Renumbering - big QUESTION

[Diecast]

I am still wondering why some models after N 60 were renumbered. It was a very interesting discussion here associated with my first post about 61a Ferret Scout Car. Yesterday I digged out all my renumbered models with raised panel and observed them under a light microscope. I tried to find some traces of the original number. Much hope I did not make, but by the models 65a and 70a I was somewhat successful. At a magnification of 20x - 40x I have found some traces of the original numbers. By these models, the raised panel is not so "raised" and the ascend trases of the original numbers appears. If you are lucky and your model has a thin layer of painting, you can see by 65a Jaguar the traces after the number "6" or the letter "C" or "G". The original number was about 0.2mm shifted up and right
Antonin

[Diecast]

By the model 70a Ford Thames Estate Car is the best situation for the observation. The raised plate is the lowest and by some models there is a visible trace of the number "7". The original number is shifted by about 0.3 mm to the left.
Antonin

[Diecast]

Just remember, because we are now discussing 65a, I recall the common topic
Antonin

[SMS88]

Perhaps the original 65a was cast as 61 because there would not be space under the block for a full width 2nd digit??? The Thames appears to offer no evidence of having ever been intended to take a lower number!!

[Diecast]

Perhaps the original 65a was cast as 61 because there would not be space under the block for a full width 2nd digit??? The Thames appears to offer no evidence of having ever been intended to take a lower number!!

Perhaps it was "6" only, because there was an intention to start from beginning
Antonin

[SMS88]

Perhaps the original 65a was cast as 61 because there would not be space under the block for a full width 2nd digit??? The Thames appears to offer no evidence of having ever been intended to take a lower number!!

Perhaps it was "6" only, because there was an intention to start from beginning
Antonin

The 6b tooling was new in production at the same time in 1959 and would under the current regime have been a like for like replacement of the 6a - there were no changes of number prior to 1960 when new versions of exisitng models were tooled up so I think that Lesney wouldnt give their dump truck number 6 to a 2nd Jag (32b was like for like replacement of 32a which did arrive in time to claim the same umber unlike 23e/57c!)