Harlequin - #4 Vintage Collectors Club

Breyer has announced the fourth (and last of the 2012) Vintage Collectors Club piece:

Harlequin!

He's the old Proud Arab Stallion in glossy Appaloosa. Gosh, is it beautiful. (I almost didn't join this club. It is limited to 500 members, and I am member 479. Sure am glad I changed my mind!)

Breyer History Diva had some comments to make about him. But I disagree with her on one point. Here's what she says:

(from Breyer History Diva, September 20, 2012)

Well, at least I was somewhere in the ballpark: the fourth Vintage Club release is a Proud Arabian Stallion in Gloss Gray Appaloosa, named Harlequin.

Not exactly what I was expecting, but still cool. And it does look like they absolutely nailed the color this time, with darker gray (not black) legs, and black hooves. The smaller, finer spotting the earliest Gray Appaloosas were known for is also present, a nicely observed point. I don’t have either of the Old Molds (ha!) but I do have a Fighting Stallion of the same vintage with those same sort of spots:

Isn’t he neat? Most Gray Appaloosa Fighters have bigger, sparser and more random spotting patterns, so when of my roommates at an earlier BreyerFest pulled him out of her sales stash, I just had to snag him. He was a little bit pricey (back when) but I thought then - and still do - that he was worth the splurge.

You see a lot of variation on that release’s paint job, but the fine speckling is definitely on the scarcer side. It’s not something you even see in any of the earliest Breyer ephemera, either, including the 1961 insert pages.

They did get one little detail on Harlequin wrong, though: he has eyewhites, and most Gray Appaloosas back then didn’t. They do show up from time to time - I’ve seen a couple of the Appaloosa Mustangs sporting ‘em - but it’s very unusual, and the prices I’ve seen on those pieces tend to reflect that.

She talks about the piece having darker, not black legs, and she is referring to this same color across molds. So, I got mine out to examine them, and I have a different take on the leg color.

 My fighting stallion (it used to belong to my sister, Leslie, but she gave it to me in the late 1980s/early1990s) has mixed-sized spots and definitely black legs.

 So does my Family Arab Stallion (Sue Seese's venerable Apache Dancer! She sent him to me in the 1990s as a gift.) Clearly, those lower legs are black, not grey as Breyer History Diva calls them.

The Semi-Rearing Mustang came with white points, not black (or grey) ones. I love this piece.

Usually Breyer History Diva knows her stuff, and although she writes in a very self-absorbed manner, it is worth reading through that to get the salient, reliable hobby information. So, based on that,  I am wondering if my pieces might be variations.

Family Arab Information

(From Breyer History Diva, June 11, 2012)

Ah, so it is the Mustang after all: "Over 25 years for one color".

That’d be Buckskin, from 1961-1986. The Running Mare came in Bay from 1962-1987, but there’s some controversy over her start date, ranging from 1961 to 1963. I’m pretty sure it’s actually 1962, but that’s not something that’s become "common knowledge" yet, the way the start date on the Mustang is.

The FAS also came in Palomino for 25 years - from ca. 1961/2-1987, but that included a switch from Gloss to Matte, so I’m not sure if that counts. (Note: The Family Arabians were released in Charcoal and Palomino some time after the Bay, Alabaster, Gray Appaloosas and Woodgrains - possibly as late as 1962.)

I’d have no problem at all with an Appaloosa Performance Horse-style Mustang. None at all!

In other news, the flea market continues to be very good to me. Every year I think I’m not going to be able to find enough stuff to sell for BreyerFest, but somehow I always manage to. I’m even contemplating leaving a few things behind. Either that, or manage to find those missing hours in my day and actually get some stuff posted on MH$P.

Now the matter of the model that got me thinking:

An Alabaster Family Arabian Foal? Yeah, really.

First, he’s a true Semi-Gloss: he’s neither Gloss nor Matte. You can’t even describe it as the "High Satin" seen on some of the earliest Matte Finishes, most famously on the Bay Running Mare. You see this little baby in person, and you’d be hard pressed to call it anything other than Semi-Gloss.

It’s true that Breyer was very inconsistent with its Gloss Finish on their early Alabaster Family Arabians. Sometimes they were bright, thick and shiny, and other times they weren’t. There was a reason for this: they seem to have been designated as the " low budget" item of the 1960s. You’re not going to watch the quality control quite as closely with the lower budget items than with the higher ones. 

The pricelists, up through 1968, always listed them at a significantly lower price than all of the other available colors. From a ca. 1966/7 pricelist:

The sticker, and all of the models that the Foal came with, dates him to the 1966-1967 era. Around this same time, the Family Arabians transitioned from Gloss to Matte - exactly when is a mystery, though. A price list dated November 1968 makes note of the "attractive matte finish new for these items", but that doesn’t necessarily help us that much, other than give us a latest possible start date.

You’ll also note the Foal’s heavily grayed muzzle. What’s unusual about it - aside from the amount of gray - is that it’s gray at all.

You see, most Gloss Alabaster Foals (and Mares, for that matter) came with pinked muzzles and gray nostrils. (Family Arabian Stallions are no help in the matter, most of them came with gray muzzles from the start.) It’s the Matte Alabasters that tend to have the gray muzzles. (Just a little splotch of it between the nostrils, usually.)

I spent years trying - in vain - to find Matte Finish Alabaster Family Arabians with pink muzzles, on the assumption that the switch to Matte Finish occurred before the switch to grayed muzzles.

Looks like I was looking at the problem all backwards! 

Unless she’s something else altogether.

As stated above, the Foal was found in a group of models that date to ca. 1966-1967. Aside from some dust, dirt, and a little wear and tear on some of their stickers, they were in excellent to immaculate condition. The lot also came from a Chicago suburb, which as any astute hobbyist knows, is usually a big flashing red light: WARNING, FORMER BREYER EMPLOYEE COLLECTION AHEAD.

Throw in a piece in the lot that’s just a little more peculiar than average, and then you’ll know why I think that might be the case here, as well.

Mustang and Western Prancer

(From Breyer History Diva, May, 2012)

They were so plentiful on Sunday I could have easily had a very fine day with the stuff I left behind. This handsome boy was not among the unchosen:

Yep, a fancy old #87 Buckskin Mustang with a partial dorsal, gray points, nubbed hoof and unbelievably, eye pinking. I’ve seen pink shading around the eyes of some Fighting Stallions, but this is the first time I’ve seen it in person on a Traditional Mustang. (It’s there, trust me.) He has a few minor condition flaws, but honestly, he’s one of the nicest Buckskin Mustangs I’ve seen in a long while, and I’d keep him if I didn’t have horses coming out of my ears right now.

His friend will be sticking around, though:

The Charcoal variation of the Western Prancing Horse! Also in beautiful condition, with just a few minor issues. It’s hard to believe, I know, but up until now I had never really had one of these variations in my collection. 

It’s not a particularly hard one to find; the majority of older Smoke Western Prancing Horses are actually Charcoals, as is the one pictured in the 1963 Dealer’s Catalog. I just never found one that was the right combination of price and condition. 

And he’s such an early guy, too - I don’t doubt he’s from the first year or two of production, especially since his Mustang buddy is of the same vintage (but not among the earliest of his kind, though - remember, the earliest Buckskin Mustangs would have painted eyewhites. But he also came out a year or so before the Western Prancing Horse, so the chronology’s still good.)

I also noticed - comparing him to my many other Prancing Horses - that his saddle is exceptionally dark, compared to later WPH saddles; I have a Black Pinto one whose saddle is of a similar shade. Those of you trying to find saddles for your saddle-free Prancing Horses might want to take note of that, on the extremely remote chance I may judge collectibility someday. (This saddle is not a vintage replacement! No NAN card for you!)

Upgrading Models

(From Breyer History Diva, June, 2011)

One of the upgrades I did make was to my Gray Appaloosa Mustang. There’s not a huge difference between the two, when you do a casual, side-by-side comparison:


There was nothing really "wrong" with my original one, per se - good color, condition, nice spotting, and so on. I’ve liked him enough to keep him around for almost twenty years now, without even giving upgrading a second thought. He’s been a good, solid addition to my collection.

It wasn’t a matter of condition: both models have about the same level of minor condition flaws. My original - the slightly lighter one - has a slight roach back (a factory molding error), while the new guy has a strange (also factory) paint blooper on his right cheek.

The newer guy isn’t quite as charcoal-y as he is in the picture, but he’s definitely darker, and he has the cutest little spray of splash spots on his butt that you can’t quite see. It’s a little less common variation than the more extensive spotting on the old guy, but that’s not why I ultimately decided to "trade in." I just liked him a little more.

I’m not sure if the differences in the paint jobs represents an evolution, with one being earlier than the other, or if it’s only representative of the natural variation inherent in this style of painting. The two earliest references we have of the Gray Appaloosa Mustang - the 1961 Inserts, and the 1963 Dealer Catalog - show lighter models with more extensive spots. From the 1961 Insert Sheet:


It’s not something most hobbyists - even me - have given much thought to. No hobbyists were giving it any thought back when the model was in production in the early 1960s, either. In the earliest days of the hobby, hobbyists were more excited about having each other, than they were in the having the rarest, coolest or most unusual things.

Dark Mustang

(from Breyer History Diva, 2010)

There’s nothing overtly special about the next horse, except that he’s gorgeous. Behold my very dark buckskin #87 Rearing Mustang:


I paid a pretty penny for him - more than I thought I would have to pay, anyway - but some models just have to be had, y’know?

Added bonus: he has painted eyewhites, too. (A little hard to see, but trust me, they're there.) That’s a rare feature on early Buckskin Mustangs. It was my primary motivation in buying him; the fact that his color was so dark and rich was just a nice bonus.

Painted eyewhites were not a universal feature of all early Breyer paint jobs. Some models and some colors never had them, and some models rarely came without them, like the Brown Charcoal version of the Mustang. Beyond the Alabaster exceptions (they weren’t necessary!) there doesn’t appear to be much rhyme, reason or rule to early eyewhites.

At first glance, my dark Mustang could probably pass for Bay. There have been rumors of Bay Mustangs floating about for years, presumably based on the fact that the color was a part of Breyer’s limited color repertoire in the early 1960s. Surely they must have at least considered the idea, right?

I don’t doubt that there may be a few authentic, vintage test color bays - either gloss, or matte - out there somewhere. But I highly doubt that there was ever a regular run or special run of them, however brief, as I’ve speculated might be the case with the Gray Appaloosa Shetland Pony. At least with the Shetland Pony, there do appear to be a handful of authentic pieces out there. All of the "bay" Mustangs I’ve seen in person were either later tests or, like this boy, exceptionally dark buckskins.