kept photocopies of the more important [!] drawings so that we can continue using them for articles etc.''

The photocopies are in the possession of the DTCA now, and they have been digitized and placed on this website.

Well, we know the overall result. Many drawings are 'gone' and there is only an inventory of the drawings known to Mike and Sue (which was a great effort indeed), with the mentioning of 'significant changes' only. Some show up every now and then in trade and we have put the drawings we know of, and which the owners were happy to provide, on the website. Bruce, you mention the large drawing of the Studebaker Petrol Tanker. It is in the first book indeed, but not in the listing of the GBofDT. And there are some more which I came across in the course of time which are not on the list. 

Finally, indeed, those drawings are fundamental sources for research into the history of Meccano and Dinky Toys. They are valuable and inexhaustible archives, which should be publicly available to any researcher and should not be trade with a commercial value. This explains my 'policy' as to the drawings I own: I put the scans in hires on this website, I wrote several articles about them and will donate the physical documents to a publicly accessible institution. I hope that many present owners will do so in the end. Kind regards, Jan 

DavidT
Offline
DTCA Member

Have enjoyed reading this post as I was not aware this trade box existed. I am now trying to understand the difference between the type one casting and the type two.

Also noticed the number 480 being on 5 of the models annd one that was blank, is this another dating difference.

Also I noticed a comment about donating drawings to the Liverpool museum, a noble idea but as a collector of cigarette cards and a member of the CSGB ( Cartophilic Society of Great Britian), can express our experience of museums.

A leading collector and auther Wharton Tiger donated his vast collection the the London Museum, and others to the Oxford Museum each with the condition that members could visit and view. What has actually happened nobody is aloud to view them or copy them, to expensive is the excuse they use.. Each of the members friends and fellow collectors regret going down that route. A far better solution is to have our own archives/ museum. This is a topic for discussion at the AGM.

David

DavidT
Offline
DTCA Member

One more commentI beleive that the Hornby Collectors club has the Hornby Dublo drawings and the Meccano club their drawings.These drawing were recoverd by the authers of the companion series and each expert was given the appropiate drawings rescued. Michael Foster the Dublo expert was telling me the story how the rescue was carried out. It is only the drawings of the Dinkys that have been sold. I think all the drawings should be together.

David

janwerner's picture
janwerner
Offline
DTCA MemberNetherlands

When I bought these items, twenty years ago now, it was less for my own satisfaction than to save them for prosperity after I had studied and enjoyed them myself for some decades first. Two years ago, when I let the Museum of Liverpool know that I intended to leave the documents to the most appropriate museum I could imagine, they left me disappointed – not by refusing them, but by not even giving a decent reply at all. That’s the short summary of a longer story.

Any suggestion for a solid, reliable, publicly accessible institution, which can guarantee to keep them for study in the future, is welcome. If not in the UK than I will address institutions in my own country as a secondary solution. Still, I may try the Meccano archives in Liverpool first. They have helped me generously many years ago with archival stuff to study. Kind regards, Jan