Most of us know that there were 2 basic versions of this nice model, the original was in the livery of "Shell Chemicals Limited", while the later model was changed to "Shell Chemicals". The original lettering was narrower to allow for placing it on the side of the truck, under the tank area. When it was changed and shortened, the lettering was more robust and fatter. By 1957 the 20 mph roundel on the left rear was omitted from models across the line. The other known change was adding the number 991 to the base, when the numbering change took place around 1955. I am showing a few views of my two versions, which follow all that I have seen in the various Dinky reference works, in terms of the lettering, etc.
However, a good collector friend recently sent me some photos of his two Shell Chemicals Limited trucks, and as you can see, one is as we are accustomed to seeing, the other is decidedly different, and features similar "fatter" letters used on the later versions with the "limited" reference. Upon close inspection, I also noticed that there is no 20 mph roundel on the rear, and no sign of it either. I then noticed that the "Shell" logo of the shell on the rear is positioned quite a bit higher than formerly. I also thought the shell looked a little different.....looking at mine again confirmed what I saw....this one has larger, more defined scalloped edges on the shell.
To me, when I first saw this, I thought this might be some sort of restoration, but the owner is very convinced it is not. I still think the lettering looks quite crowded, and a little "un-Dinky", if that is possible. Hardly any spacing between the words. The known reference books make no mention, nor show any pictures that I could find.......have any of you seen this before, and what are your thoughts? Could it be a late, transition model
Hi Terry, I have some doubt about their full authenticity, but one can never tell without the models in hand. The replacement tyres are 'suspicious', especially on the clean one. Can you see the typical beading lines around the tampo printed characters? No edges of waterslide transfers? Perhaps you should (if possible) lay them on a scanner and show the characters to us in high resolution.
For comparison I can just show you two pictures of my examples. They may be of some help.
Best regards, Jan
Very interesting! I have to say I wouldn't have touched up the lettering if it was mine though.
I'm not sure, but does the A pillar at the front of the cab look a little bent?
My feelings are it's an older restoration, but I agree with Jan that without holding it who can say for sure.
The paint depth of the lettering on these is quite thin, not at all transfer like.
Chris--Thanks also for weighing in. I am still somewhat puzzled by this, so am hoping my friend can bring it by for a closer inspection. The letters do not appear to be transfer, so if this was an older restoration, how would someone get them done so well?.....they are very straight and even to my eye. I looked under Talk Model Toys and saw no evidence of this possible variation there. Maybe Jacques can post with his sentiments?
I hope you get to have a good look at it in the hand, it does look pretty much like this to me though...... :(
As indicated before by two members, one can not say if this model with thin marking is original without having the model in hand.
One also need to know which is the base plate : Dinky Toys or Supertoys ?
I have just been through Vectis and have not found a single one like this. It could be an evaluation model made at the factory for the marketing people or even for approval by Shell.
The marking was applied by tampoo which is much faster and less fragile than transfers. Also the colour of the tampoo marking is the same as the yellow on the tank, a transfer would have had a slightly different colour, specially after sixty years.
Tampoo marking is easyly done by an automatic machine with more accuracy in the position of the marking than by transfers. The tampoos are usually made of rubber or silicone. For restorations, raw potatoes can be carved easyly into tampoos.
The drawing job # 13735 A.E.C. tanker (Shell chemicals)complete dated 11 - 12 - 50 lists six changes but they are not readable on my copy.
Jacques and others--Thanks for your adds on this. I am still curious....was the tampo process kind of like stamping a color onto the surface, using paint on the stamping device? That is what I am guessing. I was able to go back and took a look at a photo of the baseplate, and even though it was quite dark, I was able to tell that it was labeled Dinky Toys and not Supertoys, and the original rivets are definitely in place, so to me, it has not been dissembled. If it has been re-painted, it was done while it was in one piece.
There are two ways to do tampoo marking.
On automatic machines the tampoo takes the colour from a film and apply the colour to the model. The film is moved before the tampoo comes back to collect the next lot of colour.
By hand a thin layer of paint is spread on a flat surface, the tampoo is applied to that surface and then to the model.
Shell livery can be quite confusing. From 1954 470 Austin is in the well known red/green Shell BP livery, with no logos, despite BP having the yellow edged shield logo from 1947 and Shell the scallop shell with text over from 1948. Dublo 070 AEC had both logos in 1959.
591/991 Shell Chemicals had the 1948 scallop logo on the rear from 1952 on. It was in Shell red/yellow livery. I attach photos of my pair. The first a blue striped Dinky Toys boxed Shell Chemicals Limited with black tyres, Dinky Toys base and blocky close text, clearly tampo printed. The second a 991 Dinky Supertoys Shell Chemicals with replaced grey tyres.
I attach a 1958 extract showing Shell BP aviation liveries, without logos. Was 470 aviation related?
Also attached Thompson period tanker advert.
Finally we have in 1963 944 Leyland tanker sporting the red backed scallop Shell logo from 1961 and the all green BP shield from 1958.
Can anyone elaborate?
Just finished Michael Driver’s piece in Diecast Collector Dec 2017 saying it is based on the Mammoth Major Mk 111. They share the same cab and both were in build in 1948 but this is clearly denoted the Monarch both on the base and in the contemporary Thompson advert. Mammoths had more axles I think for bigger ‘mammoth’ loads?
Correct! Mammoth Major was AEC's designation for their heavy four-axled chassis. Mercury and Monarch denoted two-axled chassis of medium- and heavier weights, Mustang was a twin-steer three-axled chassis. All AEC lorry chassis had names beginning with 'M' - Matador, Mandator, Mammoth Minor etc., whereas bus and coach chassis had 'R' names - Regal, Regent, Reliance, Ranger and so on.