465 Morris Van Capstan (1957-59)

I was surprised to not see a posting already on this little commercial van, so having recently purchased a nice example, I decided to post my comments. To me, this is somewhat of a curiousity, as it was only made for 3 years.....1957-1959, and was a re-use of the existing 260 Royal Mail Van. Jan has written a very nice article about this on Talk Model Toys, and you can still find it there, but to somewhat summarize previous comments, it is a puzzle why Dinky did not make other livery versions of this. It is a very nice casting of a popular delivery van, used for many years. Some thought has been expressed that due to the fact it was advertising cigarettes, which were even then starting to fall out of favor, that it never really caught on as a model. It has also received scant attention from the toy community, and is seldom written about. The Royal Mail van was made from 1955 through 1961, and was very popular, and also plentiful. The Capstan version, however, being made for only three years, and never hugely popular, has turned into a somewhat expensive acquisition, especially if wanted in boxed, very nice or near mint condition. For some reason, I too did not buy one years ago, and only the past few years decided that I really needed to have one for my collection, so I started looking. I saw quite a few listed for sale, but most are not in really nice condition, and the light blue paint tends to show every tiny flaw, either in the paint or the casting itself. It is a striking two-tone color combination, that Dinky did quite well, but for me, I prefer the solid, single color of the Royal Mail van.....I think it flatters the vehicle a bit more. Best regards, Terry

Thanks Bruce. I have read elsewhere that some think it was cheap mistake on Meccano's part to leave in the rear window screen and locking bar, instead of modeling it correctly for other than mail van purposes. But that would have meant either modifying that die (and not making anymore Mail Vans), or creating a new, costly die, so they took the easy route. But still a very nice little van, well worth collecting. Thanks for the additional info, especially the Meccano Magazine article, which is always nice to read. Best regards, Terry

Hello Terry Nice seeing your new Thread on this great little model! I bought mine from Vectis in 2013 having had several others in the past, none of which met my criteria! I was intrigued with what the cataloguer meant when he/she wrote 'nice bright example in generally yellow carded picture box'!! (What is a 'generally yellow carded picture box'? It is either a yellow carded picture box or it is not. Cannot have it both ways!!) Still the model and it's 'generally carded picture box' is a fine addition to the collection. I think the reason the casting never made it to any other brands are the back windows with their 'secure mesh'! Cigarettes and mail obviously require great protection! Anyway, herewith are some more details to compliment your fine Post, starting with the March 1957 Meccano Magazine, and then to the second printing of the August 1957 Australian Price Leaflet, print code 16/757/15 (2P), DT/CF/4. And finally, my own 265 Morris Commercial Van 'Capstan' together with its 'generally yellow carded picture box'! Kind regards Bruce (150) 6 January 2016 #745

As always, your comments are more than welcome Terry. While you were writing, I was editing my original Post by adding some comments with tongue in cheek on the description of the model in the 14 May 2013 auction at Vectis. Yes it would have been expensive to have altered the mould, which would have not served any purpose, as only little boys would be playing with it. More than likely Meccano decided to bring this model out to further utilize an existing mould and thus increase the Company's revenue. I only bought mine as the model is a unique part of a world now gone forever. Kind regards Bruce (150) 6 January 2016 #746

Hi Terry, Bruce, I believe the 'Capstan' was just an initially unplanned 'incident'. If a series of these Morris vans had been conceived both the casting and base plate of the Royal Mail van would no doubt have been given more general characteristics (without serious concessions). Kind regards, Jan

Jan---I think you are quite right; Meccano probably initially made this as a dedicated Royal Mail Van, and had no plans to re-use or re-issue it in another form. Then a late decision was made to squeeze out a few more units, via a slightly different model, thus the Capstan was born. If they had planned a series of different liveries, they would have proceeded differently from the start.Best regards, Terry

Jan You are perfectly correct with the base plate - I had forgotten to mention this in my haste to submit my Post! Changing the base plate would have been a necessity which would have involved the least expense. Although only using the new, unnumbered base plate for just one model when at least one other could have been issued, such as a secure document courier van for instance does not make all that much sense, but I presume Meccano had taken this into consideration. Still it does not detract from a great little model, whose short production life has meant a small production figure which is reflected in its current value, although this has decreased slightly over the years. I have the 465 listed in the Dinky Toys Order Form for September 1959, Reference D/T9/15 but not in the Order Form for the following month, October 1959, it being the only commercial van that was no longer available for dealers to order. This then means the 465 was in production for two and a half years, March 1957 to September 1959. Terry - you are also quite correct when you wrote that Meccano was simply squeezing a little more life out of a model, although the 260 Royal Mail Van itself was also on the way out, with it last appearing in a Dinky Toys Order Form in June 1960 and a price list issued the same month Reference 16/660/100. Kind regards Bruce (150) 7 January 2016 #750

Terry, Changing the rear windows and door locking system does not mean making an other die but only the small part for the rear doors. This has been done later when the Triumph Vitesse was made in the Herald's die and the scarce Daimler in the Jaguar die. There may be other examples as well.The reason for the Capstan may of course be to make further use of a die when the sales of the postal van were declining, it may also be an order from Imperial Tobacco to make a code 1 promotional. At that time some manufacturers paid Meccano a small fee to have their name on the Dinky. We know that some vehicle manufacturers paid for the die and had to buy the first 500 models at full price. One known example of a manufacturer paying for the tooling is the 976 - Michigan 180 - 111 tractor dozer.Once more, we have several possible answers for a question and will probably never know which answer is the right one. By the way, do you know that this 'Express Delivery Van' was a single seater ?

This single seat for the driver configuration was quite normal in the 1950s and 60s. It meant more room for goods and more profit. Dave

Another significant real-life difference between regular production vans and those for the Royal Mail was the front wings (fenders) and headlamps. The Royal Mail specified front wings made from rubber (as did British Railways on many of their vehicles) on many of their vans rather than the normal steel versions so as to be more resistant to minor bumps and scrapes. On the Morris J van, this meant securing the headlamps to the cab sides rather than the normal position on the wing tops. This feature, and the security mesh and external locking bar was correctly modelled by Dinky. Most real non-mail vans also lacked the front bumper. Another possible explanation for the deletion of both models was that in real life, the 'J' van had been replaced by the more modern J2 (as modelled by Matchbox as the blue Builders Pickup truck, number 60), and was looking decidedly 'old fashioned' by that time.

Nice, Kevin, to see that yellow Foden Tanker in your avatar. Is that a new National Benzole creation of yours? It looks wonderful in yellow (like the Studebaker does). And what reference number did you attribute to that one on the box, 504 or ... ? (sorry to be a bit off-topic here, just curious). Kind regards, Jan

Hi Jan, Yes, it is one of my 'what if' creations, and it came about after I saw the box for sale on the internet. Whoever made the box gave it the number 942. I then found a badly repainted Foden on Ebay, stripped it and did the repaint, and the transfers were made for me by a friend of a friend. Kevin.