965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck (1955-69)

After the comments about assembling reversed tyres on the 965 in the new arrivals topic comment #855-#859 with the link /comment/10288#comment-10288 ' rel='nofollow]/comment/10288#comment-10288 and comment #40 and #41 in Happy collecting milestones with the link /comment/10274#comment-10274 ' rel='nofollow]/comment/10274#comment-10274 I have investigated my collection on reversed tyres and commented in this Euclid topic because there are the most differences and details being commented about the Euclid truck.. I discovered that Meccano Liverpool not always strictly assembled the reversed tyres on the same way on the models itself and also not strictly pictured reversed tyres on the boxes on the same way. First I show the various types of tires that were mounted on the 965. Then I show pictures of tyres mounted on a same model 965, but at a different way to each other. Also pictures of combinations of model and box with correct or incorrect mounted tyres regarding the picture on the box and show still once more pictures of all 965 boxes. Very remarkable is that box type 2 has pictured reversed tyres facing inwards and box type 3 and 4 has pictured reversed tyres facing outwards. For clarity, I add photos in full size with attached captions. By the way, I'm not convinced of the advantage of the use of reversed tires by the Euclid trucks. In the Netherlands we have very heavy clay. All farmers have tractors to plough in this heavy clay and all tires of these tractors have a deep V groove profile which is always directed forward. See last pictures. Jan Oldenhuis 18-10-2017








[img]/images/sites/default/files/forum-images/DinkyToys965

Recently I received a 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck with red decals open windows and fitted with 1st version heavy-duty tyres. I did not have this variation yet. It is also a USA export model with a Hudson Dobson label. I already had this version with red decals, closed windows and 2nd version heavy-duty tyres with V groove. The stamp in the box stated 11 AN 55 and will therefore be issued November 1955. This means that the 1st version with black decals has been issued for only a few months since October 1955. Jan Oldenhuis, 23 May 2018.

That is interesting new information for establishing a more exact date for the transition from the black to red logos, Jan. A nice addition too to your dumper fleet. it's about time to start you own quarry now! Kind regards, Jan

My newly added Euclid came with a protection ring. I know this extra for the no. 190 Caravan, but I doubt the authenticity of this one. Can anybody confirm or deny? Kind regards, Jan

First of all, congratulations on your beautiful new acquisitions. Very hard to find in such an undamaged condition. A wonderful addition to your collection.I received the same box with a 965 Euclid with a loose internal cardboard lid with a hole in it and raised edges over the winding handle as they were used in all 965 lid boxes as protection. There was also a control label in the box. As is known, the model is always transported on its side in the box, where for protection and sealing a loose internal cardboard cover with a hole in it is placed over the winding handle to prevent shaking and damaging through the winding handle against the box.In comment #35, Bruce Hoy also discussed and depicted this lid box and the later end-flap boxes with internal packing piece. His lid box has the same internal packaging as mine and the later end-flap box was given a different rectangular cardboard packaging to be filled between the body and the box. Bruce has researched many 965 models and is a specialist for this model with all its details. I hope he reads this contribution and will respond as well.When I look at your picture with the ring, it seems to me that the ring is not high enough to protrude above the winding handle to protect it sufficiently against shaking against the box, but that can be a visual deception. I checked QDT but they only show the cardboard packing pieces as protection in this boxes, so I think that this ring was not original used for protection in this 965 box. For my convenience, I use the seller's photos of my 965 with box.Kind regards, Jan O.

I agree, Jan. Exactly what crossed my mind. Thanks for the confirmation! Kind regards, Jan

Greetings Gentlemen! After a long silence, and in receipt of some new, working parts, I am back on board, and what did I find - why two Posts on my favourite Dinky Supertoys! Now all I have to do is to remember how to Post replies, as well as how to create new Posts with pictures!! I have found a folder that contains well over two dozen new Posts, either practically complete, to just the outline. Here is hoping that my fire has been rekindled! In answer to Post #76, Jan. I suggest you remove that cardboard ring, and use it on a Hornby-Dublo or Wrenn locomtive! Jan O is quite correct in that it does not belong to the 965 - the cardboard insert with the hole for the winder is all that is needed, as the edges of this piece of cardboard is the part that keeps the model away from the lid.The same sort of protective piece of shaped carboard was also used for the 930 with a similar style protective cardboard used with the 966 Marrel Multi-Bucket Unit, but instead of a hole, this has two 'slits for the upper arms of the bucket holder. My memory is a little shot at present, (most likely left on the operating theatre floor) but I am sure some of the early Bedfords, Dust Cart, dumper etc did have a protective ring that prevented the winding handle penetrating the lightweight end-flap boxes. Post #77 is one of the major reasons why I have loved researching and placing within this Forum, something that may be useful in part for our members, so thank you Jan O for your most appreciated comments. You may be interested in knowing, that since I last made a contribution, I have added yet another 965 Euclid to my collection making it 16 models, all different in some way, shape or form, but I am perplexed as to where I have placed it! I will have to start tearing our house apart soon! I have a fair idea where it is, as it is in the collection yet to be photographed, but where is that box? I will end this Post by asking a very valid question - one that has been on my mind for years. A few years ago, I acquired the original drawings for the 965, and I immediately saw something I had never noticed before, even looking at photographs of the real Euclid R-15. Here is my question: Has anyone given any thought as to why Meccano never made the model exactly as the prototype? Meccano made its model's windscreen with a small rearward slope, which in effect, makes it more 'modern', whereas the original truck, (as can be seen with the photographs) the windscreen is vertical. The reason for the R-15 having a vertical windscreen is to reduce glare from reflected sunlight when the windscreens are closed so why didn't Meccano make its model exactly the same, knowing that Meccano's draftsmen spent time measuring the real truck long before they put pen to paper? I leave you for the time being, in peace, once more, to ponder this question! Kind regards Bruce (150) 20200603/1207/1404

Bruce. I am also happy that you are back in the forum and wish you further prosperous recovery. I look always forward to your contributions.For example, I have always wondered why there are 3 vertical support beams in the body of the 965 model and not 4 like the real ones.Kind regards, Jan O.

Jan O It is not only in the Neiderland that the V of agricultural tyres are pointed forward but also everywhere in the world except in places were ignorant people do not konw that the tyres must be fitted that way.Mis fitted tyres do not make a variant but a an assembling error.About the 3 or 4 supporting beams, Meccano probably chose three beams only for aestetic reasons, these beams are perhaps not reduced to the same scale as the tipper body, they would have looked too wide if there had been four and there would not have been enough room for the transfers.

It is more of a happy coincidence if tyres like these are fitted correctly. I just leave them as they are, after so many years. Welcome, Bruce! Kind regards, Jan

Jacques, thank you very much for your much appreciated explanation. Again a number of questions have been clarified. Jan O.

Good to see that you're back in the fold Bruce. I wish you full and speedy recovery from whatever ailed you. John