VBD2 is closed. Please go to https://vbd3.co.uk instead.

GHOSTHUNTER wrote:''obvious to who show precedence GH''

Obvious to those collectors that have a deep interest in the sort of models we see on this forum. If you want Lesney sourced detailed drawings to back-up this unusual casting's existance, then I am afraid we will have to wait a bit longer until they are also discovered and brought to the forum.

Ghosthunter.

I have bought you probably the rarest Lesney piece that has ever been found and instead of saying lets try and find out more you have simply "oh it was a test, its nothing should have gone in the smelter, was done as a throw away,
Any one who has anything looking at the frankly negative vibes probably will not even bother posting, I thought everyone would have been excited and open a new train of thought . Am I mistaken

Batterseaboy wrote: I have bought you probably the rarest Lesney piece that has ever been found and instead of saying lets try and find out more you have simply "oh it was a test, its nothing should have gone in the smelter, was done as a throw away,
Any one who has anything looking at the frankly negative vibes probably will not even bother posting, I thought everyone would have been excited and open a new train of thought . Am I mistaken

I am not sure what you are reading, but to my eyes we are all saying exactly that:

1. It IS exciting
2. It IS rare
3. We ARE trying to find out more - by testing ideas and theories
4. Nobody has said it is ONLY a test
5. We are ALL glad that it didn't go back into the melting pot
6. There have been NO negative vibes whatsoever
7. This whole thread has been about opening new trains of thought - except from one person: you!

You are insistent that our various theories are all wrong because there is no precedent, or we don't have proof, but I am not aware of you offering anything other than a vague idea that this was a precursor to some unknown American gift set. Do you have any proof or precedent for that idea?

I am not saying that you are wrong, only that so far your idea of the origin of this piece seems to be based on guesswork and supposition - the same as ours!

Do you have any additional information about it that you haven't shared yet that could bring more illumination?

Martin

OK give the various ideas put forward excluding roof rack test and gift set. because I cannot recall them..

Batterseaboy wrote:

GHOSTHUNTER wrote:''obvious to who show precedence GH''

Obvious to those collectors that have a deep interest in the sort of models we see on this forum. If you want Lesney sourced detailed drawings to back-up this unusual casting's existance, then I am afraid we will have to wait a bit longer until they are also discovered and brought to the forum.

Ghosthunter.

so your guessing...

So are you (unless you've been keeping information back)!

Batterseaboy wrote:OK give the various ideas put forward excluding roof rack test and gift set. because I cannot recall them..

I think you are just deflecting. The question was, do you have any further information to back up your theory?

Clearly we don't have anything concrete to offer other than guesswork and supposition, but do you?

when I purchased this piece the chap said it was a prototype,He worked at Lesney in R&D that is all I can remember, This was 1983 so a long time ago, I know there were at least 2 more of the thunderbirds, but his table was full of very rare Matchbox.

What a great thread and a great piece of lesney history, something we will never know unless we can find some one with some more information.
What about separate small plastic cases(as with the Rentaset Van parts on a sprue) that sat on the top.
Anyway Milton I can only say thankyou for showing this wonderful casting, something else I wish I had in my collection.
J

The test bed idea is hardly negative. I think it's a very well thought out possibility. Just because you are not pleased with the test bed idea, that does not mean that others don't find it exciting or interesting. So far, it's the only idea that makes much sense for some of us. I'm certainly willing to listen to other ideas. However, I also think Antonin is correct about this body having all the final casting modifications and that puts it at the end of the timeline/life span for this casting.

My opinions are free and come with a double your money back warranty.

Tinman wrote:The test bed idea is hardly negative. I think it's a very well thought out possibility. Just because you are not pleased with the test bed idea, that does not mean that others don't find it exciting or interesting. So far, it's the only idea that makes much sense for some of us. I'm certainly willing to listen to other ideas. However, I also think Antonin is correct about this body having all the final casting modifications and that puts it at the end of the timeline/life span for this casting.

My opinions are free and come with a double your money back warranty.

opinions are like onions except they come with more p,s and i,s

Batterseaboy wrote:

GHOSTHUNTER wrote:OK Milton, what answer do you want us to give you...

Ghosthunter.

Not any answer. I thought you would all enjoy it, I think the story of it is more interesting than the general concensus that has been put forward, and a full stop denoting it that is all...

So, if we all walked away from this thread now and never posted in it again, would you be happy with the result that we have not fully come to a conclusion on this casting that suits your expectations of it.

Ghosthunter.