Hong Kong Hollow Horses - Big Ears (Type 1 and 2?)

The first post on the new Blog and the first 'Hong Kong Hollow-horse' post has been chosen as both an example of what is to come - vis-à-vis the exploration of a specific 'type' of figure/set/accessory - and as also an example of how with these small scale HK subjects it is often the exceptions that prove the rule, in that this is a 'set' with no carded or bagged examples to confirm it, yet is easy to sort from the mass of similar products . . . despite a number of remaining queries or question-marks.

My sample, after 30/40 years of serious collecting is still very small, and with the sub-division into two 'types', each example is that much smaller! The fact that the sample is so small points to these being from gum balls or Christmas cracker inserts or similar sources of cheap 'novelty' items.

Because my study of these Hong Kong smallies is empirical (as the bulk of the posts on this blog will be), the lack of evidence for these 'going together' would normally be a real problem, leaving them labeled - by me - as "provisional" or "80% sure", however, they are the exception that proves the rule; in being so different to all other hollow-horsed Cowboys & Indians, we can say with some confidence that they do go together.

You will come to know (if you visit the Blog regularly!) that my naming of these horses is a simplistic affair, basically consisting of my identifying a physical trait of the horse, its pose or its sculpting and using that as a title! This horse (these horses . . . read on!) is called 'Big Ears', as it has really big ears!

The horse is probably quite late on the HK timeline, dating from the early 1970's, or very late '60's at the earliest and while being copied from earlier examples (probably Giant 'Smoothies') has had large lugs added by the sculptor or mould-tool engraver. The above are my entire 'Type 1' sample.

My 'Type 2' horses shot gives the game away: unlike all the other horses in this section of the HK small-scale universe, the figures plug into the top of the horse through the saddle, not through the sides.

Although there ARE holes in the sides as well, and they actually provoke the difference between type 1 and type 2; so it's all a bit fuzzy - but that's HK manufacture for you! However the hole in the saddle and the protrusions on the figures tie them together in a way the other Hong Kong hollow hoses often can't be.

The figures with their clearly, err, ahem . . . 'suggestive' locating-studs . . . "Studs" being a particularly apt moniker in this case! I am sure these are all one horse type, but using the self-imposed rules on empirical evidence, I have to keep them separated as the figures that have come with the type 1's are different poses from the figures that have come with the type 2's, and until a/some cross-over figure/horse combination/s comes-in (as a 'clean' sample), they will remain nominally or provisionally two types.

But it's clear from the above that poses are [likely to prove to be] the six ex-Giant mounted poses (Spell-check offered me 'mounted posse'!), with one missing; the single six-shooter cowboy pose. I think I have a few of these elsewhere in the unknown box, the answer may lie there, but they are in storage!

It's equally clear that the figures are almost certainly from one set (or 'type'), with most having the twin 'jiggets' or barbs down the shaft and rough sculpting of the locating-stud, with smoothed-off/blobby face and body detailing along with a similar colour pallet - the metallic-blue is relatively unique for these Wild West mounted types, while unrealistically coloured horses are not that common either, for both types to have the same yellow horse is another clue.

Two of my three type 1's, you can see the large ears on the heads, however, following my naming system this horse could have just as easily ended-up being called 'Pinched Nose' as a feature of both types (which is another clue to them being really one type) is a heat-shrink type blemish which 'squeezes' the nose.

The ears on the pink one are bigger than the ears on the yellow one; different mould cavities, but they are all bigger or more obvious than the ears on all other HK horses of this pose, and laid-back more horizontal than other obvious ears - on the 'Jogging' and 'Mexican' horses and some 'Smoothies' they can be as large but more vertical to the forehead.

This also introduces one of the constants of these posts - the 'both sides of the horse' photograph, which will always be cropped to a constant 930x355 (pixels?) in Microsoft's Picasa, which will distort size-comparison (where there is a marked difference) slightly, but will show detail well as enlarged images and allow them (the images) to be stacked, blocked or collaged in any comparative file or folder Blog-followers/visitors care to store them in.

The type 2's, again one of each ear size, and the reason for the two types: These have had the redundant holes in the flanks moved back and the original hole filled in. Now the first question is why? Why - in the first place - have redundant holes at all and why then move them?

Well, go back two pictures and take another look at the figures . . . you will see there are vestigial locating-stud marks down by the ankles (lower than the shin-level studs of a lot - but not all - of these figures; as we will see in the future), however you will also notice from the two paired figure poses that the removal point is identical on each figure, they were either removed by a guillotine while still on the runner (in a jig or frame of some kind) or removed from the mould-tool; it would require a microscope to decide which is the right call but my feeling is changes to the tool rather than cutting.

The fact that some holes are so far back that the figures would be tipped-forwards at an alarmingly unrealistic angle, were they to be fitted into the holes by the missing locating-studs when added to the fact that the new crotch-based locating-studs are very crude (in finish as well as posture!) points to the answer . . .

. . . clearly something went very wrong at the final design/mould-tooling stage, and a quick solution to a complete redesign was to drill a new hole in the saddle of the horse (which could be done by the engineers who drill the release-pins in the final stages of preparing the mould tools, only using a fixed-pin) and the addition of the new locating studs on the figures - which could probably be done by the same guys, who may have been responsible for the miss-drilled flank-holes anyway?

The other constant of these Hong Kong Hollow-horse posts will be the 'Pelt' graphic. This should be familiar to readers of One Inch Warrior magazine, but has been refined over the years, although it's still not quite as right as I'd like it to be!

It represents a horse from the underside/inside but cut and flattened, with the head to the left and the tail to the right, and older versions will sometimes be scanned-in - this one was a blank scan, detailed in Picasa with keyboard strokes. A blank will be posted on a separate 'Pelt' page above for those who wish to use it to help sort their HK hollow-horsed stuff.

As a lot of the indentifying features of all these horses are the mould-tool marks or actual Hong Kong, Singapore, HK (&etc...) marks only visible on the insides of the legs, or within the hollow body, these graphics will help identify the horses in your 'unknown' pile and the annotation will always be what you would see (through an eye-glass in my case!) as you look at the original . . . if sometimes simplified.

===============================================================

But is it Giant?

No. Not even slightly, almost certainly from the novelty-end of the toy market, it's likely to prove to be from either (or both) gum ball machines and/or Christmas crackers, as yet I haven't seen it on a vintage vending-machine window card, but it may turn-up on one eventually!

As Christmas cracker prizes it would have been in a heat-welded or folded/stapled polythene bag of 3-5 or 6 figures, sometimes pre-attached to their horses and - in such a format - is equally likely to have been marketed to lesser/independent cereal brands (for which - with this set - there is no evidence at present), sweet or 'lucky' bags and as crane-machine prizes in sea-side amusement arcades.

The same small bag might be found in larger (higher priced) gum balls, but as single assemblies (one figure/horse combination) would have been found in the smaller gum balls in the bottom price range, which by the early 1970's was 5¢ or 2p, but earlier had been 1 or 2¢ (½ or 1d), Giant type 'H.K.'-marked astronauts were sold singly in 1¢ machines.

Of course - the contents of a 1968 1¢ machine became those of a 5¢ machine in the 1970's, a 10¢ machine in the late 1980's and are now to be found in 25-cent machines!

As I've hinted at above, I'm pretty confident these two types will prove to be simply 'Big Ears' one day.