Originally posted by Fiero Vice: And speaking of fastback, over 40,389 fastbacks were produced for '86 thru '88. Let's say 50% of that figure survives today. That's still a very good reason to reproduce it and make some profit out of it. Even Fiat X1/9 produced much less cars than Fiero & their enthusiasts still find a way to reproduce some parts that was not available for a long time.
50% is way high. At last check, which was several years ago now, about 30,000 of the original 370,168 Fieros were still registered in the U.S., 8.1%.
40,169 GTs were built. 8.1% of that, less some loss over the last three years is about 3000 registered cars. Sure, there are some GTs sitting out in the weeds without tabs, but those are not the cars for which owners are going to buy new tail lights.
KGoodyear, the Kickstarter idea is excellent. Set the funding level at $50,000, choose your support buy-in price, and post the heck out of it here and on the various Facebook groups. If it hits the funding goal your tooling costs are largely covered and the likelihood of taking a huge bath on the project is low (as long as a product is successfully produced). And if it doesn't you're out nothing but some time to setup the Kickstarter (or GoFundMe).
Heck, I'd even help setup the Kickstarter.
Seems like a win-win to me.
Edit to add this, from the Kickstarter site:
"Funding on Kickstarter is all-or-nothing. No one will be charged for a pledge towards a project unless it reaches its funding goal. This way, creators always have the budget they scoped out before moving forward."
[This message has been edited by lorennerol (edited 05-19-2017).]
50% is way high. At last check, which was several years ago now, about 30,000 of the original 370,168 Fieros were still registered in the U.S., 8.1%.
40,169 GTs were built. 8.1% of that, less some loss over the last three years is about 3000 registered cars. Sure, there are some GTs sitting out in the weeds without tabs, but those are not the cars for which owners are going to buy new tail lights.
KGoodyear, the Kickstarter idea is excellent. Set the funding level at $50,000, choose your support buy-in price, and post the heck out of it here and on the various Facebook groups. If it hits the funding goal your tooling costs are largely covered and the likelihood of taking a huge bath on the project is low (as long as a product is successfully produced). And if it doesn't you're out nothing but some time to setup the Kickstarter (or GoFundMe).
Heck, I'd even help setup the Kickstarter.
Seems like a win-win to me.
Anoyone like me that's been burned by a Kickstarter or gofundme campaign, will not likely do it again. On Kickstarter your pledge is forfeit whether or not anything ever comes to fruition. I wouldn't pledge $600 - $1k not knowing if I'll ever see a return. At least I can put in a claim through PayPal if nothing ever comes of it. Kickstarter gives no such protection.
Originally posted by PARAD0X: Anoyone like me that's been burned by a Kickstarter or gofundme campaign, will not likely do it again. On Kickstarter your pledge is forfeit whether or not anything ever comes to fruition. I wouldn't pledge $600 - $1k not knowing if I'll ever see a return. At least I can put in a claim through PayPal if nothing ever comes of it. Kickstarter gives no such protection.
The money is only collected if the campaign hits its funding goal. And yes, it's incumbent on the project sponsor to demonstrate technical ability to follow-through and accountability. And for supporters to vet the data provided. This is how any privately financed project gets done. Kickstarter just makes the mechanism accessible for smaller projects.
The money is only collected if the campaign hits its funding goal. And yes, it's incumbent on the project sponsor to demonstrate technical ability to follow-through and accountability. And for supporters to vet the data provided. This is how any privately financed project gets done. Kickstarter just makes the mechanism accessible for smaller projects.
Unfortunately there have been countless projects successfully funded that never produced. I backed one, which was funded at over ten times the goal amount, and the product was only shipped out to about 1/3 of the backers, then the creators were never heard from again. A similar experience happened to my son. I decided I'd wait and buy after a creator did right by the campaign first. The one particular campaign I backed ended up costing me about $50, no big deal. Not sure I'd trust an investment of 20X that amount, especially on something that's had as many failed attempts as this. Sorry. No Paypal protection, no investment.
I know someone who makes licenced products for Camaros and Firebirds. Just recently started reproducing late 2nd gen TA tail lenses. Those have a far greater reach than Fiero lenses and even with those volumes what he has in R&D and manufacturing will take him years for the payback. He has made plenty of other things over his 30 odd years of Fbody passion, and many of them have sat around for a long time before making any money and in some cases not making any. But he is dedicated and keeps going.
What I was trying to say in my original post was about how passionate you really REALLY have to be to make stuff like that work takes years and years of dedication. I'm not saying don't bother, I'm saying make sure you understand what you are in for.
It will take the right person (or group of people) to pull off a workable solution for this. Between the technical expertise needed, attention to detail to refine the process so you get consistent results, and upfront R&D costs... it is a significant challenge.
Fierostore used the original GM molds and even with them there were some inconsistencies in the final product. Many were still OK with these, so the Fierostore was able to sell them vs. toss them, but it reinforces how critical the manufacturing process is to the end result, even with the factory molds. Use a lesser quality mold and the risk for quality issues rises significantly.
For all of her shortcomings, Slammed did have a unique solution that simplified many of the technical aspects. Her lens solution didn't need any of the retaining clips, so she could vacuum mold them with a much simplified die, but this process then required trimming the edges. She painted the black on, so she didn't have to mold the inner lining part (would have required 2 more mold sets) and have it friction or sonic welded to the clear lens.
However, even with these simplifications, I think her fundamental process issues were consistency and repeat-ability. Between molding the lens to get good clarity w/o any defects, cutting the edges of the lenses with a high degree of precision, the placement of the template for painting so the letters were in the proper position, adhesion of the paint to the plastic, and removal of the template post painting. Lots of opportunities for things not to be perfect, and I think she had a high rate of failure in her process, which caused many of the delays.
The same issue happened with Lori and her fastback side windows. She had the dies made, was able to make quite a few window sets, but had lots of issues getting the dot matrix edge pattern figured out with consistent and repeatable results.
It will take the right person (or group of people) to pull off a workable solution for this. Between the technical expertise needed, attention to detail to refine the process so you get consistent results, and upfront R&D costs... it is a significant challenge.
Fierostore used the original GM molds and even with them there were some inconsistencies in the final product. Many were still OK with these, so the Fierostore was able to sell them vs. toss them, but it reinforces how critical the manufacturing process is to the end result, even with the factory molds. Use a lesser quality mold and the risk for quality issues rises significantly.
For all of her shortcomings, Slammed did have a unique solution that simplified many of the technical aspects. Her lens solution didn't need any of the retaining clips, so she could vacuum mold them with a much simplified die, but this process then required trimming the edges. She painted the black on, so she didn't have to mold the inner lining part (would have required 2 more mold sets) and have it friction or sonic welded to the clear lens.
However, even with these simplifications, I think her fundamental process issues were consistency and repeat-ability. Between molding the lens to get good clarity w/o any defects, cutting the edges of the lenses with a high degree of precision, the placement of the template for painting so the letters were in the proper position, adhesion of the paint to the plastic, and removal of the template post painting. Lots of opportunities for things not to be perfect, and I think she had a high rate of failure in her process, which caused many of the delays.
The same issue happened with Lori and her fastback side windows. She had the dies made, was able to make quite a few window sets, but had lots of issues getting the dot matrix edge pattern figured out with consistent and repeatable results.
I would agree with your analysis. I saw a set of Slammed tail light covers installed on a car and they looked beautiful. Also did some work for a guy who purchased MsLoriFiero quarter windows. He installed them and they looked very good. These plastic parts were obviously made with tooling designed for low volume, were labor intensive and probably not well thought out for repeatability. Must say that they came close but in the end they just could not ship and faded away. If Slammed ever finds a way to get it right or sells the molds to someone who has a solution to the process they we may see them again. My hope is that Villain will find someone to re-mold the Al Lindsay fiberglass C4 tail light panels. IMO, they look better than the stock tail lights.
------------------ " THE BLACK PARALYZER" -87GT 3800SC Series III engine, custom ZZP /Frozen Boost Intercooler setup, 3.4" Pulley, Northstar TB, LS1 MAF, 3" Spintech/Hedman Exhaust, Autolite 104's, MSD wires, Custom CAI, 4T65eHD w. custom axles, HP Tuners VCM Suite. "THE COLUSSUS" 87GT - ALL OUT 3.4L Turbocharged engine, Garrett Hybrid Turbo, MSD ign., modified TH125H " ON THE LOOSE WITHOUT THE JUICE "
I'll add some to this topic. I'm guessing on some of this:
From what I heard from the vacuum molding place I visited is that you can not just vacuum a sheet of clear plastic on a die with no vacuum holes in it. It will have islands of air pockets that will sit higher than the plastic that does go completely in contact with the die. They will look optically horrible. If you put holes in the die and vacuum form a clear plastic sheet over it you end up with a multitude of small dots where the holes pull the plastic to the die. This is not a problem on colored plastic because you can't see them on the backside of the finished piece. My guess is that this slammed person or Dallas Jolley (maybe both together) did a cavity die. They pulled the sheet into a depression so all the small bumps were on the outside. They then wet sanded and polished the outer surface. Or they did it opposite and wet sanded and polished the inside.
The overlay idea IMO is the solution. Since we can't believe a single word these two compulsive/pathological liars spoke we'll never know how this all came about. Trying to make a new lens with tabs like OEM GM produced is a huge undertaking. Beyond huge. I have no doubt it will never be taken on by anyone or any group. Maybe they had this overlay idea from day one? That might be the truth. The pictures of the lenses he/she said they made and sold and the $20,000 dies someone bought was all a huge lie IMO. My opinion and I know it is the truth is those pictures of the OEM type lenses the showed were old factory GM lenses they used to make their dies.
No doubt painting them from the inside was a challenge and maybe a big reason they quite making them. No amount of negative feedback would stop anyone from making something like this. The sets they did produce and sent out were quite nice. No one that received a set had any complaints about them.
IMO the solution is to do the same thing. Pull lens overlays, sand and polish the dimple side and paint them. Maybe paint the outside if painting the inside is too difficult. A few have done that and have done it for others.
It would be nice if anyone that has a set of these overlays that they did not install keep them for reference for anyone that would take this project on. I have many contacts. Possibly I could get the clear overlays made and polished. Maybe in Taiwan or mainland China. Maybe a vacuum forming company would do the form and cut process and a different company would do the polishing. Maybe someone else here in the USA would do the painting part.
Again: IMO making overlays is the only worthwhile solution and maybe painting them on the outside is the only viable option.
------------------ Rodney Dickman
Fiero Parts And Acc's Web Page: All new web page!:www.rodneydickman.com Rodney Dickman's Fiero accessories 7604 Treeview Drive Caledonia, WI 53108 Phone/Fax (262) 835-9575
I don't know if I should post this or not because the time I have spent on producing the Notchback lenses overlays so far has been minimal. This week should have some progression. I started on those first to see if there would be damage to the lense in the mold production process. If there is no damage GT lense will be next, using my lenses. Just hope to not get slammed, haha.
Originally posted by lorennerol: 50% is way high. At last check, which was several years ago now, about 30,000 of the original 370,168 Fieros were still registered in the U.S., 8.1%.
40,169 GTs were built. 8.1% of that, less some loss over the last three years is about 3000 registered cars. Sure, there are some GTs sitting out in the weeds without tabs, but those are not the cars for which owners are going to buy new tail lights.
Well, it was just a wild guess. Even if we reproduce about 200 tail lights, to cover about 7% of 3,000 registered GT, is still plenty to cover the cost of the project itself. In fact, I'd buy few sets myself. That goes for some people as well.
Rodney, thank you for sharing your perspective on this issue.
[This message has been edited by Fiero Vice (edited 05-21-2017).]
50% is way high. At last check, which was several years ago now, about 30,000 of the original 370,168 Fieros were still registered in the U.S., 8.1%.
40,169 GTs were built. 8.1% of that, less some loss over the last three years is about 3000 registered cars. Sure, there are some GTs sitting out in the weeds without tabs, but those are not the cars for which owners are going to buy new tail lights.
I want to disagree on the 86-88 GT. The bulk of the Fieros that have been junked is the 84 and up coupes. The daily drivers. The GT is more coveted. There is also without a doubt many Fieros in garages etc that have not been registered for years. Same as any other collector car.
------------------ Rodney Dickman
Fiero Parts And Acc's Web Page: All new web page!:www.rodneydickman.com Rodney Dickman's Fiero accessories 7604 Treeview Drive Caledonia, WI 53108 Phone/Fax (262) 835-9575
I still have a set of uninstalled lenses. The painting was done on the inside, as were the originals. I also see no evidence of either the "nibs" that a vacuum forming process would cause, or that they were sanded/polished. Not disputing your assessment - I just don't see the evidence. They're that good.
I have had some communications with someone who believes these could be done, relatively inexpensively, but he even lacks enough funding to get that off the ground. I trust him well enough that I would be willing to help him, except that I don't have the money, either.
He also is more interested in doing a custom variation, as opposed to the stock-looking lenses. Ah well...
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 05-21-2017).]
I have some experience with this. The difference is that I have worked with an engineer from PMD who worked with the supplier when the tail light assemblies were originally made. We pursued the people that he worked with to see if there was any avenue of getting these lenses made through the channels that the original production run was made. Unfortunately, we came up with dead ends as the original supplier ceased to exist in 2002, meaning the original records and most importantly, the original blueprints are long gone. The people that he worked with had mostly moved on and the Fiero was a 30 year distant memory. Next, we went through his friends at the GM Tech Center to see if we could obtain the original blueprints and since the 2009 re-organization, it is nearly impossible to get that kind of information out of the Tech Center. That angle of obtaining the original blueprints is still being pursued as you never know when you might get really lucky. The original blueprints are not in the main database, so that means that the prints are on microfiche. So, the challenge is finding some one who has access to the microfiche, will spend the time to manually find the michrofiche plates if they exist and has the capability of obtaining and copying them. That qwest continues to be on going. I have my fingers crossed, but really am optimistic about a positive outcome.
Next, we inquired with some more friends that he has that works as a OEM supplier that currently makes tail lights amongst other lighting components parts for GM. What most of you have missed to this point is that the tail lights are injection molded and not vacuum formed. There is one mold required to make the clear outer lense, one mold to make the black inside mask, and one mold required to join the two component parts together. Our quote last year was $15k per mold. That is 90k just to have the molds made for injection molding. With out blue prints, we would need two pairs of good GT lenses to separate the component parts with out damage to duplicate the parts utilizing a plotting scanner. Plus a third set for measurement verifications. The process of duplicating the parts accurately to actually make the molds nearly cost as much as the molds since we do not have blueprint measurements as reference. Plus after that point, you have production costs, and material costs which would be higher than normal due to a very small production run, and packaging costs for shipping to individual customers. Plus any issues that could likely occur during the process of duplicating the parts. And after the initial production run, the issue of who is going to store the molds made for an injection molding press.
Considering that there were only 40,389 fastback GT's produced between 86 and 88, the numbers just do not make this project worth while. The 20 percent rule has been mentioned several times as to what an actual sales projection might forecast. Unfortunately, the people who own Fieros that actually need lenses will not pay in the $1500 range to have new lenses based on a small production run of 100 to 200 lenses. Especially since at a reasonable cost, currently a low mileage GT can be bought that does not need new lenses. It just sucks that we have to start from scratch with projects like this. Finding the original blueprint would significantly reduce the cost of getting to the point of making molds. The cost of making the molds would still remain a constant.
As more time progresses, maybe some new methods of reproduction will make this less expensive. But now just does not seem to be the right time with a sizeable investment.
As more time progresses, maybe some new methods of reproduction will make this less expensive. But now just does not seem to be the right time with a sizeable investment.
Fred
Rare66:
I can't help it think having a 3D scan of the lens wouldn't be more beneficial. Manufacturers are requesting 3d files and 3d scanning companies are readily available. As far as I know at this point, there would only need to be one scan made and reversed for the other.
Originally posted by kgoodyear: As far as I know at this point, there would only need to be one scan made and reversed for the other.
Lettering aside, of course. 3D scans are not very high-res. Multiple passes would have to be made to get inside, outside, up side, and down side. 3D print won't do the job.
We all seem to imagine reproduction lenses being replicas of the originals, made in the same manner. Why not create a new form, where the black portion of the tails is actually black plastic, with perhaps a separate clear lens that seats into it? This would eliminate the delamination issue altogether and further allow the assemblies to be more repairable. Still no easy feat, but you would think that no risk of delam, coupled with the elimination of paint, would at least be a superior product. Might have to get creative about the PONTIAC lettering, but most options lose that part anyway.
I'll add some to this topic. I'm guessing on some of this:
From what I heard from the vacuum molding place I visited is that you can not just vacuum a sheet of clear plastic on a die with no vacuum holes in it. It will have islands of air pockets that will sit higher than the plastic that does go completely in contact with the die. They will look optically horrible. If you put holes in the die and vacuum form a clear plastic sheet over it you end up with a multitude of small dots where the holes pull the plastic to the die. This is not a problem on colored plastic because you can't see them on the backside of the finished piece. My guess is that this slammed person or Dallas Jolley (maybe both together) did a cavity die. They pulled the sheet into a depression so all the small bumps were on the outside. They then wet sanded and polished the outer surface. Or they did it opposite and wet sanded and polished the inside.
The overlay idea IMO is the solution. Since we can't believe a single word these two compulsive/pathological liars spoke we'll never know how this all came about. Trying to make a new lens with tabs like OEM GM produced is a huge undertaking. Beyond huge. I have no doubt it will never be taken on by anyone or any group. Maybe they had this overlay idea from day one? That might be the truth. The pictures of the lenses he/she said they made and sold and the $20,000 dies someone bought was all a huge lie IMO. My opinion and I know it is the truth is those pictures of the OEM type lenses the showed were old factory GM lenses they used to make their dies.
No doubt painting them from the inside was a challenge and maybe a big reason they quite making them. No amount of negative feedback would stop anyone from making something like this. The sets they did produce and sent out were quite nice. No one that received a set had any complaints about them.
IMO the solution is to do the same thing. Pull lens overlays, sand and polish the dimple side and paint them. Maybe paint the outside if painting the inside is too difficult. A few have done that and have done it for others.
It would be nice if anyone that has a set of these overlays that they did not install keep them for reference for anyone that would take this project on. I have many contacts. Possibly I could get the clear overlays made and polished. Maybe in Taiwan or mainland China. Maybe a vacuum forming company would do the form and cut process and a different company would do the polishing. Maybe someone else here in the USA would do the painting part.
Again: IMO making overlays is the only worthwhile solution and maybe painting them on the outside is the only viable option.
Because of the shape of the lenses, the tooling is not a negative. It is just an aluminum copy of an original lens, with a skin of petg pulled over it. There are no valleys, it is one long curve leaving nowhere for air to get caught. A 600 grit surface is not reflected in clear plastic but allows enough air passage to successfully pull without any additional holes. Anyone with a large enough machine can form my covers providing they want to pay for tooling costs.
As far as defects and failures, that wasn't ever the issue. I have a literal pile of unpainted lenses cut out doing nothing. It was getting in over my head. I posted about lots of other projects and was trying to do too much at one time. I've moved on to much bigger things and have put a lot of what I learned to do and not do when dealing with customers and potential customers, as well as knowing better than to handle every aspect of business by myself. If I ever start selling again, I will have a very large inventory ready to ship before even talking about it. This likely will never happen but in the mean time, if anyone including Rodney would like pictures of my tooling or a better description in how to make them, I am here to help.
Believe it or not I could make actual reproductions. I was talking to TFS about doing that very thing. It wasn't worth it compared to the other projects we are doing now so I abandoned it. I can explain how to do that as well
[This message has been edited by Slammed (edited 05-22-2017).]
Because of the shape of the lenses, the tooling is not a negative. It is just an aluminum copy of an original lens, with a skin of petg pulled over it. There are no valleys, it is one long curve leaving nowhere for air to get caught. A 600 grit surface is not reflected in clear plastic but allows enough air passage to successfully pull without any additional holes. Anyone with a large enough machine can form my covers providing they want to pay for tooling costs.
As far as defects and failures, that wasn't ever the issue. I have a literal pile of unpainted lenses cut out doing nothing. It was getting in over my head. I posted about lots of other projects and was trying to do too much at one time. I've moved on to much bigger things and have put a lot of what I learned to do and not do when dealing with customers and potential customers, as well as knowing better than to handle every aspect of business by myself. If I ever start selling again, I will have a very large inventory ready to ship before even talking about it. This likely will never happen but in the mean time, if anyone including Rodney would like pictures of my tooling or a better description in how to make them, I am here to help.
Believe it or not I could make actual reproductions. I was talking to TFS about doing that very thing. It wasn't worth it compared to the other projects we are doing now so I abandoned it. I can explain how to do that as well
You're actually posting here...? I have to admit...that takes balls.
You're actually posting here...? I have to admit...that takes balls.
Of which I have none. Don't really see why though. Everyone was made whole and I'm offering my guidance as the only person who has successfully made something happen. If my information isn't wanted, I'll go back to lurking.
Fiero Parts And Acc's Web Page: All new web page!:www.rodneydickman.com Rodney Dickman's Fiero accessories 7604 Treeview Drive Caledonia, WI 53108 Phone/Fax (262) 835-9575
Most everyone here would be interested in you helping out. Most everyone here has no interest in more lies, drama etc. If you can start out on the right foot and stay on the high road no one here will say bad things about you. So we'll see. I will gladly remove my negative rating if you do just that. I will post positive things if you do just that. I will offer any help I am able to offer if you do just that.
------------------ Rodney Dickman
Fiero Parts And Acc's Web Page: All new web page!:www.rodneydickman.com Rodney Dickman's Fiero accessories 7604 Treeview Drive Caledonia, WI 53108 Phone/Fax (262) 835-9575
.......I'm offering my guidance as the only person who has successfully made something happen. If my information isn't wanted, I'll go back to lurking.
"It's always helpful to learn from [our] mistakes because then your mistakes seem worthwhile. - Garry Marshall"
I think it would be great to have your input.
Keith
[/quote][/code]
[This message has been edited by kgoodyear (edited 05-22-2017).]
Originally posted by Dennis LaGrua: I saw a set of Slammed tail light covers installed on a car and they looked beautiful. Also did some work for a guy who purchased MsLoriFiero quarter windows. He installed them and they looked very good.
Tell me more. I sent Lori $250.00 start up money to help make them happen. I thought they never did happen. I said good things about her when people were "slamming" her, even though I lost $250.00, because she tried.
pokeyfiero tried to resurrect the quarter window endeavor but asked for no cash. I would have done it again.
Originally posted by kgoodyear: Why in the world are we over here on this old depressing thread.
My bad ? This thread was brought up in your link. My thought was on quarter windows of which some were delivered. I gave $250.00 and got nothing. I was just asking. Should I have done it in your newer thread ?
Not that I brought this thread up for you but I thought you would be prouder reading this thread, knowing you proved them wrong. Congratulations also.
