Glass, or plastic?

 

2k uv/impact/high temp.resist polyurethane,glass would make it way to expensive.

 

So, not "exact replica"

 

Yes exact-the shape with all details.

 

Franjo,

Please don't take me wrong. I am looking forward to whatever items you produce for the 102. I have just started my 3rd 102 restoration, and looking forward to a good result.

In the realm of the early Touring cars, which have become quite valuable, "exact" would mean precisely that. If the car was intended to be a fun driver, then a plastic lens would be better than a broken lens. For my purposes, a slightly road-worn, but unbroken glass lens would be preferable to a perfect plastic lens. Fortunately, I have extra glass lenses.

I encourage your support of the 102.

Thanks

 

I understand but imagine the cost for glass repros.I am doing my best to help alfista worldwide.There are a lot of bubbles in original glass lenses,you have it also?

 

I understand but imagine the cost for glass repros.I am doing my best to help alfista worldwide.

Franjo, I think nobody questions you intent. However, it seems to me that a language problem may exist with respect to what expectations your use of the term "exact replica" sets, and whether or not the use of such a term could be construed as misleading and therefore "false advertising" under either a Commercial Code (e.g. the Uniform Commercial Code "UCC" -- a law governing commercial activity) or under Contract Law.

My point is, your description is not just plain English, but, when used in a product offering, will have legal consequences in a sales contract. The issue is that UCC states that express warranties are created when a seller makes a promise to a buyer about the goods, or when a seller offers a description of the goods -- meaning that the goods must conform to the description. Now, there can be some difference in interpretation of certain terms (e.g. what you mean by "exact replica" and what a buyer perceives reading this term), but when I receive a plastic part of what is advertised as "exact replica" of a glass piece, I most certainly would be disappointed, because I would expect the "exact replica" not just to be in the same dimensions, but also made from the same kind of material as the original.

So, I would suggest (and this is not legal advice, as I'm not a lawyer but have dealt with writing many contracts and resolving contract disputes) that you use a different term, such as "polyurethane reproduction" (the thread title indicates you are halfway there) rather than the term "exact replica" in order to protect yourself from having to deal with angry and /or disappointed buyers.

 

Franjo,

If someone wants to build, and another person wants to buy, as near as perfect 102 Touring as possible, they will be happy with original glass with bubbles in it. These glasses get broken from time to time, and for someone driving their car a lot, your plastic lenses will be completely acceptable. For a top restoration, we will stick to original glass, with scratches and bubbles.

 

corrected translation suggested...

I understand Don's point and agree 100%. On the other hand, I have purchased a couple of Franjo's parts and they are of excellent quality. The description could be reworded to prevent misunderstanding as follows:

Exact size replica made in 2k uv/impact/high temperature resistant polyurethane, instead of glass -available in February 2018

Mark

 

Most people with the tiniest of familiarity with these cars can understand the meaning of what he wrote.

I've never touched one of these cars, I don't think I've seen one in person, but I know the original lenses were made of glass.

In his description, it's clear that these are not made of glass. By exact reproduction, to me, it's obvious he's pulled a mould from an original.

 

In his description, it's clear that these are not made of glass.

Nope, not in the first post of this thread, which reads:

Exact replica-available in February 2018

BTW, "copy" would be a better term than "replica" or "reproduction."

 

Nothing to add other than I would recommend the seller test the light in static conditions. The wrong size bulb could technically heat up the lens I suppose... just something else to consider when doing something off-spec with all good intentions. He might find an LED as a practical recommendation for the bulb. There are plastic lenses on tail-light units and also some Giulietta parking lights.. I just want to alert the seller to test what he has to save a BIG potential unexpected problem down the road for him. It is always the unexpected that ruins the day.

 

Fixed,i wish you all the best in 2018.
Divotandtralee-good idea about LED bulb! What standard are original bulbs?

 

You can find the bulb wattage in the owner's manual... The steady lights like parking lights on a Giulietta have 3 Watts and the blinking (hotter) filaments are 20 Watts which do not get too hot because they blink ... 3 probably is hard to find but 5 shouldn't be...In the case of your application the wattage specified might be higher in the book for a glass lense and if followed with a plastic lense might result with disasterous consequences. I relay this story .. I MELTED the courtesy light lens in my Sprint with a bulb I expected to be proper (festoon or "banana" bulb ) that was only slightly too high a wattage. That is how I learned to be careful with watts and plastic lenses and to use correct bulbs. In your case, it might be necessary to step-down the wattage from the glass lensed originals or insist the customer use LED for safety sake... Good luck with your project. Merry Christmas! PS I doubt you have a big market but anything is better than nothing so it will be well received.

 

Thanks!

 

I am not good in electric stuff...only foglight need LED bulb.Is there the same colour tone and brightness LED bulb available for foglight and technically-will that work without any additional gismos?

 

The fog light bulb was rated 45W. It can be substituted by a LED without problems.
The parking light/direction indicator light is dual-filament bulb rated at 5W/20W.

 

Resistors placed in line to an LED will cause an LED to flash normally Regrettably I don't know the correct resistance, but I'm sure the correct values are easily obtained via a search online.

 

Nope, they would have to be in parallel with the LEDs, not in-line (which would make matters worse and dim the LEDs).