One may wonder why this Thread is not included within the existing 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck Thread. Well the answer is rather simple. Based on matters such as the change of name and changes to the actual die, the downgrading to just a plain Dinky Toys, the different cast of characters, the United States Justice Department, a little fellow called White and a Caterpillar, the 965 Terex Rear Dump Truck deserves its own Thread.
The following has been included in the 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck Thread, but it is briefly mentioned here again to give perspective to the story of the Dinky Toys 965 Terex Rear Dump Truck. The expanded version can be read in the 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck thread.
The company that became Euclid was founded in 1907 in Wickliffe, Ohio, by George A. Armington as Armington Electric Hoist. It was renamed Euclid Crane & Hoist when the plant was relocated to Euclid, Ohio. Euclid built experimental tractors, one crawler and several wheeled, in the 1920s, and entered the construction equipment industry in 1924 resulting in the establishment of the Road Machinery Division in 1926, and incorporated as Euclid Road Machinery, a subsidiary of the Euclid Armington Corp., on July 11, 1931. Euclid Road Machinery became independent of Euclid Armington on January 1, 1933.
Euclid Road Machinery introduced a variety of allied equipment for crawler tractors, but its biggest breakthrough came with development of the first true off-highway end dump and bottom dump trucks in the mid 1930s. Euclid came to dominate the market with these vehicles to the point that â€œEucâ€ came to be used generically for them. Euclid expanded with overseas branches and began production of trucks and scrapers in Motherwell, outside Glasgow, Scotland in 1950 and in 1951 appointed Blackwood Hodge in Northampton in Northamptonshire a previous importer of agricultural and mining machinery as their sales agent and distributor.
General Motors, which had been exploring entry into the heavy construction equipment market, acquired Euclid Road Machinery on September 30, 1953, and made it a division of GM on January 1, 1954, which included the Euclid production facility in Scotland.
Meanwhile, the design of the â€œDinky Toys 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truckâ€ proceeded accordingly at Meccano following a visit to Blackwood Hodge. The initial drawing was completed on 12 October 1953 and during 1954 at least three changes to the design was made with more changes to the design during 1955.
When it came to deciding on the colour of the model, and although Euclid painted their vehicles in a dark shade of green that later became known within the industry in the UK as â€œParkinson Greenâ€ which was also the corporate colours for Sir Lindsay Parkinson & Company Ltd that utilised Euclid machinery extensively, Meccano selected pale yellow as used by a competitor to Parkinson, Laing Constructions.
Then came the anticipated launch of this fine model, with the announcement in the October 1955 issue of The Meccano Magazine.
Over the years a number of changes were made to the model while it was in production, as well as changes to the modelâ€™s packaging. This was followed by the dropping of the trade mark Supertoys on the end-flap box style, having a full picture on two sides with the title â€œDinky Toysâ€ although no changes were made to the casting on the chassis to show the model was now just a Dinky Toys. Finally, on 3 January 1969, the drawing plans were amended when the name of the model was changed to Terex. Thus the 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck ceased to exist but was re-invented under a new name.
THE CREATION OF TEREX
On October 15, 1959, the U.S. Department of Justice filed an anti-trust action against General Motors brought about by several well- known earth-moving companies, alleging that GM threatened to control the off-road hauler market. For almost eight years, GM fought the action, and in the end to settle, GM negotiated with White Motor Corporation during 1967 for the sale of certain parts of its Euclid Division, and on February 15, 1968, White purchased the American operations for the Division and the Euclid name.
Under the sale agreement, GM was not allowed to produce trucks in competition with White for 4 years â€“ from July 1, 1968 to July 1, 1972. GM could produce off- road haul trucks in this period, but could not sell them in the US. GM equipment dealers in the US were offered a franchise deal from White to sell the White/Euclid line of trucks for a period of 4 years. The international Euclid dealerships were still owned by GM, thus forcing White to form all-new international dealerships. GM produced haul trucks in the 1968-1972 period that it had developed during its ownership of Euclid from plants in Canada and Scotland, that it had been allowed to keep. GM also retained the former Euclid lines of crawler tractors, motor scrapers and wheel loaders, which it marketed under the Earthmoving Equipment Division name.
GM adopted Terex as the brand name for the Earthmoving Equipment Division in October, 1968 having coined the name "Terex" from the Latin words "terra" (earth) and "rex" (king) â€œEarth Kingâ€, (hence its symbol being a stylised crown), for its construction equipment products and trucks not covered by the ruling. The British operation retained the Euclid (Great Britain), Ltd. name until December 1968, when it was renamed General Motors Scotland, Ltd. The Earthmoving Equipment Division was officially renamed the Terex Division on 1 July, 1970. The antitrust case did not affect either the Motherwell plant in Scotland or truck sales outside the U.S., and GM continued producing end dumps similar to the Euclid designs at Motherwell such as the R17.
When the antitrust restrictions expired in 1972, GM re-entered the American market with its 33 series end dumps and 34 series coal hauler. Although the following advertisement referred to GM and its emergence from bankruptcy in 2009, the same could have been used for Terex in 1972.
While all this was going on, Meccano had been busy producing its extremely popular Dinky Supertoys Euclid Rear Dump Truck based on the Euclid Model R15. With legal wrangling underway with Euclid/General Motors/White during 1968, at some point Meccano was made aware of the proceedings associated with their highly successful hauler. It then decided to amend their 965 Euclid to reflect the new name of the company/division that it represented. Whether this was at the urging of GM/Terex or White Motor Corporation or not is unknown. It does seem highly unlikely that the request came from WMC as that company was still manufacturing Euclid models admittedly for the US market, but Dinky was also selling its highly successful model/toy Euclid R15 there as well. Perhaps it might have been a convenient business arrangement in that GM/Terex may have funded the changes to the drawings and mould for the model as a means of promoting the new brand name. In reality, it is more than likely that Meccano simply decided to change the modelâ€™s designation to reflect the new name of the company with which it had a close association in the past.
In the Drawing Office at Meccano, the original drawings for the Euclid were amended to read â€œTerexâ€ with the change being dated 3 January 1969, three months after GM had adopted the Terex name and a full eighteen months before GM officially renamed their Earthmoving Equipment Division! So Meccano was right up there at the front of things so to speak! The only problem was that GM never produced the Euclid R15 that Meccano had modelled as a Terex. That apparently did not worry those at Meccano!! But as later events proved, GM was worried.
Unlike its predecessor, the 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck, the 965 Terex Rear Dump Truck arrived on the scene with virtually no fanfare. The first notification of this â€œnewâ€ 965 model came with the 1969 catalogue that was issued in May for the United Kingdom. Australia however, for its 1969 catalogue published at the same time as the UK catalogue, the 965 was still a Euclid.
As mentioned at the start of this Thread, why is the 965 Terex Rear Dump Truck being treated as another model with its own Thread? Hopefully the following may help answer that question. With the 965 casting, externally, the change of name to Terex with the modelâ€™s radiator and base plate are the obvious changes. But what is immediately unseen is the absence of cross-hatching to the ceiling of the cab. By 1957, Meccano had amended the die for the cab by incorporating cross-hatching to alleviate an ejection problem. All Dinky Euclid Rear Dump Trucks from then on incorporated cross-hatching with the cab. In view of cross-hatching not appearing in any Terex model, this leads one to suspect that a new mould was created based exactly on the old Euclid mould, utilising many components from the original die. This is further confirmed when comparing most of the Euclidâ€™s produced over the years with the Terex. Some of the differences are shown below.
One major difference with the Terex is the absence of a tight fitting of the cab/engine compartment to the chassis as compared with the Euclid especially in the area of the fuel tank behind the cab. Whether this was caused by some other part within the cab area is unknown, but all the Terex models I have owned have this same ill-fitting cab to chassis.
One final difference is the shape of the back of the headlights as can be seen with these two photographs.
Then closer examination reveals other differences. One is the decrease in the size of the support surround to the exhaust stack, and the second is the alteration to the radiator above the grille and below the vehicleâ€™s name, as the Euclid has a raised line which is absent with the Terex.
Initially, early production runs for the new TEREX utilised the base for the Euclid, as no doubt a small quantity were left over from the last production run of the Euclid and rather than returning these to the furnace, and until the amended die had been prepared, changing EUCLID to TEREX, these Euclid base plates were pressed into service for the TEREX. This version of the TEREX is not very common, and is valued as such.
So, by May 1969, production was well underway with this â€œnewâ€ model, although it did take some time before the stock of â€œEuclidâ€ pictorial end-flap boxes had been exhausted,
and finally a new end-flap picture box with a drawing of the model on a white background became available in limited quantities clearly showing that this was a Terex Rear Dump Truck.
As with the last issues of the Dinky Supertoys 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck, the 965 Terex also were given an inner packing piece to provide limited protection to the model inside its end-flap box. Here is an example of the packing piece that sat inside the tipping tray:
One of the strange things that arose while the Terex model was in production is the notation on the last end-flap box: COLOUR OF MODEL MAY DIFFER FROM ILLUSTRATION. The colour of the Terex always remained a sort of yellow. I state â€œsort ofâ€ as under certain lighting conditions, the model has a touch of green. Certainly the yellow colour differs from the first issue of the Euclid.
I wonder if at some stage, Meccano had entertained an idea of changing the colour to represent Terex equipment which was called â€œHi-Liteâ€ green. The picture below is the colour in question on a Euclid R-15.
The Terex like the Euclid version, also received red hubs.
However, by late 1969, the exact date being unknown at present, production ceased rather abruptly which seems to be an extra-ordinary short period of time when Meccano was well-known for keeping its models under production for a number of years to recoup the pre-production costs even to the extent of keeping models long after their use-by date simply by changing the colour scheme. So why was the Terex production treated differently with it ceasing so quickly? According to information from some former employees of Blackwood Hodge, Meccano apparently thought the name change was part of the Euclid re-organisation, however this was not the case. It was an extremely bitter and acrimonious period, with General Motors Scotland Ltd (Terex) through its agent Blackwood Hodge even going to the extent of grinding off the Euclid name from trucks operating in the UK that were under a lease arrangement. A road leading to the Blackwood Hodge offices in Northampton was even changed from Euclid Way to Hunsbury Hill Avenue. Meccano in its enthusiasm, having â€œjumped the gunâ€ became embroiled and there was even talk of legal action, in particular with the Dinky model being based on a R15, a type that in real life was never a Terex, and more so with Terex itself having more modern-looking trucks, so Meccano simply ceased production before the end of 1969, less than a year of 965 Dinky Toys Terex Rear Dump Truck sales. Although the model appeared for the last time in the April 1970 Meccano Agentâ€™s Order Form at a retail price of 15/11, the 965 for some strange reason was not included in the May 1970 UK catalogue. For those living in Australia, to complicate matters further, their 1970 catalogue with an unknown printing date, included the Terex with a retail price of AU$2.50. But by then, production had long since ceased.
And finally, one of the first issues of the 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck and next to it, one of the last issues of the 965 Terex Rear Dump Truck, that was added to the collection in June 1970.
And here is my last 965 acquisition, a Terex with one production line error â€“ the rear wheels have the rounded side out, when they should be the same as the front wheels. Probably â€œsomeoneâ€ was chatting to a colleague and momentarily lost concentration â€“ or it was almost knock-off time!
Terex went on to produce many fine haul truck, scrapers and bulldozers. On 21 June 1970, while living in Port Moresby, I photographed a Terex 82-40 Bulldozer working on a new access road leading to the future American Embassy staff compound. Meanwhile back in the UK, Meccano was winding up its stock of 956 Terex Rear Dump Trucks.
The same view, enlarged to show that it is a Terex Bulldozer, that had been sold and serviced by Blackwood Hodge.
I end this treatise with a photograph of a group of proud Terex employees providing the symbol of their company and two images of the Terex Titan, the truck that was the worldâ€™s largest in carrying capacity for 25 years between 1973 and 1998, although in size, the Titan still remains the worldâ€™s largest. It is now preserved in Sparwood, British Columbia, minus its engines. The tyres are filled with concrete as the Chamber of Commerce grew tired of continually pumping air into them.
To put the Titan in perspective, the truck could carry the load equivalent of 23 Euclid R-15 Rear Dump Trucks!
Note the person standing inside the second rear wheel! now this was some truck!!
Hi Bruce, now I understand what you have been working on all this time: the full Dinky Terex story! A great, well illustrated, and very informative contribution. Perhaps something to porpose for The Journal, or an other paper publication?
Thank you, kind regards, Jan
The following has been copied from the 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck thread:
Also mentioned in the recent posts (in the Euclid thread) has been the increase in the diameter of the pin on which the tipping body is supported and lifted, with the original on the left and the amendment on the right.
With the existence of the two added lugs stopping the winding pinion from being extended too far to the rear, the change to the size of the pin occurred at least by 26 January 1967. A further check of my models seems to indicate that the enlarged pin occurred during the Terex era, so I will have to add this to my Terex thread!
THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN COPIED FROM THE 965 EUCLID THREAD:
"For anyone interested in seeing the comparison photographs I took of my Euclid and Terex, they have been posted for me on the Terex thread of the Dinky Toys forum on PLANET DIECAST. I had tried to post them on here, without success.
"These are Kevin's interesting pictures from Planet diecast.
Thank you Kevin, these show many unlisted variations.
Kevin and Jacques
A very, very interesting comparison between the Euclid and Terex versions. I would, however, like to see a similar comparison between the LAST Euclid and the Terex, as the Euclid casting in Kevin's photographs is that of a FIRST casting made prior to at least 3 November 1955, as the early casting shows up in several of Kevin's photographs, most of the differences I included in my various posts. The first photograph does show a graphic difference but I am wondering about the focal length of Kevin's camera as the different height for both exhausts is very noticeable, and the Terex grille etc appears smaller. The second photograph shows the Terex (on the right) more in focus than the Euclid, and this would depend on exactly how the camera was held, as both should be in focus.
But it is the 4th, 6th and 8th photographs that determines the model Euclid used in the comparison photographs. The 8th photograph shows the larger hole for the larger pin that I wrote of and posted in both threads which at first I thought occurred in the last issues of the Euclid but corrected this in one of my last posts.
I had downloaded into my computer all the discussions in TalkModelToys concerning the 965 but have not done so with Planet Diecast which I must do now! In fact www.planetdiecast.com has never been or hardly ever mentioned throughout this Forum and I have been meaning to write of this but good on Kevin for having done so now. Check it out as that website is very, very interesting!
I will copy Kevin's post and this reply and post it in the Terex Thread as it concerns both models.
Hi Bruce, I contributed some 800 posts (if I'm not mistaken) on Planet Diecast in the period when TMT was slowly dying (and finally dead) and before this DTCA forum started coming alive, and made some mutual references, here and there. Unfortunately PD is also in a dip for some time already, i.a. because of owners changed and uploading pictures has been impossible for quite some time now. Indeed, a lot of Dinky contributions too over there, but rather hard to find and mainly a mixed bag.
Kind regards, Jan
THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN COPIED FROM THE EUCLID THREAD AS IT ALSO CONCERNS THE TEREX THREAD
Herewith is a chronological series of images of the grille of the Euclid:
On the left is a model packaged in September 1955. On the right is a model packaged in January 1956
The left photograph is of the grille of a model packaged in January 1958, and on the right the grille of a model packaged in December 1960
The model on the left is in a blue-striped box, no inspection date decipherable (one with three rows of numerals) but with a green spot, which dates it from about 1962. The fact that a large percentage of the grille is "filled in" may have been due to an excessive paint being the culprit, rather than a dramatic change in the mould. On the right is the grille of a model packaged in a yellow half pictorial scene lidded box issued after the blue striped boxes had been deleted.
On the left also packaged in a yellow pictorial lidded box, but with no transfers on the tipper unit. The model on the right was packaged in an end-flap pictorial box
The final image above is a Euclid with RED HUBS, also packaged in an end-flap pictorial box. No doubt one of the last issues of the Euclid before the advent of the Terex.
With the release of the Terex, we do notice something similar with an earlier Euclid casting and this can be seen in the following images of the three Terex models I have in my collection.
The above photograph is of my latest Terex acquisition, that came in the last issue Terex end-flap picture box
Look carefully at the area on the bottom right for the last three Euclids - one can see identical filled-in areas with the Terex. I will leave it to others to make their own deductions on whether the entire grille area including the upper radiator was a new casting for the Terex or not.
For me, it is obvious that the radiator, front bumper and front of the headlights of the Terex is a new casting. The raised line shown by the red arrow has been deleted for the Terex and to do this, the tool makers would have had to add metal in the die by welding. This is NEVER done as applying such heat to the die would distort it. Also the word Euclid could have been deleted in the same way but again this is never done. An other way to delete a marking is to erase it with a milling machine but this leaves a raised cartouche as can be seen on many models the marque of which has been changes from Supertoys to Dinky Toys or their reference number deleted.
A die is made of at least four pieces : inside of the body, top, front and rear. Some times of six parts with left and right sides. In the case of the Euclid / Terex model, the part of the die for the front of the model has been replaced by a completely new one.
The same was done to change the Triumph Herald into the Vitesse, new die front piece. The piece for the front of the Triumph Vitesse has probably been lost when the tools were transfered to India, this is probably the reason why the Vitesse was never made as a Nicky Toys.
What you have pointed out with the upper radiator is what I have already described in my various posts, be it without the fancy little red arrow. However, this is what you wrote on the Euclid Thread that covers the complete front end of the Terex:
"It was not possible to change the Euclid marking into Terex, the whole front of the truck (radiator, headlights, bumper) is from a new part of the die. This explains why the grill is coarser on the Terex the die of which never got as worn as the Euclid because much fewer Terex were made."
You will note that you wrote "the whole front of the truck (radiator, headlights, bumper) is from a new part of the die" which to me means everything including the radiator protective grille. You then went on to state "This explains why the grill is coarser on the Terex the die of which never got as worn as the Euclid because much fewer Terex were made."
You will have seen that my photographs do not show the Terex having "a coarser grill(e)", but rather very little difference to the Euclid, down to the three areas on the bottom right that are filled in on both the Euclid and Terex. My basic contention is the forward part of the radiator protective grille was not changed from the Euclid despite your assertions that the Terex was given a new die in this area. Certainly the upper part of the radiator with the makers name was changed, but not the grille.
The above two are the last two Euclid castings - being those in an end-flap pictorial box
The above three images are of the three Terex trucks in my collection. Note in all cases identical areas are either partially or fully filled in. (I really must learn how to insert a fancy little red arrow to make things a little clearer!!)
One final comment on the matter. To have carried out making a new grille would have been an extremely time-consuming as well as an expensive exercise and I seriously doubt that Meccano would have really bothered. It would have been far cheaper to have ignored the Terex name completely and just continued with the Euclid until such time as a new and different model was prepared or the die simply became unusable. It is for that reason that I consider the upper radiator with the Terex name was the only part of the die modified.
This is what happens when there are two threads for a single model, the Terex is a variation of the Euclid and not a model in it' own. There should not be a specific thread for the Terex and there should be a moderator to look after such errors.
Lets hope that when the new DTCA site is on line, this sort of mess will not be possible.
When Talk Model Toys started over ten years ago and I helped Nigel to list all the models, I have been carefull to lock all the references which could have lead to double threads and nobody ever complained.
I am sorry but I do not understand your sentence : "Look carefully at the area on the bottom right for the last three Euclids - one can see identical filled-in areas with the Terex". I know, I probably write such sentences myself, one goes by once own thinking when writing an article and one does think that a sentence is not accurate enough for other less involved people to understand.
I have just read your last post again and I can not find any reference to the line on the radiator tank except in : "I will leave it to others to make their own deductions on whether the entire grille area including the upper radiator was a new casting for the Terex or not.".
My last post above is my own deductions. Other members can also post their own deductions as you seem to request.
There is a possibility that the die part for the front of the truck was cut to remove the radiator tank and that a blank block was screwed on and machinetooled to make the new tank with Terex.
To place an arrow, a circle or any other add on to a picture, you need a software like photoshop or other which may be provided with your camera or your PC package. Other members may be able to help you to find the proper Mac or Windows free software which can do that.
All the best.
Afraid you jumped the gun before I had finished my last post and added those close-up pictures. Of course I did ask for opinions in my earlier post, but I felt your "opiniated" opinion was such as coming from The Expert and I considered you had not either read my words or carefully examined the pictures I included. In particular I felt your opinion was flawed and in my next post I was making an opinion or observation if you prefer which you unfortunately ignored. Do you have an answer why all the grilles, the last Euclids and the Terexes are virtually identical in particular to the flaw that each grille carried?
But the question I raised above has in effect been answered in that you have changed your opinion from " It was not possible to change the Euclid marking into Terex, the whole front of the truck (radiator, headlights, bumper) is from a new part of the die. This explains why the grill is coarser on the Terex the die of which never got as worn as the Euclid because much fewer Terex were made to "There is a possibility that the die part for the front of the truck was cut to remove the radiator tank and that a blank block was screwed on and machine tooled to make the new tank with Terex." This in effect leaves out the radiator grille which is what I have been trying to say all along that the same grille was used for both the Euclid and Terex. So I guess we are now on the same wave-length.
I posted the start of this particular subject on both the Euclid and the Terex threads, the former for information only, with the latter to be the one that has responses. Unfortunately you made your original assessment on the Euclid thread. We have two different models with the same Sales Number, so how is it proposed to "sort out this mess" with the new DTCA site? I started the Thread on the Terex to keep the model separate. How often do we read of idiotic auction house cataloguers writing a description "965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck "Terex", when the truck was "965 Terex Rear Dump Truck", unless you prescribe to the former description.
The problem we have here when you wrote that you do not understand what I wrote, "Look carefully at the area on the bottom right for the last three Euclids - one can see identical filled-in areas with the Terex" To me it makes perfect sense, so I presume my English is different to yours. I trust the close-up photographs above help to make matters clearer.
When you also wrote, "I have just read your last post again and I can not find any reference to the line on the radiator tank . . . .if you go back to my original post, I did make reference to the raised line below the Euclid name. The comment is above the photographs depicting the exhaust and its surrounds - the third photograph down has two pictures of what I had written. I think therein lies the problem . . . . !
In the end you are welcome to your opinion and I welcome your opinion!
Anyone come across this being offered on E-bay before?
An interesting link, supplied by a member of the Planet Diecast forum: toysnz.com/Dinky965-G_EuclidRearDumpTruck
I haven't read or checked every detail yet, but it may be interesting for 965 Euclid fans to do so! Kind regards, Jan