979 Racehorse Transport (1961-64)

DISCUSSION TRANSFERED FROM 'WHEEL VARIATIONS'.

Is the Newmarket Horse Box unusual with plastic hubs ? I recently bought one so fitted, but all the pictures I've found online so far show metal hubs. The baseplate is the later version. Fred7A

The Newmarket Horse Box with plastic hubs I have never seen before. I have only seen this model with light yellow metal and with dark yellow metal hubs. I would love to see a picture of your Horse Box. There are more models with plastic hubs that are hardly ever seen like the Guy Warrior Snowplough, the Mighty Antar with Propellor and the 984/985 Car Carrier and Trailer. Kind regards, Rob

Fred I have never seen one with plastic hubs either but who has seen everything ? I am looking for a large picture of the first type base plate in grey to insert between those above. The large red arrow on the picture shows an area where something probably a reference number has been erased. Does anybody know what this was ?

Hello Jacques and greetings to everybody, seeing your last post about the bases on the 979/980/981 Horse box variations made me inspect my three models (one of each) and of course this revealed a surprise: As you can see, the middle one of the three models (the top model is the U.S. 980 'Express Horse Van' version) - is the U.K. no.981 'B.R.' version, and has a baseplate identical to the 979 Newmarket model which was only introduced in October 1961: - it has the condensed 'Horsebox' lettering without the hyphen, no mould ejector marks, and the small elongated raised cast panel in front of the back axle. What is more surprising is that the box is from 1955 (inspection stamp inside the lid is 'B 10 5' so I presume October 1955), the lid is marked 'Dinky Toys' rather than the later 'Dinky Supertoys', it has an 'LF' label on one lid end, but a handwritten price 17/11 which was not correct for 1955 when the list price was 15/9, not increasing to 17/11 until January 1957. I have had this model for around thirty years, but I suppose the model and box could have been switched before I acquired it. Anyway, the main point is that rather than the baseplate being reworked for the 979 version, it would seem that this was done before the 980/981 version was deleted in 1960 - so it may be unlikely to find a grey 'Newmarket' version with the earlier baseplate marking? Over to you, Jacques! (I can email you a separate pic of the maroon type 2 baseplate if you wish). Regards, Adrian.

Adrian, Thank you for this piece of information. I did not know when the later base plate was introduced, now we know at least on which model. Yes, I would apreciate a large photo of the second type maroon base plate by email. Thanks and regards. Jacques.

Well there's a surprise Adrian, I would not have expected to see the later base on a British Railways version! I have a Newmarket one with the early baseplate with hyphen and ejector marks.

Hi all, Not the best photo, but here is the first type baseplate on a Newmarket...

Chris Warr.

I checked this example of mine, in the same 'Dinky Toys 981' box as Adrian's, and it has the early base plate (not the later one with condensed name and without hyphen). Kind regards, Jan

Hello all, thank you Chris, Fred and Jan for the extra information which you have provided. Up until now we have presumed that the baseplate on the 979 Newmarket version was a later production - but in light of what we now see, I am beginning to think that there were two dies for the baseplate which were used alternately over the course of production. We know from well-documented information about the fate of the 999 Vulcan, that the extra temperature required to cast in alumminium caused premature wear on those dies - so would it not be likely that something similar happened with the Horse-box? If so, it would make sense to have two dies so that repairs could be made to one when time allowed, and to alternate the dies each time a casting run was scheduled. It also makes me wonder how the Horse-box managed to remain in production for so long (ten years) when it was also cast in aluminium? When you look at the pics of the two bases, it seems more likely that a new die was made with slightly different lettering - and although this is pure conjecture, if the very first production run was for, say, 5000 bases, then this could easily have caused damage to the die (it is stated that the Vulcan only ran to 500 models produced before the die was rendered unusable) and a new die was produced to alternate with the first. If this happened, then the first die would probably have been the one as mentioned by Jan and Fred, and shown in Chris' 979 picture and my 980 U.S. model, with larger and hyphenated lettering for the name 'Horse-Box' - and the second die was made quite soon afterwards. Whatever the truth was, we now have evidence of both the 981 maroon 'B.R.' model and the 979 Newmarket version with both bases, except that we haven't yet seen a 980 U.S. model with the second base - but I am sure that some do exist! Just another thought - could something similar have happened with the base of the trailer on the 582/982 Pullmore - there are two different bases, one of which has smaller condensed lettering and the addition of a number '2' cast in? I will see if I can add some pics to the Pullmore thread when time permits. Regards to everybody, Adrian.

Adrian et al- I looked at my U.S. version of the Horse Box today, and it also has what you are referring to as the earlier baseplate. The date code inside the box lid shows 1956, and the box is still labled as 'Dinky Toys'. It will be interesting to see if a U.S. version turns up with the later baseplate. Based upon your assumption, which seems quite plausible, then some should have been made. Your thoughts about the die wear and erosion with the aluminum castings are interesting, as all of us have heard about the Vulcan. But both the Pullmore trailer and the Horse Box were in production for a very long time, making one wonder if even two dies would have worked. My guess is, that for whatver reason, the damage was somehow less for these two models, or Meccano would not have put up with it......as 500 models of the Vulcan are miniscule in terms of production. Maybe the 'boxy' shape' had something to do with it.Regards, Terry

Terry Can you please advise the full details of the inspection stamp on the inside of the lid of your US version. If you have time, a photograph would be great. It would be interesting to see if something similar to what Adrian has stated shows with the inspection stamp, thus reinforcing Adrian's logical theory. Bruce