13d Wrecker GREEN cab "HOLY GRAIL" copy

[SMS88]

No one has addressed the Amber light in the Auction on Vectis circa 2006, The one on ebay(over 4K last look) today has the red dome. What is the info on the FF (factory fakes) does the story discuss the dome?
It seems the FF's were made to resemble the picture on the box which appears amber . I know those of you who consider a fake a fake , don't freak, I'm curious if that might be a means of distinguishing a FF from later fakes.
Stannard mentions the jib, the crimped axels and BP labels but nothing about the dome which to me would be a big deal.

Code 1's always have a red dome? Has anyone ever seen an amber dome in any original code 1,2,3 ? Or Superfast models?
thanks
Barry

Vectis has sold post 1980 fakes and customs before so we have been told here in the past,amber dome model is likely one of them.Those crimped axle reverse wreckers that DO come with a Bob Brennan/Joe Stone provenance have always had RED dome lights in photos that I have seen - occasional poster here John ´´Juniorman´´ owns one such example .

[kwakers]

The points everyone makes here are all based on our past discussions and our own personal views and knowledge. The Amber dome light that Rooster brings up is a brand new point of discussion that we can now investigate. Without ever noting that difference myself, I cannot comment on why it appears on any Wreckers, paint reversed or not.
I can agree with Tinman on everything but two points, so that is a lot of agreement!
In a personal discussion with Harold at a Toy Show he put on outside of the Boston area where he lived, I remember him stating that his connections at Lesney had verified that the reverse Wrecker was produced at the factory with the approval of management there. I heard it with my own ears, and witnessed a very humble Harold in that exchange which was specifically aimed at clearing up the confusion about that model in my mind. Harold had already published his apology concerning the 2nd generation reverse Wreckers at that point, and would never again refer to those models as fakes or backdoor models. I agree with Tinman that these models ARE 'Specials', made only for close friends of the Lesney company here in the U.S. For that reason, my personal thoughts are that they are indeed code twos because they were never available to the public in stores, just like our NAMC Club Models.
My point with Tinman would be that if Harold still believed they were not delivered out the front door at Lesney, he would have still called them Back Door models from then on in his Guide and his publications. I do understand the argument on the crimped axles versus the stock riveted ones still being produced, but maybe they were purposely done that way for easy identification, as well as being unique for our most veteran U.S. collectors they were done for(?).
On another point made earlier: If a 'Fake' model were to have been made with bare castings removed from the Factory, why not modify the booms and use decals and the riveting machine to make accurate 'Fake' 1965 re-creations. They would have been worth hundreds apiece even in 1970 with a world wide market. The reversed Wrecker was always a well known 'Holy Grail' Lesney because of their being pictured in all kinds of Lesney ads and publications in 1965. I have never owned either reversed Wrecker myself......... :kwakers

[Idris]

BTW, the auction which kicked this whole debate off is now closed. The hammar price was a staggering US$ 6,100 (that's about £3,675).
Irrespective of our differences of opinion regarding the precise origins of this model, I'm sure that all concerned will agree that over US$ 6,000 is an amazing price for a non-Code 1 model.

[SMS88]

BTW, the auction which kicked this whole debate off is now closed. The hammar price was a staggering US$ 6,100 (that's about £3,675).
Irrespective of our differences of opinion regarding the precise origins of this model, I'm sure that all concerned will agree that over US$ 6,000 is an amazing price for a non-Code 1 model.

If Matchbox toys and Lesney collecting could be summed up by just a single model then the reverse coloured 13d wrecker is that icon in the eyes of most diecast collectors including those who dont even know much about Lesney, the legendary rarity of the reverse wrecker is sometimes the only fact they do know so no surprises in this auction because the photos look right.
The Joe Stone legend & passions inspired by Lesney made reverse wreckers makes this model perhaps 50% as desirable (would have been my guess of final selling price) as the 1964 original thin crane run.
I wonder if they made 3 trays (ie 36) of these or more or less - time will tell as more come out of the collections of the deceased!

Hope a forum member won it

[Moyboy]

Sorry to slightly hijack the reverse wrecker thread but something Mick says and couldn't resist,
Mick, its funny you say it can be summed up as just a single model. The same applies in MOY world with the well known red/white/yellow Duesenberg. Always fetches a good price and one all collectors want yet I have seen plenty go through on sale at various sites and know of models far rarer that fetch nowhere near what this model does.
Is it beauty in the eye of the beholder that does this as it seems more a popularity thing than actual rarity as the red /tan crane or the tan Morris would be around the top as far less of these than reverse wreckers.

[kwakers]

I agree with you Moyboy, the reversed Wrecker is no where near as rare as the other Lesneys you have mentioned. Part of the answer to the popularity is probably in the use of the reversed Wrecker in not only the 1965 Dealer catalog cover picture, but in publicity shots of the Garage Gift Set and display pictures in the pocket catalogs. Some of those reverse paint pictures were seen even a year later, burning that image into the minds of collectors everywhere, even today.
Because of that particular model having overspun base rivets with frayed outer edges, I would not feel comfortable with the one that just sold on E Bay as an example of this rarity. We are all a bit 'different' in our collecting. To each his own applies here, and I congratulate the new owner on a model that will bring him happiness. Enjoy and be Happy, that is the point of our hobby, not the Cash involved.......... kwakers

[Tinman]

I've come a long way with my opinion of this particular model in the last 14 years. My largest change of opinion occurred when seeing the results of paint testing. My opinion shifted even more after performing a personal examination.

When I read about this conversation between Dick and Harold, I have no doubts in the accuracy of the conversation which Dick recounts. I'm slowly becoming a convert on how this model came to exist. I feel it still defies coding, mainly due to the unusual circumstances that brought the model about.

I have no comments on the model which just sold as I never looked at the auction or the photos.

[Tinman]

Regarding the amber light model, which another poster brought up, there is a high probability it's fake. Several years ago, someone showed off a Factory Fake with a yellow hook, that model also turned out to be a post factory fake model.

And YES, many unsavory counterfit items have slipped through Vectis over the years.

[SMS88]

The final word on this variation should belong to Harold Colpitts who actually did authenticate the crimped reverse wreckers as code 2 way back in the spring of 1970. At the end of the day nobody except perhaps Nick Jones will ever contribute as much as Harold Colpitts has done to the integrity of modern variation checklists particularly when it comes to eliminating non factory collector created variations made popular by Mack guides.

[Idris]

I would suggest that, given the murky circumstances under which this model was produced, the use of crimped instead of rivetted axle ends, the continuing lack of any hard evidence regarding its true origins and the absence of any informations to indicate the level within the Company at which its production was authorised (if it was ever authorised at all), there is no firm basis for giving it code 2 status.
All we can say with absolute certainty at this time is that it is not a code 1.