I commenced this thread under the title LEYLAND OCTOPUS WAGONS. I had no sooner posted it when further research meant it deserves a new thread. The following is a copy of my first post to keep things in perspective.
Hello Chris and Dave
Although this post should be in a new thread, as the later discussions have been on the 944 Leyland Octopus tankers, I thought I would throw this one in although it may have been discussed somewhere, sometime!
As a result of your discussions, I pulled my 944 out when something struck me as being quite odd; the box does not refer to the model as being a Leyland Octopus, but simply "Shell-B.P. Fuel Tanker". On one side it has a little story about the model, and it states:
"The prototype vehicle on which the model in this box is based, has a tank-capacity capable of holding 4,000 gallons of fuel oil and it is manufactured by Alfred Miles Limited of Brockworth in Gloucestershire, a subsidiary of the world-famous Gloucester Aircraft Company"
Meccano was referring to the tank, not the vehicle, so one wonders why Leyland was not mentioned anywhere except on the base of the model.
The Shell-B.P. tanker 's predecessor was the Leyland Octopus Tanker "Esso" and its full name is displayed on the box on three sides. So why was the 944 treated differently?
regards
Bruce
PS I should mention something about the wheels on my 944 as it carries two completely different types of plastic hubs, but will leave that one for the other thread!
Since posting the above, I have uncovered some quite interesting details which perhaps explains the reason LEYLAND OCTOPUS is not included anywhere on the box apart from the base of the model. Stay tuned!
Continuing this fascinating subject. Check out the following two pictures, although I do apologize for the quality of the black and white one.
And compare the above with the Dinky Supertoy model below.
Notice anything? The similarity of the tank! Then when one reads the description on the side of the box, it all becomes quite clear.
I think we were all thinking "Leyland Octopus" on reading the mention of "prototype" on the side of the box, when in fact we should have been thinking that the prototype mentioned is in fact the tank! In 1962, Alfred Miles Limited of Brockworth in Gloucestershire, was experimenting with how to comply with load/weight restrictions using an eight-wheel vehicle. The company used an ERF 8-wheel chassis. All this appears in The Commercial Motor magazine, in their 2 February 1962 issue page 49. The following is the article, although I am uncertain as to the quality of the image when it downloads!
Not the best. However, Shell-BP was working in closely with Alfred Miles Limited with the production of this new type of fuel oil tank.
Enter Meccano, and it is possible that the company was allowed access to the plans of the tank in view of the time frame between the unveiling of the experimental tank and the launch of the 944 in June 1963. From this point on one can only speculate. With there being no ERF trucks in the Dinky Supertoy range, it was left to the Octopus. Perhaps there was also an agreement between Meccano, Alfred Miles Limited and Shell-BP that the model would focus on the tank and not the truck. This is reflected in the description on the box, and also the price lists issued during the life of the model as well as the catalogues. It is simply listed as 944 Shell-BP Fuel Tanker - which should be the model's title in modern price guides and catalogues.
Hi Bruce,
So, the prototype mentioned was an ERF! Interesting.
Wonder if they considered making an ERF tanker? But then with Triang taking over in '64, Spot On already had a perfectly good ERF chassis, and a Shell BP tanker come to think of it!
Chris Warr.
Hi Chris
I think you were writing while I was still editing my essay! As I wrote, we were all thinking the word "prototype" referred to the truck and its tank, when in fact, it was just the tank.
Bruce Hoy
July 1963 Meccano Magazine
As usual, the toyman does not write very much about the pototype tank except that it's capacity is 4000 gallons.
The picture probably shows the wooden mock-up and not the plastic tank.
Milton Toys in India acquired the mould or made a very close copy depending on what current information tells us for the Leyland Octopus and used the Dinky Toys 944 for two separate issues, a Shell-Burmah Fuel Tanker and a Caltex Fuel Tanker. It is interesting to see that in both cases, Milton Toys also refrained from calling their models a Leyland Octopus. Perhaps they were being cautious for infringing copyright. I bet someone will tell us why!
Interesting that the holes in the tank top and bottom to simulate the access ladder do not line up on the Milton version but they do on the Dinky tanker.
Dave
David,
The reason for the misalingment of the ladder holes is that this model has not been made in the Meccano die. Milton is known to have made several copies of Dinky and Corgi Toys. Note that the chassis of the Octopus is made of two parts.
As far as I know, S. Kumar for Nicky Toys is the only manufacturer to have used second hand Meccano dies. All the others (at least fourty) are copies.
Never knew that! Thanks Jacques.
CW
I wish it was mine, I have just been asked by a friend to take some photographs of this:
It is stunning!!!
Dave
That is absolutely beautiful Dave, what a lovely example. Wish mine was half that good.
Chris Warr.
Wish mine existed at all!
I found a (rather horrible) picture of the complete assembly, job no. 61940.
Kind regards, Jan
For anyone interested in the 'Sweeteners for Industry' Dinky, a nice one will be auctioned at Vectis as part of the Raymond Hainsworth collection on either the 17th, 18th or 19th of March.
Dave
Both versions of the 944 Tanker:
Dave
dinkycollect wrote:
David,
The reason for the misalingment of the ladder holes is that this model has not been made in the Meccano die. Milton is known to have made several copies of Dinky and Corgi Toys. Note that the chassis of the Octopus is made of two parts.
As far as I know, S. Kumar for Nicky Toys is the only manufacturer to have used second hand Meccano dies. All the others (at least fourty) are copies."
Jacques
There are too many similarities with both the Meccano and Milton, granted the Milton is made in two parts, that I think the jury is still out on this one. I feel that it is the Meccano die, which became damaged before Kumar (of Number 42?? :laugh: :laugh: ) got rid of it to Milton who then chose the easy route of casting each chassis separately.
The images below are a reasonable comparison of all three Octopus chassis.
In the end, without anything documented, we are all entitled to our own opinion I guess.
Bruce
buzzer999 wrote:
"For anyone interested in the 'Sweeteners for Industry' Dinky, a nice one will be auctioned at Vectis as part of the Raymond Hainsworth collection on either the 17th, 18th or 19th of March.
Dave"
Morning Dave
No thanks, judging on my past experience with that company after 20 years of being a loyal customer. I have not lodged any bids with them since May last year, which for them would probably equate to several hundred pounds of lost commission! ;)
Kind regards
Bruce
I understand that Bruce, my message was not aimed at you. I had a problem with vectis two years ago and they gave me an instant refund, I can only go on personal experience.
Dave
Hi Dave,
I'd love to pick up a mint boxed Sweetners, but that would just about take up my collecting budget for 3 - 4 years!
Personally I am happy I have a real one, albeit battered, and I 'd rather spend the rest on another 100 odd unboxed variations off my list. I made the decision years ago to try to get one of each variation of my favourites, rather than just one MB version.
The joy for me is in comparing them all to see how they altered over time. I know several collectors who will only tolerate MB models, and fair play to them for that, (they perhaps have more patience than I have!) it's just not my thing.
Chris Warr.
buzzer999 wrote:
"I understand that Bruce, my message was not aimed at you. I had a problem with vectis two years ago and they gave me an instant refund, I can only go on personal experience.
Dave"
My apologies Dave, I was not thinking that your post had anything to do with me. I was just expressing my opinion of Vectis, or shooting off at the mouth, or better still putting my foot in it! I am glad you got an instant refund, but in my case they still reckon broken tabs on a Foden Mobilgas tanker are covered by a description of "good to good plus" and I am supposed to be a fool for not enquiring first! OUCH!
Actually when I stated that Vectis lost several hundred of pounds of lost commission from me, I understated it, as my absence meant the final price on many lots since then were considerably less.
Anyway, I have found two excellent auction houses in the UK, with a third an old-time favourite.
Bruce
Absolutely no apology needed Bruce, I know what your experience has been, I can only speak as I have found. Two of the auction houses I use who I have found to be totally reliable are SAS and Lacy Scott & Knight. You might want to check them out.
Dave
I have used Lacy Scott and Knight at times Dave, but more frequently in the 90s when they mailed client's parcels. These day's they use a commercial packer which adds an incredible amount to the overall cost as most auction houses now charge like wounded bulls with their commissions. I have recently used Bonington's and Tennant's, but the former used UPS through ATG but the idiots in UPS questionably opened the parcel "for quarantine inspection" and in the process cut several excellent Dinky boxes, their knife even cutting through bubble wrap before getting to the boxes. No problem with Tennant's. At least both of these companies list individual models rather than in groups of two or three where one buys more than what is of interest. I have been meaning to give SAS a go especially with Hugo there but I cannot recall if they use an outside firm to mail client's winnings or they have their own mailing department. I must look into this further. A pity about Vectis as they have been good to me, except they have employed at least one idiot cataloguer who does not have a clue when it comes to Dinky Toys! He is more of a liability to the company and nobody cares.
Bruce
PS I thoroughly enjoyed your piece in The Journal on A GRAND PRIZE. Actually, had Meccano used their wholesale price instead of retail, Master Evitts could have acquired even more with his two quid prize as it only cost Meccano 22/9!!:) :)
I am not sure who SAS use, the last few items I have bought I have collected and that gives me a chance to chat with Hugo. What an unbelievably nice and totally genuine guy.
Thanks for your comments about the article, I have some more bits to come which are also a bit different.
I have been concentrating a bit on documentation recently and will be doing some stuff on these when I get the time
That's a nice pair Dave!
I had a bit of a 'mare finding the white chassis myself, the 944's must have made good toys as most of the ones I see are battered to death.Come to think of it, as a kid mine was too.
Still looking for the black hubbed version, anyone got a picture?
Chris Warr.
944-Black hubs
Note that there are two different types of hubs on this model. This happened also with grey hubs.
944 - Red hubs
Thanks Jacques,
I had noticed the two different types of grey hubs on my Octopus chain lorries.
Were these black hubs used on any other models? I certainly haven't found a black hubbed 944 I can afford, and I've been looking for years.
CW.
Chris,
Black plastic hubs were also used on :
960 cement / concrete mixer,
945 A.E.C. articulated fuel tanker "Esso",
948 Tractor and trailer "Mc. Lean",
966 Leyland Super Comet Marrel multi bucket unit,
972 Coles 20 ton lorry mounted crane.
Of course, knowing Meccano, there may be short runs of other ones.
Jacques
I was asked by the owner of the 'Sweeteners' tanker to take a series of photographs of it as you had requested that from him. I willingly did this and sent them to you a number of days ago. I have had no acknowledgement of this or any reply to my subsequent e-mail to you.
Can you please confirm that you did receive the images?
Dave
David,
I am sorry but I have not received these pictures, I wish I had. Did you send them to dinkycollect@ ..... or to jacquesdujardin@ ..... the later being an obsolete address which does not work anymore.
Jacques.
It went to jacquesdujardin@outlook.fr
Can you let me have the new address and I will resend them
Dave
For everybody,
If you have this address, please delete it, it does not work any more thanks to Microsoft / Microbrain.
Jacques.
Meccano Liverpool pricelist French F.A.S. Tarif Exportation 1957
2024 AGM
2024 AGM
2024 AGM
2024 AGM
-274 - A.A. Mini van
Dinky Toys books
2024 AGM
--40h and 254 Austin FX3 Taxi (1952-59)
--40h and 254 Austin FX3 Taxi (1952-59)
-066 Bedford Flat Truck (1957-60)
-066 Bedford Flat Truck (1957-60)
--40h and 254 Austin FX3 Taxi (1952-59)
--40h and 254 Austin FX3 Taxi (1952-59)
--40h and 254 Austin FX3 Taxi (1952-59)
--40h and 254 Austin FX3 Taxi (1952-59)
DTCAwebsite upgrade 2023
DTCAwebsite upgrade 2023
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
DTCAwebsite upgrade 2023
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
--30p and 440 Studebaker Petrol Tanker 'Mobilgas' (1952-61)
DTCAwebsite upgrade 2023
DTCAwebsite upgrade 2023
DTCAwebsite upgrade 2023
DTCAwebsite upgrade 2023
2024 AGM
2024 AGM