variants in the old paint variant of giraffe 14028?

We recently got a second piece of the old paint variant of giraffe 14028. Both have been produced in Portugal, one from mal 1 and one from mal 2 resulting in differences in length of upperlip (see last photo) and height of the models. But that is not our dilemma.

When comparing the two models, we noticed differences in colour of the markings, but we are not sure if they are common production differences due to them being handpainted, or real variants in colour of the markings as to be seen in the catalogue photos over the years that model has been in production.

Does anybody recognize these differences in his/her old variant of this model? Which one(s) do you have?
Model 1: black knees & inside ears & horns, reddish (lighter) mane, head somewhat more pink than the body
Model 2: grey knees & inside ears & horns, brownish (darker) mane

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

notice the colours of the knee markings:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

notice the colours of the inside ears and the horns:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

notice the colours of the mane:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

this shows the diffences in length of upperlip, due the mal (?):
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Very interesting find! Congrats! I do not have this figure, unfortunately.

Animal_Figures_4U wrote:

Very interesting find! :cheers:Congrats! I do not have this figure, unfortunately.

Same here!! What a charming beauty!   

do you have both these, too?

Valinor wrote:

do you have both these, too?

I don't have them, like 4U said, unfortunately   

Nice catch for you!

I suspect that Toy Animal Wiki can help you. You can find there some variations from Susanne's collection.
Try to check here and here!

The one in the wiki is the one with the grey horns and ears.

If that's one owned by Susanne, then maybe she can enlighten us on the colour of the knee markings on that particular giraffe?

In ours, the knees of the one with the grey horns and ears are grey too, yet the mane is darker than that of the giraffe with the black horns etc.

hi here are my variations and of the bull 14099
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Your lighter "old" 14028 (middle one in your first 2 pictures) is the same as our light one with the grey markings, so that's probably not coincidence or bleaching of the black, as we contemplated it might be   

Funny is, that this model 14028 started out as a male, and as of 1994 it became a female   

Great that you have what we think is the earliest variant of the later model bull 14099 (in your bottom 2 pictures)!     We are still looking for that one, but haven't been so lucky as to find it yet.

Valinor wrote:

Funny is, that this model 14028 started out as a male, and as of 1994 it became a female   
yet.

That's an interesting detail once it is actually a female. Maybe Schleich noticed the mistake and changed it.
1994 was when last Classics were discontinued and Schleich started working in a more serious way making dogs in 1:12 scale and dinosaurs in 1:32 scale. :)

Roger wrote:

Valinor wrote:

Funny is, that this model 14028 started out as a male, and as of 1994 it became a female   
yet.

That's an interesting detail once it is actually a female. Maybe Schleich noticed the mistake and changed it.
1994 was when last Classics were discontinued and Schleich started working in a more serious way making dogs in 1:12 scale and dinosaurs in 1:32 scale. :)

Roger, the Classics sub-range 12901-12908 were introduced in 1996 and retired in 1997...   

schleich61 wrote:

Roger wrote:

Valinor wrote:

Funny is, that this model 14028 started out as a male, and as of 1994 it became a female   
yet.

That's an interesting detail once it is actually a female. Maybe Schleich noticed the mistake and changed it.
1994 was when last Classics were discontinued and Schleich started working in a more serious way making dogs in 1:12 scale and dinosaurs in 1:32 scale. :)

Roger, the Classics sub-range 12901-12908 were introduced in 1996 and retired in 1997...   

   As far as I am informed, 12901-12908 does not belong to the Classics, but to "die Kleinen", ( mistakenly ?) translated to "Cute Creatures"   

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

SUSANNE wrote:

schleich61 wrote:

Roger wrote:

Valinor wrote:

Funny is, that this model 14028 started out as a male, and as of 1994 it became a female   
yet.

That's an interesting detail once it is actually a female. Maybe Schleich noticed the mistake and changed it.
1994 was when last Classics were discontinued and Schleich started working in a more serious way making dogs in 1:12 scale and dinosaurs in 1:32 scale. :)

Roger, the Classics sub-range 12901-12908 were introduced in 1996 and retired in 1997...   

   0]]As far as I am informed, 12901-12908 does not belong to the Classics, but to "die Kleinen", ( mistakenly ?) translated to "Cute Creatures[/b]"   

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Yes, Susanne, I agree that they are 'die kleinen' figurines, but I was under the impression that those are considered a sub-range
of the overall Classics line. Both the Hackstein and Strassberger reference websites list these as such:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Well, I do not insist. I only know from the Schleich catalogue '97  - and from Gascher's  

They are nice, little models, but terribly poor quality rubber ..quite different from other models.

SUSANNE wrote:

Well, I do not insist. I only know from the Schleich catalogue '97  - and from Gascher's  

They are nice, little models, but terribly poor quality rubber ..quite different from other models.

Well, if it's in Gascher's as such, it simply must be true...(you knew that was coming!)...   Actually, I'm
not sure what the facts are here; for all I know, you and Frank O. may be correct. We could send a letter to
Mr. Norbert at Schleich, but he has proven to be a font of misinformation (disinformation?) in the past...   

My perception, as a non traditional Schleich collector, is that the 96/97 die Cleinen series, are a kind of swan song of Classics era.
As Schleich at this time were more focused on realistic figures the probably released these to celebrate the end of a long era of Classics.
They share a similar design with previous Classics though I don't know how they look together and in real, so my judgement as little value. They also share the numbers starting in 12xxx with previous collections.
So, although I don't say it in my previous comment, I share the way of seeing Classics collection with Phil!


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Original collection (1965-1991)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Later Classics (1991-1994)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Die Kleinen 1997

I surrender completely  

Are the rest of the "Cute Creatures" then also Classics ?   

Roger wrote:

My perception, as a non traditional Schleich collector, is that the 96/97 die Cleinen series, are a kind of swan song of Classics era.
As Schleich at this time were more focused on realistic figures the probably released these to celebrate the end of a long era of Classics.
They share a similar design with previous Classics though I don't know how they look together and in real, so my judgement as little value. They also share the numbers starting in 12xxx with previous collections.
So, although I don't say it in my previous comment, I share the way of seeing Classics collection with Phil!

I never thought of it that way, Roger, but it does seem quite plausible to me...  

I am glad I said something plausible when refering to Schleich!

SUSANNE wrote:

Are the rest of the "Cute Creatures" then also Classics ?   

Which ones?? ... Princess?

SUSANNE wrote:

I surrender completely  

Are the rest of the "Cute Creatures" then also Classics ?   

When Roger and I agree, what other choice than surrender is there?...  
For our next magic trick, we will agree on the methodology and then use it to
reverse "global warming"  

As to the others, I don't know for sure. They don't have the 12xxx numbers
that all of the rest of the Classics have, so maybe they are not. Maybe Peter
or Jürgen, or even Torben or Mr. Strassberger can enlighten us...    

schleich61 wrote:

SUSANNE wrote:

I surrender completely  

Are the rest of the "Cute Creatures" then also Classics ?   

When Roger and I agree, what other choice than surrender is there?...  
For our next magic trick, we will agree on the methodology and then use it to
reverse "global warming"  

Phil, our disagreements are "classics" and when we rarely agree, we are "Cute Creatures". It explains their contrasting longevity and why there's a gap between them.

Roger wrote:

schleich61 wrote:

SUSANNE wrote:

I surrender completely  

Are the rest of the "Cute Creatures" then also Classics ?   

When Roger and I agree, what other choice than surrender is there?...  
For our next magic trick, we will agree on the methodology and then use it to
reverse "global warming"  

:lol:Phil, our disagreements are "classics" and when we rarely agree, we are "Cute Creatures".  It explains their contrasting longevity and why there's a gap between them.

If you and I are now beginning to resemble Schleich figurines, thank Heavens they are classics and not cartoon characters (or braided ponies)...