48a Meteor Sports Boat & Trailer

[Idris]

This model turned out to be a whole lot more interesting than I thought it would be!

The NAMC’s “Catalog of all Series Matchbox Models” (second edition) lists a model at variation 48-1a which has MW, c/a and no pin to hold the boat onto the trailer. The listing explicitely states "Not broken off - 1st casting".
AIM's “1-75 Series Regular Wheels” catalogue (second printing, 1983) shows three different trailers. The first type, unlisted by Nick, measures only 1 7/8" long and terminated in a round towing eye rather than in an elongated ellipse with the eye at the end, and has MW and c/a. The second and third-type trailers match Nick's unbraced and braced examples, but the catalogue highlights the existence of an ejector ring on the underside in the middle of the web to the rear of the towing eye, creating the possibility that the braced trailer exists both with and without this ejector ring.
Houghton notes that the trailer exists in both matt and gloss black. This appears to be an early variation and can be found on Nick's variations 3, 5, and 7. Furthermore, Houghton only lists the dark tan hull as the final version (equivalent to Nick's code 12), all others being light tan. Given the fact that the boats can just as easily be switched on this model and on the 48b, perhaps the deck colour variation should be reduced to a footnote?
Stannard does not list any variations not already identified by Nick.
U.K. Matchbox covered the model in volume 7, no. 3 (Aug. '83), p94, but did not identify any new variations. However, Robert Newson discussed the first-type AIM trailer and I will quote him here: "An early version of the trailer has been reported in several catalogues and the apparently does not terminate in a "spade end" where the hole for towing is cast, but as a circular plate through which the towing hole is cast. As this circular plate is only the diameter of the width of the "spade end", the net result is a carrier some 3mm less in length than the normal. As this early version has neither been seen by the author nor associates, it has not been detailed as such here - can anyone confirm it's existence as having been obtained from a retail shop or is this a pre-production or similar type that was once recorded in a far distant catalogue and has been perpetuated as an error ever since in 1-75 catalogues?" No confirmation was included in the article follow-up published in volume 7, no. 4 (Oct. '83), p125.
Can anyone confirm the existence of the short trailer? If so, does it have the boat locating pin? (I would suggest the pinless NAMC variation is probably a defective casting since, it it were the very first trailer casting, it would be reasonable to assume that it would be the short trailer and it is unlikely that the cataloguer would spot a missing pin but not notice the different towing eye design.) Does anyone have a braced trailer without the ejector ring?

[kwakers]

Newson's reference to a far distant catalog is a joke, the Aim and NAMC catalogs were very carefully done by two of our finest pioneer U.S. collectors 15 years before Mike Stannard published his work. If Bob Brennen had a first casting Trailer without a pin, please do not write it off as a mis-cast or non existent variation. Bob has forgotten more about Lesneys than I will ever know, and he obviously had/has the model he cataloged. It may be an earliest pre-production design as Newson suggests, but could each of the 41As we now own without casting circles have been called 'pre-production' before Hardy sold his spare to expose the world to their existence? The round tow hook, and also the pinless Trailers are now noted here, so we will begin our search now boys and girls with Thanks to Bob, Harold, and now Hugh for reminding us of their provenance. A 'Clutching my Old Bibles in my Cave kwakers'..........

[Idris]

If Bob Brennen had a first casting Trailer without a pin, please do not write it off as a mis-cast or non existent variation.

The point I was making was that it seems probable that a trailer cast without a pin would also have the short towing eye. Since the short trailer variation is not included in the NAMC catalogue, the implication is that the trailer without a pin had the longer towing eye. Similarly, since the lack of a pin on the short towing eye trailer was not reported, we should assume that it had one. It seems unreasonable that the pin would have been dropped from the trailer when the towing eye was lengthened, ergo the trailer variant without the pin is most likely a miscast or the result of a weak pin breaking off during tumbling.

[Idris]

I've just been checking my 48a boats and trailers and have found that both my unbraced trailers have an ejector ring, so I revisited the NAMC catalogue to doublecheck what I'd written..
On closer inspection, the unbraced trailer is depicted without the triangular infill (with ejector ring) to the rear of the towing eye spade. That therefore means that five different trailers are catalogued:
1) round towing eye (AIM),
2) spade towing eye without triangular infill or braces (AIM),
3) spade towing eye with triangular infill but without braces (normal),
4) (assumed) spade towing eye without locating pin (NAMC), and
5) spade towing eye with triangular infill and braces (normal)
Can anyone confirm the existence of trailers 1, 2, and 5?

[kwakers]

Your #4 (Assumed) is totally improper, Bob in fact calls this the 'first casting' of the 48A Trailer Hugh. In 1971 we were not comparing smaller casting details as Stannard did 14 years later. I say that not out of speculation, I was a major contributor to both the NAMC and the AIM Guides with models out of our collection being shown and shared by snail mail. Variations we had in our collections in 1971 were mainly by body colors/ major shades, and their wheel colors and types. Only when major body changes such as the #46 Pickfords Van body and the 68 Nestles Van body castings were found, were they even noted back then. Ejection ring sizes were never measured or noted, some major axle bracing changes on Lesneys bases were not being noted yet, and the front hitch style on this 48A Trailer was a point Bob has never cataloged to this day.
When no hitch or brace details are noted in any of his 48A listings at all, we cannot catalog them, or even begin to guess at them 44 years later without actually checking his model or another found just like it by a Forum member.
By adding 'LATE' casting details to his Trailer without a stud Hugh, you are essentially ignoring the first casting designation Bob gave this Trailer that was in his collection in 1971, and still could be. You are essentially (now in 2015) doing a Bob Newson all over again on Bob's very early discovery by adding unknown casting details to it, and thereby making it a doubtful piece of history. I really don't think that is your intention, so lets just note the lack of a mounting stud for now.
I can only confirm the round eye of your #1 Trailer at this time, mine has had a broken off tip for 50 years now since I broke it off in play. I may have replaced that round hitch model later with a mint one, but Stannard made no note of that in his listings, so I have not either in my 'Bible'. All but 2 of our later 48As are in hiding right now, I will have to find the others for more information on your castings. Other Forum members should have the early casting round hitch Trailers, they just have never noticed them because most were broken just like mine!.....kwakers

[Idris]

I can only confirm the round eye of your #1 Trailer at this time...

I suppose a photograph's out of the question?

[kwakers]

My assumption is that Bob's studless Trailer has the early round eye on it Hugh, I think it should have been your #1 instead of your #4, that's all. kwakers

[motorman]

I can only confirm the round eye of your #1 Trailer at this time...

I suppose a photograph's out of the question?

ARE YOU HAVING A LAUGH HUGH??

[kwakers]

When I locate my other 5 variations I have noted with only 2 others on display presently, I will try to post them all. They are in our house somewhere because I cataloged them to my 'new 1985' Stannard's Bible just 7 years ago. Dick

[kwakers]

I can only confirm the round eye of your #1 Trailer at this time...

I suppose a photograph's out of the question?

ARE YOU HAVING A LAUGH HUGH??

Dick