641 Army 1-Ton Cargo Truck (195462)

Gentlemen This is/was my Humber sitting on its plain yellow box with the unusual end flap details, or rather the missing hyphen. Nothing spectacular; no casting changes, just a plain little old Army 1-Ton Cargo Truck. Interesting that it and most military models never had the name of the manufacturer included in either the base plate on the model or the box. There are two exceptions that immediately come to mind - the Austin Champ and the Thornycroft Mighty Antar (on the base of the tractor unit/prime mover but not on the box), plus the later issues from the 1970s and those civilian models that were militarized for the US market. The French factory military models are the opposite. Kind regards Bruce And then there is 'The Other One'!

Al I was not the originator of this Thread, as much as I would like to take the credit!! I am not sure how this came about as in December 2009 I was not writing for The Forum. Secondly, the title. Although the Dinky Toys 641 is modeled on the Humber, the manufacturer's name was never included on the box, model or sales literature. It was simply referred to as Army 1-Ton Cargo Truck. I have seen literature where the hyphen has been omitted, but generally, there is a hyphen between '1' and 'ton'. The years, 1954-62 is confirmed. The last recorded appearance of this model in my collection of Meccano Ephemera is in the October-November-December 1962 agent's Order Form. There is the slight possibility the model may have been in the January and February 1963 Order Forms, copies of which I do not have, but certainly in the March 1963 Meccano Toys of Quality price leaflet, the model does not appear, so by March 1963, the model had been deleted. (Like practically every Dinky Toy, when a model was deleted from the sales records does not mean the model was no longer available in shops, as stock of the 641 could have continued on shop shelves for many months or even years afterwards. Kind regards Bruce (150) 20 December 2015

Looking at the database records, I would guess your first post was about Auction Catalogue Descriptions back in 2014, Bruce. Not sure why the system credits you with the topic authorship, although I believe some other party was working on the data in an effort to transfer it to this new forum before I got involved. Perhaps something happened then, I can't really say. Dennis H is probably the true author, thinking about it logically. If you have any other title changes you think need to be made, please contact David Kaun because he is the moderator. I just offer Dave some technical support where needed.

I suppose that the painting ring which is shown on the drawing was never added to this model because it could not be placed at the center of gravity. Jacques.

The following images are those of two of my 641 Army 1-Ton Cargo Trucks, with unusual inner end-flaps. As discussed in the 686 25-Pounder Field Gun Topic, it is considered these were possibly experiments that retailers could use to write the prices on the boxes which ultimately would be hidden once the main end-flap was closed when the models were sold. There are many versions of similar types of inner end flaps, of which I have seen many, but had previously never given it much thought until Jan raised the subject! Hopefully others will add their thoughts on the purpose for these types of inner end-flaps in the new Topic I am about to create in the Boxes topic, although there may be a need for a similar Topic under French Dinky Toys. Kind regards Bruce (150)20160330/854/0251

I recently acquired this Army 1-ton Cargo Truck. It is not unusual except for the insignia on the front and rear. Instead of the red & yellow Royal Armoured Corps (R.A.C.) insignia it has the insignia of the Royal Army Service Corps (R.A.S.C). In addition the insignia is upside down - the blue should be on the upper left and the yellow on the bottom right. Is this just an assembly line error? Chris.

Hi Chris, I know only the Field Artillery Tractor and the Antar Tank Transporter with both insignia, but I believe these are more or less known. I did not know of the Army 1-ton Cargo Truck. By the way: isn't the transfer film on the rear too wide? Kind regards, Jan

Jan, I think you are right about the transfer film. However the truck is genuine in every other way and while I was a little suspicious about the film I bought it anyway just in case it could be considered a variation. There is no sign that the R.A.C. insignia has been removed and replaced with the R.A.S.C insignia. Chris