With the collection I am dealing with there are examples of large and medium, both have a square cross section and this is consistent with the 1987 catalogue. I would expect the 140 which is not in the collection to be square. There is however an example at about 14cm with a rectangular cross section,
138 h 87 l 82 w
Compared to large 95 w
and medium 87 l & w
You will notice that the 138 vase is the same width as the medium.
The design precedes the catalogue on Newhall CD by 19 years and with some numbers in the range 600 to 630 not covered by the CD it is reasonable to assume that other shapes were at least entered into the pattern books and that some of these may have been in production.
CGR 1969/12 does show an example with two vases of the same height but differing widths. Could this be two views of the same piece or two different views. CGR has proven to not always quote the correct pattern number... so on its own this is not sufficient information.
The image from the Max Velcovsky collection clearly shows, to my eye and measurements, two small sized vases of differing cross section. With 6 0f one and 5 of the other the difference in rarity would not seem great.
I look forward to clarification from Mr Urban and wonder if more shapes were included in the original pattern books and if some or all of those other designs were actually made in that long period of production.