NOS vs Reproduction

[FormTA]

Wow! The mirror topic keeps getting deeper! I continue to be riveted to this info though! I find it very fascinating! Thanks Ben!

[roadking77]

Another good comparison. One of mine had a corner chipped and I was gonna replace but figured to try a repair before replacement. It actually came out pretty good. I took the entire thing apart and soaked the 'flappers' in simple green to clean them. And that made a huge difference. Mine were not rubber though, almost like a woven fabric type of material. In the building industry I would call it Typar like.

[Wallington]

Good to know. I used the term rubber loosely, figured it was similar to a neoprene material crossed with felt, but waterproof! Not idea if a 1970 piece would use exactly type as a 1992 part or updated somehow.

Not everyone is convinced with the mirror gaskets or components. Try to help them, add pics and diagrams, but they don't even look, claiming every seller copying each other with incorrect repro numbers vs GM, some random guy and common sense proves they don't even have to consider it.

There's an eBay ad at present, big name used seller and even I've used them several times in last 10 years, and will again.
Ad shows LH remote  mirror, Firebird gasket and RH inner door bracket from a Firebird. I messaged them thinking its just an innocent typo, grabbing wrong parts for pics and so many ads being listed. I said just swap the LH remote mirror for a RH mirror, any model, and you have a RH Firebird setup complete. Nope. No. It's for LH Camaro and Firebird. Um ok...well, here's why that's a Firebird gasket and here's why that's a Firebird bracket, and there was no LH bracket as it's part of the door frame. No, straight into attack mode about how long they've been selling Camaro parts. Ok, long enough to know basics, I'd have assumed. The problem is, someone like me would have bought this 20yrs ago and wondered why nothing fits and at great expense. This is another area where Google AI sprouts false info, based on sheer incorrect info, and universal parts carrying GM numbers they shouldn't.

Some of the guys with roughly 80-81 models will have seen inside their mirrors that the 2 screws holding support to the head even swapped to a torx-head type. Im not sure if there was a delayed uprising against convex glass since mid-78 but this was to limit guys easily swapping internals to standard glass!

[Wallington]

Some more trivial details, some that have been done already but some more. Ignore the grainy images up close. Chromework is hard to focus on, especially in low light, and dodgy phone cameras.

NOS GM #20099255 LH door handle (76-81 short)

Hard to see in pics, but the clearance holes are smaller in the hinge pins and there is even a layer of grease for a silent action. The repros still have a slight grinding and spring tensioning sound. The mounting bracket is straight with equal gap. Repros nearly always have more gap on the spring end. This has been shown in prior comparisons in this thread. Also, the repro handle tops at the rear always extend further and closer to the bracket. Some even touch if there's flashing, and makes the angled gap more obvious. This is shown in a few pics below like stud pic and all 3 at once.

NOS GM 20099255 LH Firebird door handle (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS GM 20099255 LH Firebird door handle (4) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS GM 20099255 LH Firebird door handle (12) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr


Not terribly detailed but a few comparions with generic chrome and black powdercoat replacements. Even when they sometimes carry a brand on the box or the packet, you can still find several different castings and suppliers used. Paying extra for OER will still get you the no-name that costs half. Taiwan specials, although there still seems to be better versions, at least on the few sets I've compared.

NOS GM has the gold plated mount and the red spring. Both of the reproductions are similar, yet different castings.

NOS GM 20099255 LH door handle vs repros (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS GM 20099255 LH door handle vs repros (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

The GM version has dog-nose studs to assist getting flange nuts on, I don't recall any repros having these yet. Also, the stud splines are often too long for the plate they are pressed through, likely due to being used for many applications. The black version has correct length, but standard thread ends also. These are M6 studs, which was correct for original handles for this type.

Strangely enough, the was a gradual change from 1/4" imperial to M6 Metric during the mid years, this version handle was metric, earlier long handle was imperial. But the flange nuts used #3063100, are listed in GM parts books as being both threads, obviously an error somewhere during the changeover process.
#3063100 is the metric number. The earlier 1/4" part number should be #14051876. Double-check what you have anytime you swap parts.

NOS LH door handle 20099255 gold vs repro studs M6 by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

The GM version of rod clip is far tighten and better fitter, with box sides. Repros are a flimsy wrap around type. The repros may even use the same clip here, albeit blackened or plated to contrast the part. The GM version has a lot more positive locking tab through the hole, the others are more of a dimpled tab and would rebend easy rather than retain shape.

NOS LH door handle 20099255 clip vs repro (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS LH door handle 20099255 clip vs repro (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS LH door handle 20099255 clip vs repro (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Spring detail differences, although not that really matters much. GM bent to suit part while repro more generic. Repro appears to use same springs.

NOS LH door handle 20099255 spring detail red vs repro (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS LH door handle 20099255 spring detail red vs repro (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS LH door handle 20099255 spring detail red vs repro (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Up close end handle shape detail. GM has squared inlay shape, repro has curves, less picture frame border definition.

NOS LH door handle 20099255 vs repro handle details (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS LH door handle 20099255 vs repro handle details (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS LH door handle 20099255 vs repro handle details (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr


Here's something interesting that I've only just noticed, and not seen on repros. (will check later) The spring mounting pin is actually angled slightly, not damaged! I'm not sure if this helps keep things squared up with spring tension or perhaps offers a more metered sprung feeling as open and closed. Obviously does 'something'. And the repros....don't. That something is completely missing! Another clear sign of how much gap is between the GM handle and the mount compared to the pics below it.

NOS LH door handle 20099255 angled spring mount vs repro (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS LH door handle 20099255 angled spring mount vs repro (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS LH door handle 20099255 angled spring mount vs repro (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr


And just to add further confusion, here's the RH-side NOS GM 20099254 door handle. The rear of the studs are stamped with dates, make up your mind what year and decade they are from. The box dates it to 70-80s.

NOS GM Firebird door handle 20099254 RH (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS GM Firebird door handle 20099254 RH ( by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Except, unlike the 90's NOS version above, the spring end attachment appears to be straight. I was trying to get a good comparison pic and seemed to have shifted for the pic. A quick search of other used GM shows them to be straight, but most angles don't show it either. Hard to tell if it's a shift in the casting or an update modification of sorts. Both function silently and smoothly compared to the creaky repros that sound like grinding metal and tensioning of springs. The grease does help too, applied to GM from new.

NOS GM Firebird door handle 20099254 RH (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS GM Firebird door handle spring angles 20099254 20099255 by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

[Wallington]

Recently released Oldsmobile (and some BOP) version of the long fuel filter housing for Quadrajet carbs. This is the extended nut version, there is already a longer version available of the short nut as shown on used Q-jet at bottom of this post.

To justify the postage expense, I bought several. Then found out they were brass, not plated like the originals. Not terrible, but also not original. They are nearly always dinged-up, and rounded off, so replate badly and highlight any damage more than used. These came with spring, seal and filter that were made in Taiwan. I'm assuming the bodies could be as well, they are unbranded and 2 sellers that stock these refused to respond.

I only compared by eye, they look good in proportions and machining.

Quadrajet brass filter housing repro (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Quadrajet brass filter housing repro (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Pontiac and BOP version that uses the shorter hex nut section.

Quadrajet brass filter housing repro (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Quadrajet brass filter housing repro (5) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Quadrajet brass filter housing repro (7) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr


Slightly off-topic, but it's my thread and i don't care! Here's a couple more pics while on topic.
These are just a selection of the 3 common types of straight Quadrajet fuel filter housings, bare steel and ready for plating.

Quadrajet fuel filter housing types bare (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

And just for a laugh, the reproduction long nut version with a slightly used version that was on a very sad Q-jet I picked up. Without the seal installed, it was always going to have leaks and tape everywhere. Someone fancied themselves as a carb rebuilder. Had been sitting a long time with crud inside and no filter.

Quadrajet repro fuel inlet housing and used  (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Quadrajet repro fuel inlet housing and used  (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Quadrajet repro fuel inlet housing and used  (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

But it cleaned up well, kinda. Ready for plating.

Quadrajet repro fuel inlet housing and used  (4) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Quadrajet repro fuel inlet housing and used  (6) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

[Wallington]

NOS GM 9827572 door handle gasket vs OER repro (probably).  GM is top or left, and darker.

A few brands stocked these and are likely the same moulding. The GM version feels thinner and lighter but I didn't check. This one had been installed on a NOS door handle in packet so already half folded up. The repro remains flat but is still slightly oversize in this area. This could be intentional if the GM version is a tight fit on replacement handles, I haven't checked.

Overall, the repro is a cleaner looking casting, but also feels chunky. The repro is thicker where it folds over behind the mounting plate, and therefore sits further off the door. GM version easy to spot, new or used, with the cast numerals and codes, mainly the PP. I've seen repros being offered as NOS GM that were plain, and of course, unboxed, and more expensive than they clearly cost.

NOS GM 9827572 Firebird door handle gasket vs repro (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS GM 9827572 Firebird door handle gasket vs repro (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS GM 9827572 Firebird door handle gasket vs repro (4) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

NOS GM 9827572 Firebird door handle gasket vs repro (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

[Wallington]

I decided to test fit a couple of the door handle gaskets on a rough repro handle. I'd already done some tests on the handle some time ago and damaged the chrome trying to file the flashing back, which then helps it peel. So ignore if you have chrome flashing, keep it rough and ugly! Sacrificed a set just for online posts.

Here's another example of bad press-in stud length splines, compared to bracket thickness. Although, if the door skin has clearance, it still has to be thicker than the spline or nut will bottom out before tight. Still crude.

Firebird door handle repro stud splines by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

The flimsy little tabs that tuck over the door handle studs, often seen on the repros like OER. No strength, pointless. OER also uses stock photos that have this area scalloped, doubt it's a replacement version, more likely just a second supplier in use.

Firebird repro door handle and gasket (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

And when the OER gasket is installed on repro handle, not only is the handle top hitting it and not closing fully, it closes more on one end due to the angled, twisted handle gap often seen on repros, spring end nearly always twice that of the plain end gap.

Firebird repro door handle and gasket (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Firebird repro door handle and gasket (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr


This is the NOS GM gasket. A little out of shape as was wrapped around a NOS handle in box for years, rather than clamped down square when in use. Chunkier tabs, but thinner where it folds over the handle plate.

Firebird repro door handle NOS GM gasket (1) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Firebird repro door handle NOS GM gasket (2) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr

Hard to see but handle closes squarely and evenly along the gasket and it presses down on it at the same time it reaches the stops in the handle. A perfect seal and doesn't hold the handle open.

Firebird repro door handle NOS GM gasket (3) by Ben Noakes, on Flickr