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

motorman wrote:Thanks Reg for the additional images. It would appear that the entire rivet is there!

The left most edge has not been depressed to the same extent as the other chissiled parts of the rivet. These latest images clearly demonstrates that these rivets have never been spun IMHO.

If you believe that the rivits have never been spun, how else can you explain the loss of paint only around the outer edges of both rivits?

I would imagine different people in the R&D had different ways of chiseling there models as I have some with cross chiseling and some with a single chisel strike, I've never seen this type of triangle chiseling but certainly wouldn't discredit it on this fact alone.

Lets swing all concerns around so could somebody tell us why the 1/3 piece raised portion of both the rivets remains intact with full paint,no folds or curves from being flared or spun as some of us may call it.
numi

i'm totally confused now fact or fiction, fake or real I just don't know i'll take it with me on the next few fairs so if I bump into anyone they can have a proper look

fixer wrote:i'm totally confused now fact or fiction, fake or real I just don't know i'll take it with me on the next few fairs so if I bump into anyone they can have a proper look

There is the problem in a nutshell and it's the same problem with thousands of alleged pre-production models. Without solid provenience, it's just another questionable model floating around in an ever expanding world of expensive fake pre-production models.

Ouch....seems that this thread had come to a sudden close!
Reg,i gather whatever Tinman & other members had to say didnt mean that this is a shut case as all they did was merely relay their opinions like we all have been doing constantly on this forum,me included.
This specimen sure does not have a provenance like most prepros but we are still at liberty to biopsy it and find out how & why this specimen shows varying characteristics unseen by most/some of us.Without honest written provenances all we have in front of us to go by is just the basics,intuition,the material dynamics and operandi of R&D workers.
This topic was actually quite interesting which could be a learning curve and insight into whats possibly out there and still to be discovered.We reasonably expect anything to come out of R&D over 45yrs ago with lesser technology & other tools thus the possibility of this specimen being a pre-production specimen like varying others from R&D seems plausible.
Even if this specimen does turn out to be non-factory then at least lets give Reg the benefit of knowing its status from his fellow forum members.
I humbly ask our forum members with Regs' permission to proceed to relay their opinions & arguments so we have an idea of each others lean-to's until this topic has exhausted itself.
Of course its authenticity is best determined in-hand.
Could we proceed Guys?
numi

My last inquiry was : Lets swing all concerns around so could somebody tell us why the 1/3 piece raised portion of both the rivets remains intact with full paint,no folds or curves from being flared or spun as some of us may call it.

I personally feel the rivets shown on Reg's Mercedes-Benz could be replicated by forcing a baseplate away from the body to effect a baseplate change and then with a sharpened small hand screwdriver, chisel the rivets to...

A, keep the replacement baseplate connected to the body.
B, do it in a way that emulates a known method used on 'Pre-Pro' models.

GHOSTHUNTER.

SMS88 wrote:

motorman wrote:Thanks Reg for the additional images. It would appear that the entire rivet is there!

The left most edge has not been depressed to the same extent as the other chissiled parts of the rivet. These latest images clearly demonstrates that these rivets have never been spun IMHO.

If you believe that the rivits have never been spun, how else can you explain the loss of paint only around the outer edges of both rivits?

How do you explain the lack of paint loss on quarter of the rivet.......has it been partially spun???

Unless someone shows up with a film of the model being made in the shop or some other corroborating evidence that it was not a home brew, then I'm not sure how much further the discussion can go. Some hands on inspections by some who are good at spotting tampered models would certainly be a welcome addition to the thread.

motorman wrote:

SMS88 wrote:

motorman wrote:Thanks Reg for the additional images. It would appear that the entire rivet is there!

The left most edge has not been depressed to the same extent as the other chissiled parts of the rivet. These latest images clearly demonstrates that these rivets have never been spun IMHO.

If you believe that the rivits have never been spun, how else can you explain the loss of paint only around the outer edges of both rivits?

How do you explain the lack of paint loss on quarter of the rivet.......has it been partially spun???

Paint loss pattern like this is typical of paint that was NOT ovenbaked so flaked when 3 out of 4 blade strikes were made.No evidence that all colour trials were oven baked but of course most would have been..... When rivits are spun paint is ground off, this looks flaked off. Clearly standard procedure in Jack Odell´s workshop was to make just 2 strikes with a chisel wide enough to cover the whole rivit - this toy has 4 strikes make by a sharp tool that was NOT wide enough to cover the whole rivit or was done by a person who never considered the possibility that 2 strikes in an X pattern was going to do less damage than 4 - this implies the person that made this has never been taught how to split rivits!!!