Another Mustang Oddity

From another grungy box lot arises yet another weird Buckskin Mustang I feel compelled to keep….

He’s another one of those plastic oddities from the early 1970s – the surface physically feels like chalk, the plastic looks bright white in places, and he has some paint flaking characteristic of an Opaque White Plastic Chalky.

But he isn’t a White Plastic Chalky – he’s not opaque enough. And he’s not simply an exceptionally white model that hasn’t yellowed one iota from the day it was pulled from the mold, because he doesn’t have the translucency of standard, garden-variety Tenite, either.

(Most exceptionally white vintage models, I believe, were molded from fresh Tenite that was completely unadulterated by any regrind. The more regrind there is in the mix, the faster and more deeply a model will yellow.)

No, this fellow is something in between.

He was found in a collection with a couple of genuine Basecoat Chalkies and at least one other piece that might be of the same “stuff” (that one’s still grungy, so I can’t tell yet).

So he fits in with my earlier hypothesis, which is that at some point during the Chalky era, Breyer started mixing the Opaque White Chalky plastic with the standard Semi-Translucent White plastic to get this – kind of plastic I still struggle to find a proper name for. (Milky White? Bright White? Partial Chalky?)

So now I find myself in the possession of not one, but two oddball Buckskin Mustangs from the 1970s. Of all the crazy things you can find in box lots....

Dimensional Stability

I was doing a little cleanup in the office yesterday and noticed something on my research shelf of Family Arabian Foals:

The variable heights aren’t the big news here: most of us know that Cellulose Acetate is susceptible to shrinkage, both during and after molding. It’s more a quirk of the manufacturing process than a concern, unless it is also accompanied by paint discoloration, distortion, and oozing that indicate the model may be suffering from the dreaded “Shrinky Syndrome”.

What’s interesting is the composition of the tallest member of this little crew: according to his “B” mold mark, he’s molded from the Cellulose Propionate plastic.

It hadn’t occurred to me before, but that makes a lot of sense.

Breyer briefly experimented with this slightly different Tenite cellulosic plastic in the late 1970s and early 1980s, with mixed results. It was more widely available and had greater dimensional stability, but was also more brittle and difficult to finish/work after molding.

Better dimensional stability means less shrinkage and warping.

What that means for us is that this Foal is the most accurate depiction, dimensionally, of what the interior of the Family Arabian Foal’s mold actually looks like.

I now find myself almost intrigued enough by this idea to seek out other Propionate models and cross-compare them with their more standard Acetate counterparts.

Tailing Off on the FAF

Wrapping up/prepping up the last few pieces I intend to sell for the next couple of months, outside of stray relist items. There’s a slim chance I might purchase another collection soon - newer stuff, no Special Runs - but even if that comes to pass, I won’t have the time to prep and sell until at least March.

I have just about run out of all my accumulated packing materials anyway. (Empty space in the garage, hurray!)

I have been picking up a few pieces here and there, mostly via the local network of Salvation Army stores. Last Wednesday was a particularly memorable day - dealer promo cars, Elastolins, old German model train supplies and Aurora model kits from the 1960s! - but earlier in the week I was also very pleased to find this little fellow:

As soon as I saw his broken tail, I was positive that he was a "B Mold Mark" Era Foal, and he was:

The Cellulose Acetate variant that they went with during that era was a bit less flexible than the standard CA, and tail breaks are a common consequence of that.

I bought him because he was cheap, I felt sorry for him, and for research. From what I’ve been seeing online, it looks like I need to restart my Family Arabian Foal research program, and get all those mold variations straightened out. Not just for my sanity, but also to help satisfy the curiosity of my fellow hobbyists.

That he has the B mark helps fix his date - ca. 1979-1982/3 - and the state of the mold at that time. So he's going to stick around a while, as I make my way through all my FAFs again, point by point.

I’m somewhat less interested in retooling that occurred after that because it’s less necessary. The release dates for later (post-Palomino) releases are well-known, and any mold changes we’d find there would just be corroboration. I imagine there might be interest in discovering if there were any changes during the brief runs of the late 1980s/1990s Family Foals, but I already have enough on my plate as it is. I have to draw the line somewhere.

And there aren’t mold changes since 1997 that we know about, since FAF mold’s last release was the #995 Dark Chestnut Julian, during the brief "Bi-eye" Era.

The Mare has been missing since then too, but the Stallion still makes appearances. The most recent ones have been the Gold Charm Pinto Web SR back in 2009, the Chestnut Azhar in 2008-2009, and the recent Warehouse Reissue of Azhar.

While neither the Mare nor the Foal have the same fan base as the Stallion, with all the Reissues and Vintage-style releases that have been coming out lately, it’d be nice to see the whole family released together again one more time. Something either Glossy or Decoratory would be nice.

Brittleness

The flea market was very full and very busy on Sunday, but I didn’t buy much; ironically, the busier it gets, the less I find. I think it’s because on pretty days like that, the dealers try to bring out stuff tailored to tourists or occasional shoppers, and leave the more specialized things at home.

Though there was a life-sized Pink Panther plushie I briefly agonized over. I totally would have bought him if I had room in the car.

My best find was five yards of vintage homespun fabric for a dollar. (The catch? It smelled like a dirty ashtray.) The only horses I saw were super-common pieces and body-quality stuff, of which I bought a few, because I get anxious if I don't have a certain level of bodies in my body box. 

I was rather shocked at how white the plastic was on these two, especially since they appear to date from the early 1970s. Then I realized: silly, this was just slightly before the Chalky era. They might be some flavor of White they were experimenting with back then that is not the standard Translucent White.

The clean break at the base of the Western Prancing Horse is almost a classic indicator of that. I once bought a box lot with a star-faced Classic Quarter Horse Mare who had both ears cleanly broken off at the base, making that weird girl look even weirder.

Many of the nonstandard plastics of that era had a certain brittleness to them. This was probably due to some slight chemical variations from the name brand Tenite Breyer was used to using. The models themselves are not significantly less durable than those made of the regular plastic, but they are just a tad less flexible. In other words, when you drop them, there’s not much bending, just breaking - and the subsequent ricocheting off of the broken pieces in strange directions.

It also makes the customizing process a little more challenging, since the plastic doesn’t behave the way we are accustomed to. This brittleness reappeared during the "B" mold mark era - ca. 1979-1983 - when Breyer switched over to Cellulose Acetate Propionate, because of availability issues with plain old Cellulose Acetate.

Brittleness can also occur due a lack of plasticizers in the plastic itself - the stuff that gives the plastic its flexibility. This can occur either due to age, or a too much regrind added to the mix. Some of the plasticizers evaporate during the molding process, so reground plastic will have less than fresh, or virgin plastic.

Both of these bodies are most definitely bodies, and I have no time to fix them up before Kentucky, regardless.

Acetate, Butyrate and Propionate - Oh My!

As I mentioned in my previous post, Breyers haven’t always been made of Tenite Acetate. I’m not talking about the Stablemates and Little Bit/Paddock Pals, both of whom made the transition to ABS (acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene) some time ago. There have been a couple of times in the past when Breyer used other types of Cellulose Acetate.

The first known incidence of this is from the early to mid-1970s: the Chalky Era. Since Tenite was expensive, and in short supply, Breyer went overseas to purchase the off-brand Cellulose Acetate they needed to continue production. It might not have been "Tenite," but it was still the same stuff chemically - more or less. It’s not the color this stuff came in that made the difference: the pigments used to color Cellulose Acetate have little effect on the plastic’s basic properties. It’s the formula itself: every manufacturer has their own, subtly different recipe for Cellulose Acetate.

Because each brand of Cellulose Acetate is slightly different chemically, it’s generally not a good idea to start mixing them together - just like it’s not a good idea to mix different brands of the same kind of paint together. So the brittleness some Chalkies are known for may not just be a result of a different "recipe," it could also be the result of a slightly incompatible regrind mix.

In the late 1970s, Breyer again was forced, due to cost, to switch to a different type of Cellulose Acetate. This time it was Cellulose Acetate Propionate (CAP.) CAP is most definitely not compatible with plain old Cellulose Acetate: the literature from the Eastman Chemical makes it very clear that mixing the two is a very bad idea. (Oddly, it can be mixed, to some degree, with the third form of Tenite - Cellulose Acetate Butyrate, or CAB.)

The "B" mold mark was added to molds during this time period - ca. 1979-1982 - to help distinguish the Propionate-molded models from the Acetate-molded ones, and prevent regrinding accidents. It’s assumed that the "B" mark was added to most Breyer molds in production during that time period - but we don’t know for certain. I’ve been casually keeping track of that data point just to confirm or verify. And who knows? Maybe a surprise or two will show up. (I keep track of all sorts of crazy data points. It’s a wonder I get anything done at all!)

But why did they use a "B" mark - shouldn’t it have been "P" for Propionate, instead? I wonder if they originally decided to go with the Butyrate form of Tenite instead, and only switched to the Propionate at the last minute. The molding properties of the Butyrate form of Tenite are more similar to the Acetate than the Propionate.

It’s probably only a coincidence - maybe it was just a "B for Breyer" thing, or a random mold stamp they picked up. Or maybe it was just an artifact of their internal production process: they may have simplified things for the workers by referring to the two different plastics by letter, rather than by name. If Acetate was "Plastic A," then Propionate could have become "Plastic B." No clue.

In general, both Propionate and Butyrate are more dimensionally stable, and can hold detail better than Acetate. However, these properties come at a price: less flexibility. That lack of flexibility results in this sort of thing happening more often:


A lot could have been done to manipulate Propionate and Butyrate to behave more like Acetate - either by changing the plastic formula (adding or subtracting plasticizers) or recalibrating the molding process (manipulating the heat, the pressure, or the injection speed.) It must have been too much of a hassle: they opted to go back to Acetate once it was feasible to do so.

While most molds had the B mold mark removed by 1982, it lingered on for years afterwards on a small number of molds, most notably the Rearing Stallion. Some molds seem to be more rare than others with the B mark, but I don’t know of many hobbyists who collect them the way, say, Chalkies are collected.

As far as I know, Traditional-scale Breyers are still made from Cellulose Acetate - though I am unsure if it is specifically the Tenite brand. I haven’t seen the word "Tenite" in any of the promotional literature lately, but that doesn’t necessarily mean anything. As the saying goes, the absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence.

The Unique Properties of Cellulose Acetate

You’ve probably heard by now about the demise of Giant Butter Jesus. The drive to Kentucky this year will not be the same without the dairy-like Divinity’s presence. You would have thought, though, that for the amount of time and money they invested in him that the church would have gone the extra mile and upgraded him to sturdier stuff than wood and styrofoam.

(Big Lex is going to be fiberglass, right? Right?)

Now, onto the stuff our stuff is made of: Tenite.

Tenite is the brand name for a family of cellulosic plastics created by the Eastman Chemical Company of Kingsport, Tennessee. It was formerly known as the Tennessee Eastman Corporation, a subsidiary of the Eastman Kodak Company. There are actually three different forms of Tenite: Cellulose Acetate (CA), Cellulose Acetate Butyrate (CAB), and Cellulose Acetate Propionate (CAP.) Breyers are usually made of the Cellulose Acetate form of Tenite; that’s not always been the case, but we’ll get to that in the second part of this discussion.

Cellulose Acetate was developed as a more stable and less flammable substitute for Cellulose Nitrate, or Celluloid. It was first used to manufacture photographic film and textiles: it’s the stuff Rayon is made of. The solid, moldable form of Cellulose Acetate was put on the market in 1932, and it basically made the plastic injection molding industry possible: prior to that, most plastics were either extruded, cast, or formed by hand, which made mass production labor intensive and time consuming.

Other plastics hit the market not long afterwards, including Tenite II, or Cellulose Acetate Butyrate, in 1938. Other companies came up with their own varieties of Cellulose Acetate, often with their own unique brand names.

Here’s the cover to a promotional brochure for Tenite, ca. 1940; one could easily imagine it sitting on someone’s desk at the Breyer Molding Company way back when. There were other booklets available on molding, and one on its properties/specifications, but I don’t happen to have either one in my archives - yet.


The brochure is lavishly illustrated; although we’re still several years before the model horse boom, there are some equine-themed items among the products displayed, including Bergen cowboys, and a Lone Ranger Yo-yo!



The brochure goes into great detail about what an ideal material Tenite is for toy manufacturing:

"Tenite is also used for game pieces and toys. Chessmen, mahjong pieces, and poker chips may be injection molded complete in only a few seconds, eliminating hand-carving, machining, and polishing operations. Toy trains, airplanes, and automobiles are safer and less expensive to produce in Tenite than similar articles made by swedging nitrocellulose sheeting. Jackstones, toy soldiers, whistles, and babies’ teethers of Tenite are practically unbreakable, light in weight, and colorfully attractive."

Little wonder why Breyer decided to stick to Tenite when they began to mass-produce the Western Horse, eh? (Well, there weren’t a lot of other plastics to choose from, either - might as well go with what you know.)

Though the original form of Tenite has largely been eclipsed by more modern plastics, and by other forms of Tenite, there’s a reason why it’s still the go-to material for the model horse industry: it feels good! Or, as the brochure also explains:

"Because it is a low conductor of heat and takes an exceptionally smooth finish, molded Tenite is very pleasant to the touch."

It’s no coincidence that the other uses for Cellulose Acetate today include toothbrushes, eyeglass frames, and tool handles: all of these surfaces come in close, regular contact with the skin.

The text also notes that "in certain formulas, Tenite is virtually odorless and tasteless." An important consideration back then, but amusing today: isn’t the aroma part of the charm? Who among us hasn’t taken a long, deep sniff after deboxing a brand new arrival? I know I’m not the only one who’d be willing to buy a "New Breyer Horse" scented car air freshener.

Bacon Resistant, and Mayonnaise Proof!

You wouldn’t think that it’d take over two years to paint and wallpaper three and a half rooms, would you?

Since it probably won’t be until the end of this year before this process is apparently done, I’m going to have to soldier on without access to some of my research materials. They’re not in any apparent danger: I literally cannot reach them without moving half the contents of the room. And I can’t do that, lest I anger the gods of painting and wallpapering.

I’ll focus my attention today on one of the documents I do have access to: it’s PP-101B, Tenite Acetate - Chemical Resistance. If you want a copy for yourself, it’s available as a PDF from Eastman, the company that manufactures Tenite. I’ll give you a moment to find it via your search engine of choice, if you’d like to read along.

(Trust me, it’s worth it!)

Most of us who’ve had any extended experience with Breyers in general know that while they’re durable, they’re not indestructible. They can yellow, warp, stain, shrink, crack, ooze and all sorts of unpleasant and unattractive things. Some of it is beyond our control - the result of a bad batch of plastic, too much regrind in the mix, machine (or human) error. And other times, it’s a previous owner’s bad decisions that lead to the damage - chain smokers, we’re looking at you!

Over the years many of us have developed techniques to fix some of the more fixable damage. If I happened to have an otherwise unsalvageable horse, I wouldn’t hesitate to subject it to whatever I happened to find around the house. (Within reason, and usually in the garage.)

Silly us. All we really had to do was ask the company that made it.

This document lists several hundred chemicals, commercial and household products, and what the "Observed Condition of the Plastic" was after being exposed or immersed in it for a given period of time.

Most of the stuff that was tested was of an industrial nature - hydrocarbons, acids, esters and alcohols that most of us wouldn’t be keeping anywhere near the house or garage in the first place. The results for some of those tests are quite predictable, too: it dissolves in a solution of 10% Nitric Acid within a week. Duh!

Some of the results were a surprise: apparently mothballs (naphthalene) are not good things to keep around your horses. The results "Showed considerable plasticizer exhudation" after only 24 hours. Yikes - that sounds like oozing to me! Though I have to admit that my curiosity is now piqued; I’m tempted to toss a body in a sealed box with some dollar store mothballs to see what would happen.

The most amusement comes from the "Commercial and Natural Products" section. Everything from Jet Fuel to Coffee Grounds was tested. Toothpaste, Horseradish, Chocolate Syrup, Lard and Blood(!), too.

The reason for this eclectic mix of test subjects is that Tenite Acetate is also used in food and chemical handling and storage - the machinery that processes it, and the containers that it’s stored in. You’ll be happy to know that if you accidentally lose a model in a vat of mayonnaise, or drop it in a bowl of bacon drippings, it’ll be fine. (Unless you happen to have dogs in the house.)

Not so fine: Lipstick, Kool-Aid, Lysol, Lighter Fluid, Budweiser Lager, and Vicks Decongestant. (Sound like an interesting party to me!) Catsup, Mustard and most Gasolines also leave stains.

I could go on - the document is 13 pages long, and full of win. Who would have thought technical documentation could be so entertaining?