I have two sets of GT tail lights that would need new lenses because they are cracking.
I honestly think that the reason why the tail lights crack so much is because when you are working on the engine people may tend to lean against the lenses putting stress on them. Also, when standing in the trunk working; "sitting down to take a break" on top of the tail lights.
------------------ "Discord" Red 1988 GT under restoration!
I have two sets of GT tail lights that would need new lenses because they are cracking.
I honestly think that the reason why the tail lights crack so much is because when you are working on the engine people may tend to lean against the lenses putting stress on them. Also, when standing in the trunk working; "sitting down to take a break" on top of the tail lights.
He is totally right. And clearly speaking I think it is a un-professional way to work on a fiero.
Tell me about sitting or standing in the trunk. I never understood that...really un-purist. The back end of the fiero isn't designed for the weight, especially for the fastback clip. That can crack the rear clip, and put pressure on the whole taillight assembly.
If that was a high end car, Ferrari, Lotus, etc...people wouldn't treat their car like that. Just because the fiero is an in-expensive car, no need to treat it like that. Actually, fiero parts are probably starting to get as rare as Ferrari parts. (year for year) And I'm talking clean, solid body parts.
I guess the lens and assembly / mounts are the most wanted parts. The inner red, and brake / upper flasher part is the less damaged part inside the taillight assembly.
We would need a full investigation from the fiero store, and find out which vendor / company, the name of the business that did the taillight lens, and try to track down a name of somebody that worked there. Then maybe an insider could tell us what happened with the molds and tooling dies. Then know if they are really destroyed, or where they could be.
I could be off, but its worth a try.
As for the GT quarter windows, Lexamar Corp is still alive...maybe that company can reproduce them. From what has been posted, I recall at least 1 member said they where going to call an inform about this topic, but haven't seen an update or posting about it since. If I had the money and time, I probably would inquire about it. Being in Canada is another issue...that company is based in the US. Time will tell.
I've worked while in the trunk plenty of times. Cloth cover and I weigh little
Reproductions are coming very soon, I'm sure of it
So have I, but my car isn't in the nicest condition cosmetically. Many would call it trash. I prefer the term rat rod. Anyway, if/when repreductions come, I would hope it would be by someone who has taken the extra care to get it as accurate as possible. Few things are worse than getting ill fitting components and even original tooling can produce inaccuracies if it has been cranking out components continuously for many years.
He is totally right. And clearly speaking I think it is a un-professional way to work on a fiero.
Tell me about sitting or standing in the trunk. I never understood that...really un-purist. The back end of the fiero isn't designed for the weight, especially for the fastback clip. That can crack the rear clip, and put pressure on the whole taillight assembly.
If that was a high end car, Ferrari, Lotus, etc...people wouldn't treat their car like that. Just because the fiero is an in-expensive car, no need to treat it like that. Actually, fiero parts are probably starting to get as rare as Ferrari parts. (year for year) And I'm talking clean, solid body parts.
I guess the lens and assembly / mounts are the most wanted parts. The inner red, and brake / upper flasher part is the less damaged part inside the taillight assembly.
We would need a full investigation from the fiero store, and find out which vendor / company, the name of the business that did the taillight lens, and try to track down a name of somebody that worked there. Then maybe an insider could tell us what happened with the molds and tooling dies. Then know if they are really destroyed, or where they could be.
I could be off, but its worth a try.
As for the GT quarter windows, Lexamar Corp is still alive...maybe that company can reproduce them. From what has been posted, I recall at least 1 member said they where going to call an inform about this topic, but haven't seen an update or posting about it since. If I had the money and time, I probably would inquire about it. Being in Canada is another issue...that company is based in the US. Time will tell.
You realize that the trunk is attached to the frame and not the actual fastback clip. I don`t think there is much stress on the fastback clip just standing in the trunk.
I'm one of the dreamers so I'm gonna give a try. The CAD drawings of GT tail light lens would give a good start and an exact measurement of whats needed so if anyone knows where to look, I would greatly appreciate it. Option two is two provide my own measurements, which is the plan.
quote
Originally posted by cam-a-lot:
Don't hold your breath. There are far too many dreamers on here who say they will create parts that never materialize
Great way to start, asking someone else for measurements. Just stop posting, you're spamming this everywhere. Just from the way you're conducting yourself on here I wouldn't buy from you
I'm one of the dreamers so I'm gonna give a try. The CAD drawings of GT tail light lens would give a good start and an exact measurement of whats needed so if anyone knows where to look, I would greatly appreciate it. Option two is two provide my own measurements, which is the plan.
I have worked on tail light lens molds, as well as headlight lens molds. For the last time, all those who think they can reproduce these, please talk to companies that build injection mold tooling so you can get back to reality. To recreate these molds would cost in excess of $125,000. One would have to be certifiably insane to spend this much to create reproduction parts for an obsolete economy car from the 80's
Unless you can build this in your garage with Sears Craftsman tools and a bucket of epoxy, then you are not going to be able to build tail lens molds http://www.dbmreflex.com/moules/
For anyone interested, I have info for a reputable plastics company that specializes in low volume production. They can design and build the molds, and unlike many other plastic companies the customer owns the mold and can take it at any time, but as I and others have stated it won't be cheap. In my opinion, Anyone who seriously pursues it is a philanthropist. I talked to the Fiero Store some time ago and they told me that the reason they didn't pursue tooling for reproducing these is there is no money to be made. Now that I've given the disclaimer here's the info:
Falcon Plastics/Premier Source 1313 Western Ave Brookings, SD 605-696-2500
Good luck jc8367 There are some amazing things that have come out of backyard shops and if everyone stopped dreaming when people told them no then we wouldn`t be as advanced as we are. Look at the world`s fastest Indian. Bert cast some of his own parts and set land speed records. A guy built a Countach that`s as close to original as you can get, in his basement. I think I`m a bit like you, when people tell me something will never work, it makes me that much more determined. I don`t think you would need friggin solid aluminum molds to cast a few parts. It`s not like you are going to make 1000`s of them. It`s like Chris Cook`s quarter windows. I don`t know how he forms them but I would almost bet he doesn`t have a hundred thousand dollars in his moulds. And personally the windows I have seen from him look close enough to original for me for 1/3 of the price of OEM (when you can find them)
[This message has been edited by TXGOOD (edited 04-09-2015).]
Originally posted by TXGOOD: I don`t think you would need friggin solid aluminum molds to cast a few parts. It`s not like you are going to make 1000`s of them.
It`s like Chris Cook`s quarter windows. I don`t know how he forms them but I would almost bet he doesn`t have a hundred thousand dollars in his moulds. And personally the windows I have seen from him look close enough to original for me for 1/3 of the price of OEM (when you can find them)
The molds don't need to be high quality for production of quantity purposes. They need to be high quality for getting quality lenses. The same with the plastic used. You can't use cheap thin plastics for the lenses. They will just keep shattering all the time if you do, especially if you leave the car outside all the time.
The quarter windows aren't made from the same plastic as the tail light lenses. It's also not as complex an item, as the tail lights are. They're basically a flat piece of plastic and you just need to bend the leading edge, which is pretty easy to do with Lexan and a little heat. You can't take a sheet of Lexan and make a tail light lens replica though.
Originally posted by fierogt28: He is totally right. And clearly speaking I think it is a un-professional way to work on a fiero.
Tell me about sitting or standing in the trunk. I never understood that...really un-purist. The back end of the fiero isn't designed for the weight, especially for the fastback clip. That can crack the rear clip, and put pressure on the whole taillight assembly.
When doing work from the top, I usually sit the in the trunk (maybe if I was a knuckle dragger with freakish long arms I wouldn't ):
1) I would rather sit in the trunk then lean over the side and possibly damaging the 1/4 windows on the fastback (been there already - somehow must of leaned on it odd for it to crack).
2) never had a problem with my tail lights cracking - they are still original (maybe lucky?).
I think you would have more problem leaning over the back end cracking the lens as you are possibly putting pressure on the outer edge of the unit. When sitting in the trunk, you are either in the trunk or sitting on the body shell which really doesn't flex.
[This message has been edited by Mickey_Moose (edited 04-09-2015).]
Good luck jc8367 There are some amazing things that have come out of backyard shops and if everyone stopped dreaming when people told them no then we wouldn`t be as advanced as we are. ...
This is all true... The helmet bubbles on the spacesuit are all formed manually using an ancient method and not 100s of thousand dollar molds. Yes there is a lot of scrap, but it's not worth it, even for NASA, to build an expensive mold for something that you only need a few of them. A really talented person working with plastic could reproduce these in there garage. Don't know if I would want to pay what it costs even then, but it could be done.
A really talented person working with plastic could reproduce these in there garage. Don't know if I would want to pay what it costs even then, but it could be done.
Ummm... no. I finished an apprenticeship as a mold maker and tool and die maker, and can tell you with 100 % certainty that these lenses cannot be reproduced by someone in their garage, no matter how talented they are, how "positive" their attitude is, or how many boy scout badges they own.
Originally posted by cam-a-lot: Ummm... no. I finished an apprenticeship as a mold maker and tool and die maker, and can tell you with 100 % certainty that these lenses cannot be reproduced by someone in their garage, no matter how talented they are, how "positive" their attitude is, or how many boy scout badges they own.
Boy scout badges you say? Not like you need to actually earn them, either.
[This message has been edited by dobey (edited 04-12-2015).]
Mike, the problem with pouring the lenses is that in order for them to be strong using that urethane plastic, they would have to be 1/4" thick and even then, they might yellow over time. Any clear liquid resin really isn't designed for the abuse that the taillights take. The road grime, heat, flex, exhaust soot and just the elements would destroy a liquid-poured lens. Plus somehow pouring the black "laminate" would be a mess. Alumilite makes products for pouring your own lenses but they are usually small reproductions. I have never seen anyone pour a lens as large as the Fiero.
I have used a couple of Smooth-On products and was quite impressed. You may be right about the clear although it does state that the material is UV resistant and not brittle. I`m talking about a Euro style lens where the outer lens is clear. Eventually I`m going to start playing around with a mirror base that will allow you to put F430 style mirrors on the stock door mounting location.
Originally posted by TXGOOD: I`m talking about a Euro style lens where the outer lens is clear.
Ah, then the Smooth-On would probably work fine. I would still be curious to see how the material handles the elements over time. I know a lot of people have on here their car buried in snow while people that live in areas such as myself and others in Arizona have their car sitting in 118 degree heat.
Let us not forget that the outer lens actually consists of 2 parts: the clear section and then the opaque black part. The delamination that occurs is when these 2 pieces start to separate from each other - which means at some point during the build they were molded together. I can guess that the clear section was first created and then placed in another mold and then the black was then injected - but like I said that is just a guess.
Bottom line is that I don't think there is an easy way to producing a repro lens of similar quality and clarity without any "delamination" in the "garage". But hey, I would like to be proven wrong.
We would need a full investigation from the fiero store, and find out which vendor / company, the name of the business that did the taillight lens, and try to track down a name of somebody that worked there. Then maybe an insider could tell us what happened with the molds and tooling dies. Then know if they are really destroyed, or where they could be.
I spoke with Matt at the Fiero Store a couple years back. He said they had given a manufacturer the original molds that were purchased by GM. The would call and order so many to be made as they needed them. There came a time that they could not get a hold of the manufacturer, and sent someone to investigate.
The person found that the building had been abandoned as they went out of business. Part of them going out of business / possible bankruptcy (I do not know personally), all of the metal in the shop, scrap, molds ect was sent off and melted down for it's scrap weight.
I do not confess to know 100% of the details, just what I was told. One thing for certain though, the molds are not hidden, or misplaced, they were destroyed and no longer exist.
Trust me, if anyone wishes this were not true, it is the Fiero Store. This was a HUGE loss for them. Something that probably still stings to this day. Just imagine how many orders they would have lined up if they offered them up for say $400 a pair.
[This message has been edited by JohnWPB (edited 04-15-2015).]
I spoke with Matt at the Fiero Store a couple years back. He said they had given a manufacturer the original molds that were purchased by GM. The would call and order so many to be made as they needed them. There came a time that they could not get a hold of the manufacturer, and sent someone to investigate.
The person found that the building had been abandoned as they went out of business. Part of them going out of business / possible bankruptcy (I do not know personally), all of the metal in the shop, scrap, molds ect was sent off and melted down for it's scrap weight.
I do not confess to know 100% of the details, just what I was told. One thing for certain though, the molds are not hidden, or misplaced, they were destroyed and no longer exist.
Trust me, if anyone wishes this were not true, it is the Fiero Store. This was a HUGE loss for them. Something that probably still stings to this day. Just imagine how many orders they would have lined up if they offered them up for say $400 a pair.
Sad....very sad to hear.
Sounds like this will be a hard project to get back going with this info.
That's a very sad story about the molds. It's the most complete version I'd heard.
It's going to be fascinating to look back at this situation ten or fifteen years from now. Either these darn tail lights are going to be so rare and expensive that no one drives around with them on their cars, or someone will figure out how to make them without a massive up-front investment. If the former, the grand I just paid for a near-mint set will look like a pittance, or I'll have wasted a lot of money but will still be smiling because the Fiero community will have won.
I'd bet a nickel that the technology curve will meet the need and cost curves and that, like the sail panels, we'll have reasonably good facsimile tail lights, at least the lens portion. Any takers?
I wonder how Rick Dale from American Restoration would tackle the job of restoring Fiero fastback taillights? I watched one episode where he was restoring a space helmet and tried to reproduce the plastic bubble on his own without any success. After several failed attempts he took the helmet to a plastics fabrication shop and they reproduced the plastic bubble without any problem and for a reasonable cost. Perhaps someone in Las Vegas could talk to Rick and find out which plastics fabricator was used to replicate the space helmet bubble and then ask them if they could replicate Fiero fastback taillights. Did anyone on the Forum see this episode and know who the fabricator was?
I wonder how Rick Dale from American Restoration would tackle the job of restoring Fiero fastback taillights? I watched one episode where he was restoring a space helmet and tried to reproduce the plastic bubble on his own without any success. After several failed attempts he took the helmet to a plastics fabrication shop and they reproduced the plastic bubble without any problem and for a reasonable cost. Perhaps someone in Las Vegas could talk to Rick and find out which plastics fabricator was used to replicate the space helmet bubble and then ask them if they could replicate Fiero fastback taillights. Did anyone on the Forum see this episode and know who the fabricator was?
Despite Cam-A-Lot's 100% certainty to the contrary I disagree with his assertion. With all due respect to his experience, Space suit helmet bubbles live in an environment far harsher than any taillight lens, (-250F to +250F, 100% UV Radiation) and they manage to remain optically clear, don't explode when exposed to pure vacuum and don't crack, and are not manufactured in any fancy mold. I've seen how they are made and it's not rocket science. I don't have the skills, but to insist that it's impossible is just being pessimistic and not realistic in my humble opinion.
Despite Cam-A-Lot's 100% certainty to the contrary I disagree with his assertion. With all due respect to his experience, Space suit helmet bubbles live in an environment far harsher than any taillight lens, (-250F to +250F, 100% UV Radiation) and they manage to remain optically clear, don't explode when exposed to pure vacuum and don't crack, and are not manufactured in any fancy mold. I've seen how they are made and it's not rocket science. I don't have the skills, but to insist that it's impossible is just being pessimistic and not realistic in my humble opinion.
Please go right ahead, make a set, and prove me wrong. I would be VERY happy to be proven wrong
Originally posted by jscott1: Despite Cam-A-Lot's 100% certainty to the contrary I disagree with his assertion. With all due respect to his experience, Space suit helmet bubbles live in an environment far harsher than any taillight lens, (-250F to +250F, 100% UV Radiation) and they manage to remain optically clear, don't explode when exposed to pure vacuum and don't crack, and are not manufactured in any fancy mold. I've seen how they are made and it's not rocket science. I don't have the skills, but to insist that it's impossible is just being pessimistic and not realistic in my humble opinion.
I'm pretty certain the bubble for the helmet in question was not being subjected to being in space (being as it was a TV show), and the suit was being restored for show or such. I don't know what you think you may have seen exactly, but even though NASA only needs a very low number of suits to be be made, as there are very few people who actually go into space, these components still must be made to very exacting standards. Even an incredibly tiny hole which can't be seen or felt by human eyes or hands, could mean a very quick death for someone wearing the suit in space. Of course, a tiny hole in a tail light lens, isn't going to be so tragic.
It's certainly not that difficult to get decent optically clear plastic. However, optically clear lenses won't fix the delamination issues that everyone wants new lenses to fix. The outer lens could be optically clear and not have any humanly visible defects, but the inner surface of that could be just bad enough to cause issues with bonding the additional layer of black ink to the back of the lens, which could result in fairly quick delamination after you just paid $1000 for a set of new lenses. Optically clear plastic that is UV resistant is a solved problem; we've been doing that for years as a civilization. But a poor mold could easily make for a waste of lenses, even if they are optically clear and don't turn yellow for 20 years.
What was the purpose of the lamination process anyway? Tinting? If that's the case, then why not just dye the lenses instead?
The purpose is "that is just how the lights were made." And the lenses basically are just dyed. The black bits are added after the clear shell is already produced. The way this ink attaches to the plastic, it will degrade over time, especially with exposure to sunlight, and you end up with the "delamination" which occurs in the lenses. If you want a cheap fix, just mask the clear areas off and NightShades them (or take them apart and do it from the inside, as you might get hassled by police for paint on the lights if you do it on the outside).
Originally posted by dobey: . If you want a cheap fix, just mask the clear areas off and NightShades them (or take them apart and do it from the inside, as you might get hassled by police for paint on the lights if you do it on the outside).
You CANNOT NightShade the interior of a Fastback tail light where they are delaminated because it is IMPOSSIBLE to seperate the two LAMINATED parts .... If we were able to seperate the two then we would NEVER have a delamination problem .... SEPERATE TWO PARTS + PAINT = DELAMINATION GONE
Originally posted by Danyel: You CANNOT NightShade the interior of a Fastback tail light where they are delaminated because it is IMPOSSIBLE to seperate the two LAMINATED parts .... If we were able to seperate the two then we would NEVER have a delamination problem .... SEPERATE TWO PARTS + PAINT = DELAMINATION GONE
Clearly it is not impossible, because the delamination problem is exactly that the two parts are separating. If they were not separating, then you wouldn't have a delamination problem.
And because the pieces are separating, the paint will be able to get into the areas where the delamination has occurred. This of course won't truly fix the problem, but it will help mask the issue.
Clearly it is not impossible, because the delamination problem is exactly that the two parts are separating. If they were not separating, then you wouldn't have a delamination problem.
And because the pieces are separating, the paint will be able to get into the areas where the delamination has occurred. This of course won't truly fix the problem, but it will help mask the issue.
Have you ever tried splitting the them ???? I've tried and what your saying is definately NOT true..... take a look you'll see .... IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO SPLIT THE TWO WITHOUT CRACKING THE LENSES ... PERIOD......... let alone trying to get paint the splitted area.
I'm pretty certain the bubble for the helmet in question was not being subjected to being in space (being as it was a TV show), and the suit was being restored for show or such. I don't know what you think you may have seen exactly, but even though NASA only needs a very low number of suits to be be made, as there are very few people who actually go into space, these components still must be made to very exacting standards. Even an incredibly tiny hole which can't be seen or felt by human eyes or hands, could mean a very quick death for someone wearing the suit in space. Of course, a tiny hole in a tail light lens, isn't going to be so tragic. .
I've seen the show you are referencing, but that's not what I'm talking about... I'm talking about the actual space suit helmet bubbles, which I have been to the "factory" where they are made and have seen the process. There is a lot of scrap, we have hundreds of scrap bubbles, but the point is that they are not made in a fancy $100,000 mold. They are made by people who know what the heck they are doing.
Originally posted by dobey: And the lenses basically are just dyed. The black bits are added after the clear shell is already produced.
Yes, the "black bits" are added after the fact. However the lenses are NOT just dyed. It is another hard plastic layer bound to the inside of the clear lenses. This black plastic is about 3/8 of an inch thick.
There is NO way to remove that black plastic without destroying the clear lens. Yes, it has delaminated, and is allowing air between small areas. The rest of the lens that is not delaminated, is still HEAVILY attached, and can not be split apart without destroying the clear lens period.
If someone were to tackle the lenses, I personally think it would be far more cost effective / easier to just produce the clear lens, and then dye / paint the black areas. Much like the restoration process. Mask off the areas to remain clear, paint black, remove the masking, and clear the whole thing.
):
If we were able to seperate the two then we would NEVER have a delamination problem .... SEPERATE TWO PARTS + PAINT = DELAMINATION GONE
