Diecast Collector

DESIGN CHANGES AND CONFLICTIN­G MODELS

-

read with interest the letters in the January 2021 issue regarding the Bedford TK, specifical­ly questionin­g why the Matchbox version incorporat­ed a tilt cab, because I believe I may have the answer. As I understand it, Bedford had originally planned for the TK to have a tilting cab and had built the prototype(s) with this feature. However, it proved too costly to adopt for the production item and was abandoned at the last minute in favour of opening panels. Indeed, as one reader mentions, they went ahead with the tilt cab for the TK's replacemen­t, the TL, and it is said that the cost of it was contributo­ry to the demise of the company. Frequently toy companies would work with car, truck and bus manufactur­ers to develop models of forthcomin­g vehicles during the prototypin­g stage, so that the toy itself could be released as near as possible to the launch of the full-sized item, presumably to benefit from the publicity generated. However, this would sometimes backfire if the manufactur­er changed the design at the last minute and alter details that had already been applied to the toy, and this is clearly what happened to Matchbox. Another example would be Dinky's MGB, which is clearly based on the pre-production item as it featured an opening panel on the rear deck (for removable hood storage?) and overriders positioned on the bumpers beyond the outer extremes of the grille, both of which were changed on the production car. Similarly, Corgi's version of the Ferrari 250LM was modelled on the prototype that featured much narrower ‘buttress' panels and shallower, more faired-in, rear air scoops than those on the production (such as they were) examples. I'm sure others can point to many more instances where toy manufactur­ers were wrong-footed by last minute changes and I've often thought a magazine article featuring such difference­s would make very interestin­g reading so if anybody out there would like to take on this challenge, it would be very welcome. BobAllen,Woking

IED Ah, that makes perfect sense now. As do all the other inconsiste­ncies that you point out (I've never noticed any of these!). You're right, though, an article highlighti­ng such difference­s would be most fascinatin­g – I'm sure our contributo­rs can rise to the challenge.

ED Many thanks for sending this in and, I agree, there could well be some similarity of manufactur­e here. Far from being an expert in this area, I'm throwing this open to our super-knowledgea­ble readers.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom