He was one of the 1986 G1 Autobot Mini-Vehicles:

https://tfarchive.com/toys/catalogues/generationone_catalogue/86a_catalog.jpg

On "https://tfwiki.net/wiki/Hubcap_(G1)#Notes", it says, "Despite his availability with the rest of the '86 Mini-Vehicle assortment, Hubcap was completely absent from contemporary Western Generation 1 fiction. No character model was drawn up for him, and he was not included in either the Generation 1 cartoon or the Marvel comic. He was even missing from Marvel's The Transformers Universe bio series, despite having a full-length bio written by Bob Budiansky. The reason for this omission is unknown."

Has any info been provided since this info was posted?

- Rodimus_2316

On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 2:16:53 PM UTC-7, Rodimus_2316 wrote:
> He was even missing from Marvel's The Transformers Universe bio series, despite having a full-length bio written by Bob Budiansky. The reason for this omission is unknown."
>
> Has any info been provided since this info was posted?

In this interview he touches on why some characters were omitted from the TF:U series:

http://epicmarvelpodcast.com/interview-budiansky2/

Basically he states that they had more profiles than pages available so they had to pick the most relevant ones and some got left out. Hubcap was just not notable enough to make the cut I guess.

On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 3:16:53 PM UTC-6, Rodimus_2316 wrote:

> Has any info been provided since this info was posted?

We know that Bob Budiansky wrote full-length profiles for the characters, which were later condensed down into the shortened biography we got on the Hasbro toy packaging. So, the fact that Hubcap got a full write-up is, in and of itself, neither surprising, nor indicative of any plans regarding the character. The Omnibots, Deluxe Autobots, and Deluxe Insecticons also got write-ups, but that doesn't mean there were plans for them to appear in the comics or cartoon. It just means they were toys that existed, and Bob was doing his job by creating names and personalities for them.

It's somewhat more telling that Hubcap does at least get a mention in an early "Five Faces of Darkness" script. So, the writers were at least aware of his existence and, at one stage, did plan to include him.

My take on things is that somebody took one look at him, went "oh, that's just Cliffjumper," and ignored him for that reason. After all, a yellow Cliffjumper toy had already been sold as part of the Transformers toy line in 1984-85, so upon a cursory visual inspection, Hubcap would not have looked like a new 1986 product to anybody with a passing familiarity with the product line. Also, we know for a fact that Hasbro mistook Hubcap for Cliffjumper at least once—the 1987 mail-order form, which ostensibly included older 1984-85 toys like Thundercracker, Mirage, etc. had a selection of Mini-Autobots for sale that included Warpath, Cosmos, or "Cliffjumper," but in fact pictured Hubcap in the catalog instead (and this is who you received in the mail).

Hubcap was also the sole 1986 character to make it into the initial Transformers: Generation 2 line-up. In a toy line filled with classic, popular characters like Optimus Prime and Bumblebee and Jazz and Starscream, why in the world would they throw in an obscure 1986 Mini-Autobot with no media appearances? Probably because somebody at Hasbro had wanted Cliffjumper, not realizing the molds had been permanently modified in 1986 to create the new Microchange cars. (When we finally did get a Cliffjumper "reissue" in the form of the Fun-4-All licensed keychain, it was obvious his newer Hubcap parts had required some retro-tooling back to their original Cliffjumper configuration.)

I think Hubcap was probably forgotten because of this. If he and Tailgate had kept their original planned colors, with Hubcap in white and Tailgate in yellow, perhaps it would have been a different story.

Zob (maybe we'd all be sitting here talking about the mail-order version of Bumblebee instead...?)

I also feel like the name 'Hubcap' was terrrible-Budiansky's first dud. Car parts as names were cool if they captured imagination like Gears or Pipes. But a hubcap isn't really a cool car part. They would weaponize the dumb name concept later on with Mudflap but here they just stumbled into it and it killed the toy's popularity. So the toy was sadled with a reused color scheme and a bad name working against it to make the most forgettable character ever. Had it been named 'Carrito Fantastico' and had racing stripes it may have had a chance.

On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 1:41:18 PM UTC-6, evil.king.m...@gmail.com wrote:

> I also feel like the name 'Hubcap' was terrrible-Budiansky's first dud. Car parts as names were cool if they captured imagination like Gears or Pipes. But a hubcap isn't really a cool car part.

I think it's a metaphor for his personality. A hubcap is a clean, shiny piece of metal that hides all the ugly, grimy lugnuts underneath. The character is kind of the same way. He acts like he's your best friend, but it's a facade that hides his true, unpleasant tendencies to screw you over as soon as it's convenient for him. Hubcap wears a mask in the same way that a car wears hubcaps to mask what's underneath.

I think Gears is a far worse name. Sure, it can describe the mechanical inner workings of the character, but that's certainly not unique to Gears. He might as well be called Circuits or Wires. Honestly, I thought Budiansky took one look at the toy, thought the toy's notched wheels looked like the teeth in a set of gears, and went from there. But, that's an aspect that's also shared with Brawn. Also, the look of the gear-like wheels was completely eliminated when he made the transition to media, so it's really only the G1 toy itself for whom the name makes sense.

I don't think 1986 was a year for creative names. Even as a kid, I was insulted by names like Eject and Rewind. They were literally just the names of the buttons on a tape recorder. We could have easily gotten Pause and Fast Forward.

Zob ("and here come the exciting Autobot cassettes, Stop and Play! New, from Hasbro!")

On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 1:48:18 PM UTC-7, Zobovor wrote:

> I think it's a metaphor for his personality. A hubcap is a clean, shiny piece of metal that hides all the ugly, grimy lugnuts underneath.

This is a really well thought out analysis and probably was Budiansky's thought process behind the name. What's overlooked here is that the whole point of a hubcap is to protect the lugnuts from the elements. If there's grime underneath then the hubcap has failed. I guess this is the tragedy of the character-his nuts were clean once. In war a robot's nuts are bound to get dirty. It would be nice to have a Transformer whose function is therapist or spiritual healer who can go around mending all the other robots' mental traumas. It could be named Lugnutbrush. The line for their services would be really, really long with all the mental patients on both sides.

> Honestly, I thought Budiansky took one look at the toy, thought the toy's notched wheels looked like the teeth in a set of gears, and went from there. But, that's an aspect that's also shared with Brawn.

Gears and Brawn are definitely the bottom of the barrel for the '84 names. They seem to have the least effort put into them. I can imagine Budiansky collapsing on the sofa after Thanksgiving dinner '83 having endured a long weekend of coming up with names and personalities for all the robots and then eating turkey and dealing with family-but wait! What are those lumps he just sat on? It's two more minicars! So he proceeds with Gears as you imagine, then there's the little brown jeep thing and Bob keeps staring at it thinking-it's brown. Brown. Brown-wait! That's it! Just swap a letter! Brawn!

One thing Gears and Brawn have going for them is brevity. They are short like the toys they describe. I feel like the multi syllable minicar names that ended with -er were almost too good for the minis and should have been used on future deluxes. Minis would best have been served by one syllable names.

On Thursday, September 1, 2022 at 12:19:57 AM UTC-7, ...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 31, 2022 at 2:16:53 PM UTC-7, Rodimus_2316 wrote:
> > He was even missing from Marvel's The Transformers Universe bio series, despite having a full-length bio written by Bob Budiansky. The reason for this omission is unknown."
> >
> > Has any info been provided since this info was posted?
> In this interview he touches on why some characters were omitted from the TF:U series:
>
> http://epicmarvelpodcast.com/interview-budiansky2/
>
> Basically he states that they had more profiles than pages available so they had to pick the most relevant ones and some got left out. Hubcap was just not notable enough to make the cut I guess.

How do I get to that interview from that link?

Thanks.

- Rodimus2316

On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 12:01:41 PM UTC-6, Rodimus_2316 wrote:

> How do I get to that interview from that link?

Here's a download link:

https://tinyurl.com/3mf6fk7w

Not sure how I feel about that interview. Bob Budiansky doesn't remember all the details about what he worked on at Marvel, which is understandable, but the guy interviewing him wasn't very knowledgeable, either. There were things that I was sort of expecting one or the other of them to say, but neither of them said it, because nobody knew what they were talking about.

Zob (got a McDonald's Changeables toy I didn't own before, and I'm happier about it than I have any right to be)