140a and 106 Austin A90 Atlantic (1951-58)

I started this post within another post concerning Wheel Variations', which received a response from Terry so decided to start a new thread dealing exclusively with the cross hatching under the roofs of many models. This what I wrote in 'Wheel variations':I had been writing to Jacques 'dinkycollect' about his use of the word 'chequered' in describing the interior of the last issue of the 255 Mersey Tunnel Police Van. 'At first I did not understand when you wrote the interior having a chequered ceiling cab, until I realised that I had been used to the terminology cross-hatched, going back to the days of Classic Toys magazine and the article on the 29h/282 Duple Roadmaster Coach. Cross hatching as you know became a norm when difficulties were starting to be experienced in ejecting the model from the mould. It appears with my favourite, the 965, although not in a sequence that would be expected.'I have seen cross-hatching inside late issue 282 Duple Roadmaster Coaches and the 965 Euclid Rear Dump Truck. How many models ended up receiving this treatment to solve an ejection problem as well as to prolong the life of the mould? I have never given cross hatching much thought, so can members add to the two I have listed? (I now have to go through all my models and see what others should be included. Photographing them will be difficult I imagine!) Bruce

Sorry,
Bruce,
hadn ' t seen this new thread yet
and posted this one earlier in the Wheel variations thread :[img] / images / sites / default / files / old - forum - images / Oude_afbeeldingen_036 -20140817.jpg [/img] This is the ' cross hatching ',
or whatever you call it,
of the Mersey Tunnel Police Van ' s inside roof.It improves the flow of the zamac,
especially near the tiny window pillars.[img] / images / sites / default / files / old - forum - images / 9b -20140817 -2.jpg [/img] Although not very spectacular,
there are even more differences to be found among the MTPV ' s issued.Of course tyres can be replaced,
but the model can be proven to have been fitted with white
or black smooth 15 cm tyres,
the black ones treaded
from
1957 on,
and also the bigger smooth 17 mm tyres.Besides that there are three sizes of texts on the doors,
transfers
and stamps.Finally the shades
and gloss of red can differ significantly.Kind regards,
Jan

Many thanks Jan ! I have just posted my comments on Wheels Variation ! Good to see we are now on the same wavelength ! Thanks too for the photo of the two interiors.Makes it easy
after
the model has been disassembled - a little harder on a example not in need of restoration ! Kind regards,
Bruce

[img] / images / sites / default / files / old - forum - images / 24d.png [/img] 24D Plymouth Belvedere This model has three ceiling variations (
I have never seen a Dinky with cross - hatched roof
).

Gentlemen Since starting this Thread, I have been looking carefully at the Dinky Toys and Supertoys in my collection. Having five 642 Pressure Refueller's in my collection, each in their individual blue-striped box, I examine each, and all did not have any cross-hatching. Then in a dusty box, I discovered a long-lost example, but unfortunately, without its box. Looking at it, I was very surprised to see that this one had cross-hatching on the interior of the cab. Shining a flashlight into the rest of the casting, no other cross-hatching was visible. Obviously this model was a late issue as all the other boxes were dated April, May and June 1957. Bruce

Bruce, Good find. The cross hatched models are always later issues than the smooth ceilings. Have you noticed that Meccano failed to reproduce the headlights which should be below the bumper ? Jacques.

Jacques Yes indeed, as well as a number of other features, although I guess they were aiming for a simple, uncomplicated casting. I wonder if other members can check their 642 Pressure Refuellers to see if we can find more with cabin roof interior cross-hatching still in their original box together with an inspection stamp on the inside of the box's lid. Certainly would aid in learning the approximate date when the cross-hatching took place. Kind regards Bruce

I have always been fascinated with the 'checkering' or 'cross hatching', and first noticed it around 1958 or so, when another Dinky collector and I first noticed that some of our French Dinky's had it, and some did not. Then we noticed that my older Citroen 11BL did not have it, but a newer one did. We often wondered why, as then there was no explanation available.I have posed the question before, but don't remember much discussion about it, other than to know that it was done to facilitate the casting process. From my own observations, it appears that the French started doing it at least by 1956 or so, and maybe a little before...say 1955. But I don't remember any of the English made Dinky's having it until several years later. And that has always prompted another question I always have....how much the two factories shared information on casting issues, etc. If the French found it so beneficial, why did Binn's Rd. wait so long to implement it? Another question......are there notations on the drawings extant that show this being added? I don't remember seeing a specific change shown regarding this. Terry

Terry, I have answered this question several times on various forums. 'checkering' or 'cross hatching'is applied to large flat surfaces to facilitate the flow of metal in the die and reduce the weight of the toy but also to save on the metal. If you save 10 gr. on 1 000 000 models you have saved 1 ton of zamac. The main reason is that large flat surfaces such as car roofs, tippers etc

Bruce, This means that the cab of the Terex was cast in a new die. To change the name on the grille, it was necessary to replace the part of the cab die which corresponds to the grille, bumper and headlights. As the whole die may have been a bit worn, it was choosen to replace the whole die. This is confirmed by the fact that the name TEREX is not raised and the lack of cross hatching. This is not mentioned on the drawing job No. 13 972 which only states : 'Title was Euclid truck, Terex was Euclid on radiator 3.1.69'. The cross hatching is not mentioned in the list of changes.

Jacques I wrote my post in the wee hours of this morning, and what you stated was what I had intended to include! It is becoming quite apparent that the Terex Cab was a new casting, so perhaps it may have had a new drawing, although I cannot see why this was not reflected in the Terex drawing 13970. Perhaps it might be helpful if members could check their Terex models and confirm if their's also has no internal cross hatching on the cabin roof. It is possible the new casting is reflected in 'Title was Euclid truck, Terex was Euclid on radiator 3.1.69', with January being the month in which the new casting was created, although it seems a lot of expense for a model that only had a year or so of being in production although at the time, the life expectancy of the Terex was an unknown factor. One thing I have noticed, are the castings for every Euclid right up to those packaged in the end flap box are clean, clear and with no apparent defects of a minor nature that would warrant a new die being made. Perhaps something drastic happened to the original die - who knows!! Maybe out there is a Terex with internal cab cross hatching!! Let us all check our Terex models!! Bruce

I checked my Terex 965 and found no cross hatching boumpa