32ab and 575 Tracteur Panhard avec semi-remorque 'SNCF' [Panhard Articulated Lorry 'SNCF'] (1952-1964)

Hi Jan. If I am right, the first type of this Panhard was produced in 1952 and the SNCF logo was printed in silk-screen process and had a locomotive in the center. Here is my model : Friendly yours.Richard

On this new photo, you have a 'type 2' on the right, produced in 1954. We can even say that it's a 'type 2-b' because the cabin has a grid ceiling. The cabin has a smooth ceiling in the 'type 2-a' On the left it's the ref. 575b with concav hubs.(575a has convex hubs) and the logo has the letters SNCF in green, produced in 1962. And all together : Cheers Richard

Hi Richard, Oh, they are beautiful! I love this model, but only have the later version, too many Liverpool models left to get, but your post really tempts me to add a couple more of these. Chris Warr.

Thank you Chris for your nice words. When you see all the variantes we can find in the Liverpool or Bobigny models, I think that one life is not enough to hope a complete collection. Kind regards Richard

Being far from expert in the field of French Dinky Toys I am still struggling with the cataloguing of my new Panhard SNCF artic. Especially the information about the correct chronological order of the decoration on the tilt is confusing in several sources. This photo shows page 98 of of 'Utilitaires Dinky Toys & Dinky Supertoys' by Redempt and Touillez. It shows all decorations, and I read all accompanying text, but I doubt this sequence from top to bottom reflects the correct chronological order. Who can help me? Kind regards, Jan

You are absolutely right Jan, the book is wrong. This is the correct chronological order. Without a picture of your truck, I can not help you any more. There are at least six variations. Tilt, hubs; cross hatched ceiling and chassis member of the semi-trailer. Jacques.

Hi Jacques and jan. I never saw a yellow logo before ! I think that the photo is disturbed by the flash or someting else ... If you refer to the page 98, for me, the order is : 1st cover = 3 2nd cover = 1 3rd cover = 2 4th cover = 4 Jan, do you know that there is a very rare version of the Panhard, ref. 32A with a cover without logo ? I will add a photo. Friendly yours Richard

Hey Jacques : faster than Speedy Gonzales ..! abra cadabra ....and the yellow became dark green !

Thank you gentlemen, your data comply with my initial assumption! So we must conclude that my example is version 3. Besides, it has a 'toit quadrill

Hello Jan. Yes your item was probably in an individual box. Here under the covered panhard whithout the logo. Not new but I am very happy to have it. Of course it has a smooth ceiling and no reinforcement under the trailer rear axle. I already put a photo on the 'new arrivals' thread, on page 24. Friendly yours. Richard

Hi Richard, Wonderful! I don't suppose I'll ever see that one over here, but you've given me another one to look out for. Chris Warr.

Does the 32 A exists ? According to Roulet, this advertissement less Panhard is part of a short run made after the initial run of S.N.C.F. with steam engine in the logo. As it is known that Roulet is an expert in short runs, even if he makes them himself and make beleive that they are ex factory, he can not be trusted. His only evidence is two BW photos in the January 1954 Meccano Magazine (not 1955 as stated in his 2012 book) showing in an article about the highway code one of these trucks with plain tilt. I have an other theory which is at least as good as Roulet's. For some reason, the photographer who made these pictures did not want to show the S.N.C.F. logo, he picked an unfinished tilt from the assembly line and made his pictures. After this the tilt either returned to the assembly line to be tampooed (certainly not silk screened) or was packed and shipped without the marking. A few other trucks like Richard's just skiped the marking and passed the quality control to find their way on the market. It is quite possible that one can find such models in any of the casting and assembly variations. This would prove Roulet's statement wrong.