Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: FS: 1965-67 Durant 3-star Interior Mirror

  1. #1

    FS: 1965-67 Durant 3-star Interior Mirror

    1965-67 OG Durant 3-star interior mirror, none better, mint. $750 + shipping & fees
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Jim

    Too many Porsches and one VW are starting to fill up my desert landscape.

    https://www.instagram.com/1967s_307184s/

  2. #2
    Junior Member SWBDream's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2023
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    6
    That looks like an original arm with a repro mirror. The gaps around the glass, afaik, shouldn't be there and match the cheap repops.


    Screenshot 2024-09-23 at 5.17.09 PM.png

    Screenshot 2024-09-23 at 5.22.42 PM.png

  3. #3
    Interesting, similar accusation was just recently levied of my Samba post for this mirror. As I explained to Mr. Barnes, that theory is easy to debunk. You can not or if you can show me how you take off the repo mirror head and install it on an original stalk. I tried years ago to restore original 3-star mirrors, I failed and came to an abrupt conclusion it can not be done. The only person I know who might be able to do such an operation is the very high-end restorer Victor Miles. Another point is do you think a cheap $95 China repo mirror will have chrome to this level you see here? We are compare apples to oranges. There is nothing that China makes that even comes close to 1965-67 OG chrome. I have no data points, but I'm sure the vendors sell lots of those cheap China mirrors to budget-oriented buyers. IF it was, as you stated a repo, I'd disclose that. Full disclosure" glass has been changed, but still you'll hard pressed to find anything comparable.

    Quote Originally Posted by SWBDream View Post
    That looks like an original arm with a repro mirror. The gaps around the glass, afaik, shouldn't be there and match the cheap repops.


    Screenshot 2024-09-23 at 5.17.09 PM.png

    Screenshot 2024-09-23 at 5.22.42 PM.png
    Jim

    Too many Porsches and one VW are starting to fill up my desert landscape.

    https://www.instagram.com/1967s_307184s/

  4. #4
    Junior Member SWBDream's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2023
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    6
    I still think its a reproduction head on an OEM shaft.

    1) The arm is removable from the head of the mirror with a threaded shaft - you can see it here:
    IMG_0248.jpg
    IMG_0249.jpg
    Links here:


    Also worth noting, one can buy just the head - apparently to install on an original stalk: stoddard link

    (note the level of chrome). China sends ships into space, I am sure they can reproduce chrome to a level of a 1960s German auto accessory.

    If you look at the stoddard link you can see the same gap (image courtesy of stoddard who does not allow deep linking…)
    IMG_0250.png

    Finally:

    I took out a stoddard repro and the original that I have just to check.

    IMG_0245.jpg

    You can see the much tighter curve on the oem unit as it approached the glass so that it captures the glass, the repro is more straight. How does yours look?

    Also in the OEM the glass is flush with the chrome:
    IMG_0246.jpg

    Where as the reproduction is proud and uneven to the chrome edge (which isn’t even curved correctly).
    IMG_0247.jpg


    So could I be wrong ? Sure. Will you post the profile photos of the curve of the housing as it approached the glass for us to see? Let’s see…
    Last edited by SWBDream; Yesterday at 10:54 PM.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by SWBDream View Post
    I still think its a reproduction head on an OEM shaft.

    1) The arm is removable from the head of the mirror with a threaded shaft - you can see it here:
    IMG_0248.jpg
    IMG_0249.jpg
    Links here:


    Also worth noting, one can buy just the head - apparently to install on an original stalk: stoddard link

    (note the level of chrome). China sends ships into space, I am sure they can reproduce chrome to a level of a 1960s German auto accessory.

    If you look at the stoddard link you can see the same gap (image courtesy of stoddard who does not allow deep linking…)
    IMG_0250.png

    Finally:

    I took out a stoddard repro and the original that I have just to check.

    IMG_0245.jpg

    You can see the much tighter curve on the oem unit as it approached the glass so that it captures the glass, the repro is more straight. How does yours look?

    Also in the OEM the glass is flush with the chrome:
    IMG_0246.jpg

    Where as the reproduction is proud and uneven to the chrome edge (which isn’t even curved correctly).
    IMG_0247.jpg


    So could I be wrong ? Sure. Will you post the profile photos of the curve of the housing as it approached the glass for us to see? Let’s see…
    Any, work you take a chance of damage. I don't mess with China junk and that would be the last part I put on my 911.
    Jim

    Too many Porsches and one VW are starting to fill up my desert landscape.

    https://www.instagram.com/1967s_307184s/

  6. #6
    Junior Member SWBDream's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2023
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    6
    It doesn’t matter what you will or will not put on your car. I’m showing that there is a high likelihood what you’re saying is not true and you are trying to charge people $750 for it.

    Buyer beware.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by SWBDream View Post
    It doesn’t matter what you will or will not put on your car. I’m showing that there is a high likelihood what you’re saying is not true and you are trying to charge people $750 for it.

    Buyer beware.
    Right, I went out and bought a repo junk China mirror replaced the glass and put it on an original stalk. Makes sense to me. Thx for your input keep trolling, guessing and dreaming.
    Jim

    Too many Porsches and one VW are starting to fill up my desert landscape.

    https://www.instagram.com/1967s_307184s/

  8. #8
    Junior Member SWBDream's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2023
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by juche_namja View Post
    Right, I went out and bought a repo junk China mirror replaced the glass and put it on an original stalk. Makes sense to me. Thx for your input keep trolling, guessing and dreaming.
    This is exactly what it appears was done here.

    What I’m telling you (again), is that it appears to be a reproduction mirror head on an original stalk based on the evidence provided above.

    If you'd like to dispel concerns, post the side shot of the mirror head (like I did) so we can see the curvatures and additionally a photo of the area where the glass meets the chrome.

  9. #9
    Having seen the repro mirrors in person (compared to originals), +1 to what SWBDream is saying... Very likely this is a partial repro. Originals don't have glass shape mismatch like this.

    Either the OP purchased this from someone and paid too much (whoops!) or they're knowingly trying to sell a non-original for way too much money. Either way, not a good look.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Message Board Disclaimer and Terms of Use
This is a public forum. Messages posted here can be viewed by the public. The Early 911S Registry is not responsible for messages posted in its online forums, and any message will express the views of the author and not the Early 911S Registry. Use of online forums shall constitute the agreement of the user not to post anything of religious or political content, false and defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise to violate the law and the further agreement of the user to be solely responsible for and hold the Early 911S Registry harmless in the event of any claim based on their message. Any viewer who finds a message objectionable should contact us immediately by email. The Early 911S Registry has the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary.