1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

[Chuck G.]

I dragged my container of spare 63 parts out of the attic to retrieve what I needed for my turn signal issue..

In the box, I found a set of repro interior window cranks. They're nice and purty... nice chrome, no pits or scratches.

My originals are pretty nice, but, they do have pits, scratches and some areas of thin chrome.

I cannot find any detectable differences between the repros and the originals. The originals have the part number embossed under the round area where the crank mounts on the regulator, but this is not visible when installed.

That's all I can see.

How do these handles judge?

Chuck

[Bob R.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

I think if you measure carefully you will find that the reproductions are just a bit smaller (the diameter of the round base) than the originals. With the originals on you couldn't see the plastic trim piece under the handle but you could with the reproductions. They were picked up on my car at the regional a few years ago.

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

I think if you measure carefully you will find that the reproductions are just a bit smaller (the diameter of the round base) than the originals. With the originals on you couldn't see the plastic trim piece under the handle but you could with the reproductions. They were picked up on my car at the regional a few years ago.

Thanks, Bob.

I didn't measure the diameter of the circular part. Will do so and report back.

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

I mic'ed both the original and repro handles I have.

Original and repro main window cranks mic @ 2.066 (orig) and 2.074 (repro) The repro is actually slightly larger.

Original and repro vent window cranks mic @ 2.015 (orig) and 1.950 (repro). So, the repro vent crank is 0.065 smaller.

[Joe R.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

Chuck, you are obsessing about window and vent cranks that have been used on GM cars and there must be thousands of them out there. The original supplier is still out there making them for trim parts and many other vendors supplying GM Chev. parts.
This ain't a gold crown! Take off and go to the Zoo!

JR

[Brian T.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

Just a note on this one Chuck. There are at least 2 different suppliers for these. I have not compared each to originals as you have. to There may be a version that is closer to the original.

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

Before I stick my Tupperware container of "spare" parts back in the attic.... I wanted to ask.

I can easily swap out handles.

Chuck

[Carmen R.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

If you were to carefully trim 0.065 off the plastic trim piece, would the judges be sharp enough to pick it up?

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

0.0625 = 1/16 inch. Would be TOUGH to do.

I'll just stick with my original cranks.

[John D.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

The repro handles have more bling that the NOS handles. I bought a set of each for my 63 the LWC as got dinged on the original handles.
The NOS handles are on the crude side right out of the box compared to the pretty repros Dr. Chuck. JD

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

The repro handles have more bling that the NOS handles. I bought a set of each for my 63 the LWC as got dinged on the original handles.
The NOS handles are on the crude side right out of the box compared to the pretty repros Dr. Chuck. JD

I left my gnarly old originals on the car. They're not too bad.. a few pits, etc.

They exhibit "patina".

[John D.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

Dr. Chuck, I have the originals on my 63. The window cranks are original. The vent window cranks are NOS.
My originals have light pitting so I lost a point. Since never having the car judged again and can't see that good without switching glasses they are good enough. hahahaha

[Bob R.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

I should have mentioned in my post earlier the reproduction window crank on the drivers door just will not stay on. I have tried to install it many times it always seems fine then when I try to use it it falls off in my hand. The original with a few pits on it works like a charm and never falls off so I have an original on the drivers side and a reproduction on the passengers side. At the nationals in Warwick RI this summer I didn't get any deductions for either the pitting on the original part or the reproduction.

[John D.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

Bob, I bought a pair of the repros. One of the knobs will not turn on the shaft. Would rather have an original and get a ding for minor pits. Just like you said. JD

[Chuck G.]

Re: 1963 Repro vs. Original Vent and Window Cranks

Dr. Chuck, I have the originals on my 63. The window cranks are original. The vent window cranks are NOS.
My originals have light pitting so I lost a point. Since never having the car judged again and can't see that good without switching glasses they are good enough. hahahaha

Bob, I bought a pair of the repros. One of the knobs will not turn on the shaft. Would rather have an original and get a ding for minor pits. Just like you said. JD

As I previously stated, I left my originals on the car.

The box of spare parts is going to be returned to the 140* attic, not to be retrieved again until the temperatures drop.