Lesser Known BAYKO Variants

Here [below right] are two very collectable BAYKO parts, both of which exist, officially and actually. They're White Windows, in the 'New Series', cruciform style, and matching White Large Windows.

They're both from 1939 or 1940 and, while not extremely rare, they're certainly far from common. Earlier, Georgian style, White Windows, much sought after in their own right, are at least ten times as common as these, but they do evoke the mystique of the "De-Luxe" set #6.

The 'New Series' BAYKO manuals - 1939 until around 1941 - stated that BAYKO sets could be “supplied to order” with 'Oak' bricks and white doors and windows “at the same prices”…

…and it's from such sets [or spare parts sales, that these two parts, and the white Curved Window [further down] actually come.

As the script above says, they were for use with the 'New Series' 'Oak' Long, Curved and End Bricks, among others. [also below]

There was also a model of the Speke Airport Building built for the 1951 British Industries Fair which used these parts, some of which may subsequently have escaped into the wild…

Here [below left] we have three BAYKO parts, again all of which exist, both officially and actually.

All three are from 1939 or 1940 and, while not exactly lights flashing, bells ringing rare, they're certainly far from common. I've been collecting for years, and I've got just enough to build one model! Oddly, Curved Bricks and Long Bricks seem to turn up disproportionately more frequently than you would expect, compared with Bricks, Half Bricks and End Bricks [the last two not shown]. This may suggest a bias towards the spare parts acquisition route, by collectors with who already owned original 'Oak' sets - but that's definitely speculative.

BAYKO manuals [1939 to just before war stopped production] stated that BAYKO sets could be “supplied to order” with 'Oak' bricks and White Doors and Windows “at the same prices”…

…and it's from such sets, or spare parts sales, that these parts come.

Occasionally the plastic for these parts, particularly the End Bricks includes a little white as well, but the normal mix is well represented by these samples.

As the script above says, they were intended for use with the 'New Series' white windows, two of which can be seen in the section above, and the Curved Windows a few sections below here.

This BAYKO part, just like the one immediately below, probably dates from between 1938 and 1940…

…and it doesn't exist…

…at least as far as all known BAYKO literature is concerned.

The suggested dating is because those are the dates when the mould had first become available. Apart from the tenuous link to brown at least being available pre-war as a colour for Bases, I can't justify it any further.

There's no true precedent for true brown parts - except pre-war Bases - though some 8-pane pre-war Windows and Doors come close, and, indeed, several came along with this brown Curved Window.

The generally accepted explanation for such anomalies is based on the admission by former Plimpton employees that, occasionally, when they got somewhat demob happy on Friday afternoons, “sometimes we threw any old **** into the moulds!”

Perhaps I hope, rather than believe, but this may have been a trial sample produced by Plimpton - there was a known link between the [late] source and the Plimpton family.

Who cares, at bottom it's great to own such a BAYKO rarity!

This BAYKO part, [below, left] just like the one immediately above, probably dates from between 1938 and 1940…

…and it doesn't exist…

…at least as far as all known BAYKO literature is concerned.

The suggested dating is because those are the dates when the mould had first become available and when creating parts in 'Oak' was still practiced, apart from that, I can't justify it any further.

Just to confuse the situation, as I am wont to do, there was a known connection between the [late] source of this part and the Plimpton family - so was it another failed trial, in this case, with the 'Oak' effect somewhat 'out of scale' with the part‽

There's BAYKO literature precedent for mottled windows of any style or colour, though they exist - and yet I half remember seeing such a reference to 'Oak' windows, but I'm not sure it exists…

The generally accepted explanation for such anomalies is based on the admission by former Plimpton employees that, occasionally, when they got somewhat demob happy on Friday afternoons, “sometimes we threw any old **** into the moulds!”

Who cares - again - it's just great to own such a BAYKO rarity.

Click on the image for a larger version where the 'Oak' is clearer.

This part's [late] source had Plimpton family connections, so the 'failed trial' scenario may have been played out again…

…but this BAYKO part doesn't exist…

…probably!!!

I suspect that that statement could do with, if not actual full-blooded clarification, certainly a bit more light to be shone on the subject : -

Bay Window Covers, part #19, were initially called the “Pinnacle ½ Platform” in the Ornamental sets #20 to #23 in which they were introduced, in orange, in 1938. Then, at least in the earlier 'New Series' manuals “Prices of Separate Parts” listings, but not the set contents listings, they were referred to as “Bay Window Roof”, which was also available in red and white.

These 'New Series' manuals also stated that BAYKO sets could be “supplied to order” with 'Oak' Bricks and White Doors and Windows “at the same prices”…

…lots of quotes there, but no specific reference to the colour of the Bay Window Cover concerned.

I've no grounds for assuming that these Bay Window Covers would have been 'Oak', any more than I have for assuming that they would have been White, but this is the nearest I can get to a loophole…

…but at least white is mentioned as being available.

This [unique ?] BAYKO part probably dates from either 1937 or 1938…

…and it doesn't exist…

…at least as far as all known BAYKO literature is concerned.

The dating is simply based on this being when the true white plastic and this mould were in use together, and so available to make this part.

Oddly, this part emerged, front and centre, in the supporting photo of an eBay auction lot - it's always worth checking!

There can't be any certainty as to why a relatively common BAYKO part should turn up in an 'unpublished' colour, however…

…the generally accepted explanation for such anomalies is based on the admission by former Plimpton employees that, occasionally, when they got somewhat demob happy on Friday afternoons, “sometimes we threw any old **** into the moulds!”

I've even heard a conspiracy theorist suggest that employee-fans cheekily created their own range, for their own use!

Who cares - in the end it's just great to own such a BAYKO rarity - unknown until I bought it, in a job lot [eBay] in June, 2008.

Pinning this one down is tricky!

I haven't an exact date, but all green BAYKO Curved Windows carried the embossed part number “25” until the early 1950s…

…this one doesn't have it!

I've also never seen the unusual shape of the two projections housing the rod holes on any other Curved Window of any era.

White windows are generally regarded as being pre-war, including the 'New Series' versions…

…however, the Liverpool Speke Airport Building model [1951 British Industries Fair] included a full range of BAYKO White Windows.

So, without linking this piece to the specific model, which I can't justify…

…it's possible that updating Curved Window moulds, for material saving via smaller Rod-housing plates, was also under review…

…if that's the case, maybe the rod-housing projections looked too fragile, as all that really changed was dropping the part number.

If you can shed any light on this issue, then I'd love to hear from you…

This is a strange one indeed - and I'm struggling to provide a full explanation…

…if you have any information, or just a theory, then I'd love to hear from you.

The image [right] shows the reverse side of four pre-war BAYKO Bricks. I know they are pre-war both from the material and from the brick course markings on the front.

Each of the mouldings is slightly different - in both the vertical [which may have been related to raw material batch size variations] and horizontal directions - which, perhaps, gives us our first clue…

…it suggests that this was a temporary lash-up [or brief series of same] to see what Bricks would look like if you added brick coursing to the reverse - for the “reverse brick” usage.

At the time, given that the reverse side still didn't have the later cutaways either side of the centre slot, this change wouldn't have significantly affected the amount of raw materials used for each brick, so it was a logical thing to have looked at.

As to the timing of this experiment, all I can suggest is that the use of the “reverse brick” increased significantly after the introduction of Curved Bricks and Windows [1938], and Long Bricks and Large Windows [1939], so 1937/1938 is my best guess.

So why wasn't it taken up? The answer has to be that I don't know. The change would have made the mould slightly more expensive and would have made alignment of this part of the mould much more critical. It may also have created an occasional issue with getting the Brick out of the mould. I also have to accept that, for later brick styles, there is the material usage issue. However, I still believe Plimpton missed a trick here. Even if they'd only made a limited proportion [in the same way that MECCANO did with Bricks with rod-grooves to the rear] it would definitely have improved the versatility of BAYKO, and the appearance of many models, which surely has to be the acid test.

Somewhat underwhelming, perhaps, but examine the image [left] and you'll see, on the two pieces on the bottom row, that the brick pattern on the 'stubby bit', doesn't mirror the one above.

Actually, in terms of being closest to reality, I'm told that, in the real world, the pattern shown above would be a little weaker, so the lower version is slightly more prototypically accurate.

What inspired this detail is unlikely ever to emerge, but was soon recognised as a detail too far [in terms of mould design] and was soon dropped in favour of the simpler version, shown on the top row.

Side Bricks and Side Windows were launched in 1949 [possibly late 1948], surviving through to the MECCANO takeover in 1959, though the original probably only lasted until 1950 at the latest.

ALL Side Brick entries, [BAYKO manuals, "Supplementary Parts" page] use the early brick pattern, but 'upside down' on the drawings [or the Bricks] i.e. they're different! Perhaps suggesting : -

► This style was certainly [nearly, but badly] planned originally.

► That printer's plate cost considerations overruled accuracy.

A final comment - on May 5th, 1949 [the eve of my ex wife's third birthday!] Plimpton submitted no less than ten applications for "Registered Design" status, a legal route to protect new[ish] parts not included in the two previous patent applications.

Side Bricks and Side Windows would certainly have been eligible for this process, and the timing was right, but they weren't included in the application - so there's no definitive 'legal' answer I'm afraid.

An odd one, this, but look at the image [right] and you'll see [top of the 'stubby bit' on each Window] there's a small rectangle…

…slide your mouse over the image, to highlight all four…

…or click on the image to see a larger version.

The two windows on the top row of the image have Labels in this small rectangle ["R" = Right, or, "L" = left], respectively…

…the letters themselves are cameo - that's posh for 'sticks out'…

…Right/Left refers to the side of square bay windows they fit…

…when viewed from the front - standard architectural protocol.

In complete contrast, the two Side Windows on the bottom row are both, clearly, Label-free zones.

There are very few of these, even compared to the anomalous Side Brick [above], so presumably it was quickly corrected, i.e. in 1949.

Never one to simplify things, I thought I'd compound the confusion by including the first [far left] and last [near left] Side Window BAYKO manual entries ["Supplementary Parts" page].

There's no Label on either, but the 'stubby' entry is, wrongly, drawn open. This is clear on the final version, but speculative on the first.

This may be more a commentary on Plimpton's internal communication systems than anything else, who can tell?

A final comment - on May 5th, 1949 [the eve of my ex wife's third birthday!] Plimpton submitted no less than ten applications for "Registered Design" status, a legal route to protect new[ish] parts not included in the two previous patent applications.

Side Bricks and Side Windows would certainly have been eligible for this process, and the timing was right, but they weren't included in the application - so there's no definitive 'legal' answer I'm afraid.

Until Bob Burgess pointed this out to me, I'd never noticed this Gable Roof variation at all - I always was a dozy *******.

The image [below] shows both the moulding variants and is, I hope, fairly self explanatory : -

I can only deduce from their relative scarcity, that the switch to the reinforced version was fairly soon after the Gable Roof launch.

Click on the image [above] to see the changed details more clearly.

Until Chris Boutal pointed this out to me, I'd never really taken Ramps all that seriously, let alone noticed this Ramp moulding variation - as I said above, I always was a dozy *******.

The images [below] show both the moulding variants and are, I hope, fairly self explanatory : -

The unreinforced corner [left] is, logically, the earlier moulding. The later form, [right] with the reinforcement, was preserved, including during the MECCANO era.

The Gable Roof reinforcement parallel [above] is surprising - we might have expected Plimpton to have learned from this earlier experience…

…however, to be fair, the Ramp's overall shape would initially at least, suggest that it would be less vulnerable to distortion or other damage.

Almost one for Nerds Corner…

That's the last of the moulding 'quirks' in otherwise standard BAYKO parts…

…unless you know better, of course‽

It's easy to assume that the strengthening of the Gable Roof and Ramp was a reaction to children's feet…

…but, in my case at least, it was my dad's size eights [so small as well!] that were the problem!!!

This is a beauty, and is the only 'Oak' Turret, in this case actually a Long Turret, that I have seen, to date…

…and it doesn't exist…

…they are certainly not mentioned anywhere in the literature!

Dating it loosely is not too problematic as Turrets did not appear until 1938, and, as far as we know, nothing was ever produced after the war in 'Oak'. Further more, the 'Oak' mixture used here was introduced with the 'New Series' sets in 1939.

This basically brackets this 'Oak' Turret between 1939 and 1941 - and I don't see it as a likely wartime experiment - pointing to 1939.

I think the flow lines of the plastic, now long since frozen and so effectively highlighted by the two-colour material, to be extremely interesting. It's a feature that you can never see with monochrome parts. These flow lines also tell us that this piece was definitely made from a general mix of pellets of two different colours - no sawdust here.

My apologies for the colour discrepancies of the photos, it won't surprise you to know that the Turret is the same colour on both sides!

This is slightly puzzling to me. White Turrets do exist, and were, in deed, always intended to exist, if you see what I mean, i.e. they were included, as a recognised colour variant, in official BAYKO documents.

That's all well and good - but where are they all‽ The postcard-form Parts Price Lists which emerged into the earliest months of the war [1940] clearly display all four shapes as being available, in White, at the same price as the Red and Orange variants, i.e. Square and Curved Turrets at 2d each [0.833p] and the two Straight Turrets at 1½d [0.625p]. Although the Orange variant was dropped, the immediate postwar postcards [1945] still had White Turrets available, though sadly at the higher prices of 2½d [1.042p] and 2d [0.833p] respectively.

This leaves us with a query that's not easy to fathom - where are they‽ In some ways it's even more irrational than that. Based entirely on my own collecting experience, the White Turrets have arrived in dribs and drabs over the years. e.g. my latest acquisition [eBay] was a single White Square Turret, [though, surprisingly I have since acquired three more] and I think, to date, six has been my biggest single capture. Bearing in mind that the postcards above covered a period when both manufacturers and retailers could have sold any and every piece of stock, almost as soon as, if not actually before, it arrived!

e.g.n eBay today, people regularly offer Red Turrets sale in so-called 'sets' [four of each of the four styles] and it's not too dissimilar to Plimpton's own Orange version launch back in 1938. There's something quite natural, even organic, about this approach, so why, in the period when White Turrets were available, does that predictable purchasing pattern appear to have gone right out of the window‽ Further more, why wasn't it rectified by subsequent purchases in later years - puzzling‽ "A three pipe problem" if ever there was one!

Anyway, as you can see from the three images [above], colour aside, White Turrets are the same as their Red counterparts - as you'd expect.

If you have an explanation for this anomalous distribution of White Turrets, then I'd love to hear from you…

Sadly, even as I wrote the script [above] about the White Turrets, there was an eBay lot, very much in the form of a 'set' of all four types, just as I described it…

…and I missed it - never saw it at all - a black day for White Turrets!!!

Leaving aside the constructive efforts to enhance the BAYKO parts range by Brian Salter and the late Leo Jannsen; Gary Birch's recycled Roofing; and even my 2 metre Replica Rods; plus Dads' Shed exports, I've never come across 'suspect' BAYKO Spare Parts - until now.

The images [below, left and right] show four White Long Turrets [left] with four White Short Turrets [right] - which are clearly from the same original source - and THEY'RE FAKES!!!

The plastic from which they are made is not BAKELITE.

The surface is mat, not gloss, an effect you can feel as well as see.

There's no part number [23 or 23B] on the upper flat surface.

The castellations aren't quite vertical relative to their base area.

The drilled 'half Rod-holes' at the left and right edges are badly defined compared with the genuine moulded detail.

There may, of course, be many more of these out there, but I have to say that it seems a very singular subject to start a forgery operation!!! I strongly suspect that most willful of creatures - a dad with a shed!

I'm assured by people who know about such things, that the likely source material is some form of plastic 'angle iron', or edging material, from which the Turrets were cut and drilled to shape - though dad should probably have used a round needle file for the 'half Rod-holes'.

The exact origins of this particular style of Medium Roof [initially called the Small Roof] are a mystery - to me at least!

As you can see from the central image, this is the earliest moulding type, of Medium Roof so it must date from before the war or shortly after, and the cause must have been short lived as so few of these have survived, despite the proven robustness of this moulding.

The 'true' colour of the plastic used here almost certainly places it as 1938 or later, based on the timing of other BAYKO parts..

The cock-up theorists might suggest this was a later version of mottled green roof that they forgot to put the mottling ingredients in…

…it could equally have been a small trial batch which never progressed…

…or another 'Friday Afternoon Special'…

…I suspect we'll never know.

The images are shown courtesy of Neil Baldry.

I can, perhaps, switch off a few "little grey cells" as I explain this one. Initially, both sizes of BAYKO Roof, in the early BAYKO Light Constructional Set days, were, give or take a shade or two, the same Maroon/Brown colour as the 'Red' Bricks. However, in 1938, when Plimpton switched to the 'true' Red, Green and White parts, the Roofs did not immediately follow suit to Red as you might have assumed.

The only explanations that I can offer are either : -

►

The lower cost of materials for the original colour raw materials - saved money.

►

It created a channel for using up existing stocks of old materials - saved money.

The number of mixed-colour sets [Maroon Roof(s) with true colour parts] is relatively limited, perhaps pointing towards the latter explanation - or an early rethink on the former - all without 'materially' compromising the appearance of the BAYKO sets and models.

Then came the age of the Cherry! Some sets were produced with these 'intermediate' Cherry Red coloured Roofs, either as a continuation of the materials strategy, or as an experiment in its own right, I don't think a definitive explanation can be proven, but, either way, this colour departure must have been regarded as a failure. Whatever the reason, this second experiment was even shorter-lived than the first. Still, as I've said before, it's nice to have the rarities - so, take care not to loose your Cherry Roof!

Additionally, of course, it's possible that these Roofs were also sold through Spare Parts channels. Personally, I have to admit I'm a fan, I like them, though I can fully understand any manufacturer's reluctance to carry parallel stocks of two similar Red plastic raw materials!

Two images [above left & right] show Cherry Roofs, Large and Small [later called Medium] respectively - click on either for a larger image.

The third image [above, centre] shows [bottom up] the 1930s standard BAYKO set Roofs, in chronological order [colour change sequence].

First things first! For the first five years or so of BAYKO's life the smaller of the two roof sizes was [spoiler alert!] called the Small Roof. However, the 'New Series' relaunch in May, 1939 introduced a new, smaller Small Roof, so : -

► The original Small Roof was renamed the Medium Roof.

► The new, smaller one took over the mantle of Small Roof.

Most of the Small Roofs from this, or indeed any other period are bog standard Red - and published as such - but, a while ago, Ian Cole acquired a 'New Series' set # 5 at auction containing the Roofs featured here - thanks to Ian for providing these important images.

The images [left and right] are there for completeness and comparisons. The key image [centre] shows the very rare 'New Series' Mottled Small Roof, click anywhere on it, or the other two images, to a larger version of the image.

If you have an explanation for [possibly] anomalous 'New Series' Mottled Roofs, then I'd love to hear from you…

Plimpton had a history of occasional colour volatility, so to expand a little on my use of the word anomalous, I'm not disputing the contents of Ian's set, Mottled Roofs and all - rather I wish to point out the colours of further parts in the image of Ian Cole's Set #5 [left] : -

►

The various Turrets visible in the image are Orange, those in my 'New Series' sets #5 and #6 are Red, as published.

►

The 3-Brick Pillars are all shown as being Red, those in my 'New Series' sets #5 and #6 are White, as published.

If you forced me into a corner to squeeze an explanation out of me, I can really only float the word "launch" into the discussion, it's surely far too far off piste for a Friday afternoon offering.

Don't you just love it when such rules are bent, if not actually smashed beyond all recognition‽ Nice one Ian - and thanks.

If you'd like to find out more about the BAYKO 'New Series'…

This is a strange one, to put it mildly. Shortly before Christmas, 2020, The first of what has turned out to be many lots appeared on ebay, in which their scripts all say are genuine pre-war BAYKO. Anyway I bought the first lot.

They claimed to be part of a special, one off order supplied direct by Plimpton Engineering. I have to admit to some initial scepticism, but, having examined them myself. The moulding looks O.K., they feel right and their colour perfectly matches the Green Arches of the period. This contradicts Plimpton's supply policy, but rules, as they say, are meant to be broken!

Dating colour variants can be problematic, but is unlikely to be earlier than 1937/1938 when the 'true colours' emerged.

Interesting pieces - and the pleasure of owning something which doesn't exist goes on!!!