76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, Mystery solved?

[matchboxuk]

May I ask a possibly stupid question? Did no one ask Smith or Odell what actually happened? Or were they unable to remember?

Thanks
Mark

By the time the First Forty years book was published, both Smith and Odell were getting on in years and their memories were not so good. The answers to many questions were just not known. Odell said shopkeepers complained about the amount of space the whole range took up.

[Idris]

I've just noticed this advert being offered for sale on Ebay.
Two interesting points:
- They are referred to as replacement models. (In both cases they represented a complete break with the preceding models bearing those numbers).
- The models shown are the abortive no. 76 and no. 78, rather than no. 76 and 77. This confirms Nick's suggestion (in the third post of the thread), that the simple Triumph was ready for full-scale production ahead of the Taxi. Could it also be that, besides issues of model complexity, the Taxi was further delayed by having to undergo minor retooling to become no. 17 following deterioration of the 17b dies, having previously been tooled up for a different number?

[matchbox1-75showroom]

Some photo's I have of three pre-production models I have for sale that fall into this category.

First a few photo's of a 76 base Cadillac Sixty Special..... 78 base Triumph Motorcycle..... and a no number 17 Metropolitan Taxi.....

P1170725.JPG (170.74 KiB) Viewed 3513 times

P1170726.JPG (183.29 KiB) Viewed 3513 times

P1170727.JPG (172.43 KiB) Viewed 3513 times

P1170728.JPG (267.22 KiB) Viewed 3513 times

P1170730.JPG (155.59 KiB) Viewed 3513 times

P1170732.JPG (258.57 KiB) Viewed 3513 times

Proof that two Triumphs with a 78 base exist! What I wanted to comment on though is the 17c Austin Taxi. On this pre-production there is no raised block for a number change obviously, but no number at all. If the triumph was ready for production prior to the Taxi (hope I have got that right) then was the Taxi awaiting a number allocation? It's all ready to go apart from that. Could this have been just at the time the decision to stay within 75 models made. But wait! I hear you say, the production model has a raised platform for the number change so presumably out there their is or has been a 77 base Taxi. Looking at the number platform on the production Taxi it is larger than it needs to be, even extending over and beyond the split rear rivet. Could it be possible bearing in mind that the pre-production has no number that that the raised platform is actually there for strengthening? the 44a Rolls for example often lost the rear of it's baseplate because it was weak at the rear and that was released two years prior to the Taxi. Just a thought.

Mal

Mal

[Idris]

A real 76a!

[Idris]

What I wanted to comment on though is the 17c Austin Taxi. On this pre-production there is no raised block for a number change obviously, but no number at all. If the triumph was ready for production prior to the Taxi (hope I have got that right) then was the Taxi awaiting a number allocation? It's all ready to go apart from that. Could this have been just at the time the decision to stay within 75 models made. But wait! I hear you say, the production model has a raised platform for the number change so presumably out there their is or has been a 77 base Taxi. Looking at the number platform on the production Taxi it is larger than it needs to be, even extending over and beyond the split rear rivet. Could it be possible bearing in mind that the pre-production has no number that that the raised platform is actually there for strengthening? the 44a Rolls for example often lost the rear of it's baseplate because it was weak at the rear and that was released two years prior to the Taxi. Just a thought.

It's an interesting idea. The pad is very oversized for just the number and does include the slot for the split rivet so, yes, because the slot is included I think I'd be prepared to sign up to the baseplate strengthening idea. I can also add I am convinced that something similar (in the form of a raised square platform) was used on the 45a baseplate for the rear rivet (thereby making the first-run casting rivet posts fractionally too short to hold the baseplate properly).
I also find myself in agreement with the suggestion that the Taxi's baseplate was engraved just as the decision not to proceed beyond 75 was taken, resulting in full text but no number
Given the above, it now seems to me unlikely that a 77 base version of the Taxi exists - this unnumbered version is probably as close as it gets. It also lends support to the idea that the Taxi was later to completion than the Triumph.
All in all, an excellent analysis Mal (and welcome to the Forum by the way)!

[Tinman]

Wow, exciting models is an understatement for sure.

[nearlymint]

Yes some superb models, nice to see some great examples of super rare castings from time to time.
J