40a Bedford 7 Ton Tipper

[Idris]

The NAMC’s “Catalog of all Series Matchbox Models” (second edition) and the AIM's “1-75 Series Regular Wheels” catalogue (second printing, 1983) both contain the same two variations not listed by Nick. NAMC's variation 40-1A (matching AIM's variation 40-1a) has a dark brown tipper, MW and c/a. If confirmed, this could be slotted into the variation table as the new variation code 2. In addition, the NAMC's variation 40-1D (matching AIM's variation 40-1c) has a dark brown tipper, KGPW, and c/a. If confirmed, this could be added to Nick's variation table as the last of the 8 x 18 GPW c/a variations.
The NAMC’s “Catalog of all Series Matchbox Models” (second edition) has the final variation (40-1F) as "very dark red body, dark tan dumper, GPW". Since NAMC comments explicitly on there being shade variations of the red body (as does AIM), there must be quite a striking difference in colour. Can anyone confirm this variation (including the wheels, which I think must be 9 x 20 GPW) and also provide the trim specification?
Both NAMC and AIM comment on the existence of light and dark KGPW.
Neither Stannard nor Houghton (who has duplicate entries at variations 40a-9 and 40a-12) list any new variations
U.K. Matchbox did not examine the model.

[kerbside]

Here we are Hugh a Dark Brown tipper with MW and CA, and domed axels either a code 2 or a code 3 on Nicks variation listings.





George T.

[kerbside]

Also the light Red and dark Red bodies, the dark Red has the 9x20 gpw and the trim as shown.





Then the four different shades of the tipper Brown.



George T.

[kerbside]

Well Hugh the model #40a I have put on as asked about they are unlisted and yet you make no comment about them.

George T.

[Idris]

Well Hugh the model #40a I have put on as asked about they are unlisted and yet you make no comment about them.

Without meaning or wishing to sound rude, what would you like me to say, George? I'm simply getting the ball rolling by providing an analysis of the mismatches between the various published catalogues. As I see it, it's then for us (i.e. the whole Forum) as a team, to pick over the evidence offered by various members and draw the necessary conclusions, so that Nick can update his listings. (Also, to be perfectly frank, during the week, I rarely have the time available for any kind of in-depth discussion regarding a given model.)

[kerbside]

Well Hugh I guess I have got it all wrong, I assumed that when new finds ect were put on your segment they would be discussed by members and their thoughts, as I am retired so I always have plenty of time and forget other people are busy sorry about that.

George T.

[Idris]

I assumed that when new finds ect were put on your segment they would be discussed by members and their thoughts,

That was (and still is) my hope too.

[Idris]

Also the light Red and dark Red bodies, the dark Red has the 9x20 gpw and the trim as shown.

Then the four different shades of the tipper Brown.

It's always difficult to tell from photographs, so do you feel that the cab colour variations are sufficient to be noted in Nick's table?
As regards the tippers, that is an even bigger problem, and I seem to recall that you shared something similar on the 35a Horsebox. How should these be recorded? How about: light tan (shades exist), and dark tan?

[kerbside]

Hello Hugh I left this post for a week thinking that other collectors would chip in with their models or ideas but this did not eventuate
which is a pity.

I have looked through the A.I.M. book, and they list the models as Tan in most cases, but then Stannards list most models as Brown,. both use the term Dark and Light Tan or Brown

Here are two photos to show different colours which seem to favour Tan colours than Brown.

As these colour variations might get on to Nicks Site I guess it is up to him what he calls them, although I prefer Tan

Hope you do not mind me putting these to photos on your 40a segment.




George T.

[Idris]

Tan is definitely a better name than brown.