1968 Passenger Mirror - Service Replacement - Dating

[Jeff W.]

My '68 has a mirror installed on the passenger door. As this was not a production feature, it is a service replacement. My question is two fold:

1. Where and how should this be 'scored'? Under Section 14, Outside Mirror, Door Handles, and Locks? More specifically under the first entry: Outside mirror? Should it be a deduction for originality or should it be scored some other way?

2. I will not remove the mirror until it is time to paint the car (likely not in my lifetime so I will leave that to the next owner ). That said, should I restore a properly date-coded mirror or is that irrelevant for a non-production, service replacement?

[Joe L.]

Re: 1968 Passenger Mirror - Service Replacement - Dating

My '68 has a mirror installed on the passenger door. As this was not a production feature, it is a service replacement. My question is two fold:

1. Where and how should this be 'scored'? Under Section 14, Outside Mirror, Door Handles, and Locks? More specifically under the first entry: Outside mirror? Should it be a deduction for originality or should it be scored some other way?

2. I will not remove the mirror until it is time to paint the car (likely not in my lifetime so I will leave that to the next owner ). That said, should I restore a properly date-coded mirror or is that irrelevant for a non-production, service replacement?

Jeff------


I would say that the date code is completely irrelevant for a piece like this mirror.

[Gene M.]

Re: 1968 Passenger Mirror - Service Replacement - Dating

As far as scoring the damage to the door will be deducted. The actual mirror is ignored.

[Jeff W.]

Re: 1968 Passenger Mirror - Service Replacement - Dating

Thanks, Gene and Joe. That makes sense. I love the 'damage to the door' part. That's an interesting perspective. Perhaps the deduction should be more harsh because, unlike a rock chip or a door ding, it was purposely damaged.

[Terry M.]

Re: 1968 Passenger Mirror - Service Replacement - Dating

Thanks, Gene and Joe. That makes sense. I love the 'damage to the door' part. That's an interesting perspective. Perhaps the deduction should be more harsh because, unlike a rock chip or a door ding, it was purposely damaged.

Intentions don't matter, however usually a rock chip or door ding does not create a hole with missing fiberglass. One nice thing about a passenger side mirror is the judges will focus on what to do for it and ignore any lesser damage (rock chips or door dings) in their intense focus to "get it right".

Just sign me: Been there and got that T-shirt.

[Reba W.]

Re: 1968 Passenger Mirror - Service Replacement - Dating

The judging standard also makes allowance for a safety item. Being used to two mirrors on current vehicles, I would not drive my 1972 without the right-hand mirror.

[Jeff W.]

Re: 1968 Passenger Mirror - Service Replacement - Dating

Now there is a twist.