For gallery: 802 Breakfast Cup, correct 744 large saucer, different Fiesta Gaye backstamp, 4610 vit jumbo saucer

Edits to correct:
The shape number for this big cup is 802 (not 832).

When I bid these on trademe I must have been dreaming as I thought I was getting a 781. Only when I reviewed the listing did I see it was an 802, which is even better.

for gallery: 802 Breakfast Cup
This is a shape match for the cup identified by Portage as the 802.
http://www.nzmuseums.co.nz/account/3384/object/488193
My example appears to be slightly bigger than the one at Portage.

77mm H x 97 OD x 46 OD footring
75mm H x 94 OD are the Portage measurements.

handle, size and shape comparison with an early 781 cup

for gallery: correct 744 large saucer
We do have a picture in the gallery for 744 but it is wrong and was my mistake as I thought it was the same shape as the earthenware jumbo sauce 4017 (which pairs with the 3016 father's cup 14.7.65 often referred to as the jumbo cup). The shapes are quite different. (There is no three digit equivalent for the 4017 as the saucer was developed for a new cup shape and shares a mould with the vitrified 4610, saucer for the vit jumbo cup 3613, and vit coffee can 3618.)

comparison with an 805 saucer: 744 at left
(lower images are a single photo)

dimensions of my 744:
23mm H x 156 OD x 51 ID cup well x 45 footring
Portage has three different sets of dimensions for saucer number 744:
25 x 155, 22 x 153, 26 x 157.
http://www.nzmuseums.co.nz/esearch/object?a=3384&q=744

dimensions for the matching Fiesta Gaye 805 saucer:
23 mm H x 146 OD x 47 ID cup well x 42 footring
dimensions for 4017 Jumbo saucer (not shown):
20mm H x 149 OD x 52 ID cup well x 48 footring

The ring of the 802 cup actually fits within the well of the 805 but it looks silly!

for gallery: different Fiesta Gaye backstamp.
We do have a Fiesta Gaye backstamp in the gallery but not this one.

I have photographed it with a slight upward slope as this is how it appears on the crown and star backstamp.

See also:
https://www.newzealandpottery.net/t4590-fiesta-gaye-trio#16287

for gallery: 4610 saucer
Ev, there is still no 4610 saucer in the gallery. You have confirmed it is the correct shape elsewhere. The Reflections is the only one identified on the forum so far.

Here's one:

145mm OD, 55 ID in well

I was well pleased to see you win that auction Jeremy as I knew there were shapes in it that we didn't have. I don't have time to double check your findings, so will go with the flow thanks so much. I just have to stop Beach work to add your pics to the Galleries

Sorry Jeremy, but the 4610 saucer goes with the 3612 Breakfast cup which looks the same as the 783 not a coffee can.  I will have to come back to your post and check it all out thoroughly when I get time.

Edits to remove photos.

It's a double-up Ev.
While the 4610 is the correct saucer for the 3613,
it is ALSO the correct saucer for the 3618

The e/w jumbo cup 3016 goes with the e/w jumbo saucer 4017.
The e/w 3023 coffee can also goes with the e/w jumbo saucer 4017.

I bought a 6 set of Purple Myrtle 3023 e/w cans NIB with 4017 saucers.
They are definitely jumbo saucers.

The saucers for the two different cups (jumbo and can) are identical.
(I have jumbo cups and saucers as well.)

The vit jumbo cup 3613 goes with the vit jumbo saucer 4610.
The vit 3618 coffee can also goes with the vit jumbo saucer 4610.

The jumbo e/w cups 3016 and vit 3613 cups are from the same mould.
The jumbo saucers e/w 4017 and vit 4610 are from the same mould.

The coffee e/w cans 3023 and vit cans 3618 are from the same mould.

Where I write mould above take that to mean jig if you prefer.

The only 3613 vit jumbo cup posted on the forum is my burgundy one.
The only 4610 vit saucers posted are my Reflections ones.
The only 3618 vit cans posted are my Reflections ones.

So, while the paperwork says that the 4610 sacer goes with the 3613 cup,
it also goes with the 3618 can.

Ok and I will check it out when I can thanks Jeremy.

Thanks for the pics Ev.
The writing for 3613 in your first photo does look like 3612,
but when you big it up it looks like 3613.

3612 is a red herring.

I really wanted that set    
But I saw you were the only bidder - so did not go into a TM battle.
Anyways .... I don't need any more cups !! ( I do really hehehe)
On a more serious note. well done for winning the set they are quite lovely.
I will have a look too at the shapes/numbers
I do have a plate in this pattern, I was lucky enough to pick it up for $1 at the dump shop, one of my "be there at the right time" purchases.

Thanks Janice.

I missed the previous Fiesta duo which I think may have been a 752 cup, and another pair I think of 752 duos not by being outbid but by stupidly not bidding during the course of the auction and missing the end, which is I why I jumped on that lot so quickly.

I have a bunch of different Ambrico cups and (in different patterns) 750, 753, 754, 755 (in earthenware!), not forgetting the 773, and the unnumbered one with Roturua on it (751???) so I think the only known numbered early shapes I need to complete the 1950s lightweight cup set is the 752, well may be the 802 but I think that is a bit later. Then again, there is the larger 750 shape (I know it exists cos I stupidly missed the auction for that while driving home from the Portage opening).

Anyway, I'm pleased to have the 832, and appreciate that you (and perhaps others) elected not to outbid me.

Allen from ChCh has a 752 (without its saucer) at the moment but he has it bundled with other pieces and it all adds up to too much.

Yes I agree that the cup shape is 3613 Jeremy.
832 cup is on my list to check out where the Portage got the number from, because it differs from the shape from the Auckland Museum cups.
Do you have any ideas about it as I haven't found any verification either way yet.

I'm taking Portage's word for it Ev.
Certainly the handle looks like the Auckland Museum pic.
From the image I get to look at in the gallery, and the one it is taken from I'd say without meaning to be facetious that either it is or it isn't. Because of the quality of the image there is a matter of interpretation involved. Remember the troubles we had with blips on demitasse handles. I can understand your reluctance.
I'd certainly appreciate what you can find at Portage as they may have some further info on it.
The description of breakfast cup certainly works. It is very big. I've not tested it for volume yet but as you can see from my comparison with a tulip it is well bigger.
I was looking at various Fiesta last night and I see that its height is just short of my small Fiesta Ware beehive bowl (and the glaze is the same colours too). I will add a pic of the two side by side later on, likely as an edit.

Done: single photo not a montage. About 3mm height difference.