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

Batterseaboy wrote:Precedence is what is needed, show where this is common practice, using retired molds for apprentices to practice on, otherwise you are just guessing, in any event that is what I have, like it, loathe it, dismiss it whatever. you don,t like the thunderbird that,s your opinion. I think it's amazing that's why I shared it I,m kind of disappointed with your short shrift dismissal of it but hey hoo that's life. I won,t bother posting any other MB pieces that I have so this is me checking out have a good one

Milton

Hey Milton. Nobody is dismissing, loathing or in any other way denigrating your piece. We are all in agreement that it is probably one of the most exciting things to emerge in quite a long time.

It is the way of this forum to explore possibilities. We enjoy batting around ideas and theories and welcome opposing views. After all, we are all collectors of Matchbox toys to have fun. Finding something so new to talk about after 56 years is, you must admit, about as fun as it gets!

There are several theories as to how your casting came about and others may emerge - none of which can be proven. Unfortunately there is so much we don't know for sure about Lesney's production processes. But discussing and debating them in no way belittles the importance of your find.

Your request for precedence applies just as much to our several theories as it does to yours. There doesn't seem to be any for any of the ideas proposed.

Who knows which of us 'right'? Nobody knows for sure, and it is unlikely that a definitive 'truth' will ever be found. That doesn't mean the item is worthless (I would hazard that it is actually quite valuable to the right collector) or in any way uninteresting. On the contrary - it is a fascinating discussion point that I am sure all of us are very grateful to you for raising.

Martin

Batterseaboy wrote:Precedence is what is needed, show where this is common practice, using retired molds for apprentices to practice on,

Milton

Sorry Milton, I can argue similarly. Please, show me a precedence, please show me a gift set, in which was at the end of production replaced one model ( Could you imagine e.g. the extra costs for new Gift Set box with a new pictures of Ford Thunderbird with the roof rack).
We are trying to find right answer and the best and most logical argument could be accepted. Most of the members here are very experienced collectors with 40-60 years practice. We are trying to find the best theory and not slander your very nice and interesting model.
Antonin

Batterseaboy wrote:...I,m kind of disappointed with your short shrift dismissal of it...

How very odd! You obviously see completely different posts to the ones displayed on my laptop.

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

Ghosthunter.

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...

We are enjoying it, this thread is already running into 6 pages, but the general feeling that comes across is that you are not very happy with our views and theories as to what this body casting is, why it exists and it's possible use in a catalogued range.

Ghosthunter.

It's definitely an enjoyable thread Milton, please do post any other models of interest.

just to upset the apple cart could it be a Nik Stil style prepro

I would like to know if any other unusual castings have come to light, can any more history from the factory be found. Is there much factory history in the public domain

fixer wrote:just to upset the apple cart could it be a Nik Stil style prepro

Was he around Enfield Pageant of motoring in 1983