Taillight lens ID
 

Now that the quality of reproduction taillights lenses have improved (no more peeling paint) I'm unsure how to tell a fake from an original. I have some with 11 flutes and 12 flutes. I have a small stack from an estate. None are for the drum style. Some are all red and some amber and red


How can you spot the fakes?





Thanks in advance

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

I never did understand you they went with the amber and red instead of all red.

Regards
Bill

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

Some states required it I think.

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

Amber is more visible in fog.

States required red for brakes.

On my car there is one I believe is original, the other obviously repop. The original has a deeper amber color and a bit of red overspray around the edges. The other is a paler color and may be lighter in weight. it's possible they are both repops, just different, so this really isn't much help.

I put red LED bulbs in them and it now it has bright red brake lights, filters right through the amber.

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

The inside diffusers for the red have a unique shape I believe. I have one I recovered from a housing that broke apart as I fumbled it out. Like jagged pyramids. Anybody seen this, or have better information?

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

This is one question where I think you have to be very careful defining "original" and "repop".


First, this is the type of item that Ford tended to have multiple suppliers and there easily could be significant differences between two lenses yet both "original".
Second, is there documentation that the lenses were originally painted or were they cast using dyed glass? If dyed there could easily be variations in color saturation from run to run, or even within a single run.
Third, there were almost certainly period aftermarket lenses sold. Would they qualify as "original" (not) or "repop" (no... too old) or what?
Hopefully someone along the line has compared numerous documented original lights to see what, if any, differences in the lenses there are. Also if the original engineering drawings available they should specify the construction (and hopefully variations... if any). If not, could someone sic Steve Plucker on this!

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

A possible bag of worms. I may go find my mangled OLD lens. I wonder how many are out there. Maybe an nos ford replacement somewhere.

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

I have a significant collection of red & amber lenses. All look to be originals, but have variations. Is there a Ford drawing of the original available?

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

Hi Barbara, back when the MARC Meet was held in San Diego, I had the fortune of judging several classes out there, -and one was Area 18 with the late Tim Johnstone as Team Captain. Tim was very knowledgeable on lamps in general ...and the way we were determining is he put a small flashlight up to the red glass portion at an angle and he wanted to see a definitive 'swirl' in the glass. All I remember him saying was that the glass had Lead in it that caused this. Likely we incorrectly scored a few cars as having service replacement or reproduction glass due to the swirl not being pronounced enough for his liking. To answer your question, likely the sure-fire way is to look for any type of distorted or swirled look inside of the glass.




1Karl, I think the one thing that probably played into this is that Ford engineers often gave specific instructions to Vendors as to the procedures and materials to be used. I have seen on many prints where the print made reference to a M-Spec which outlined what materials or components must be used as Ford did not want inferior materials to be substituted by a Vendor that might cause premature failures.

2 I spoke of this briefly above, but as I understood it from Tim Johnstone (-who I think is the one that wrote the revisions for the Standards), the glass was specified as to the composition and it was to have lead in it. My guess is the variation did not deviate much, if any.

3 Aftermarket during that time period would fall into the category of Service Replacement. For the purpose of Fine Point judging and what is acceptable, if there was an aftermarket glass manufactured either back then, -or a reproduction piece today that meets the criteria of the 11 or 12 flutes and had the swirling marks visible, then it likely would not receive any point deduction during adjudication.

To answer your follow-up thoughts, yes the Engineer's prints of A-13450-* will spell out all of the dimensions and design criteria. This applied to both in-house manufacturing and outsourced items. In the top corner of the print will be a list of variation dates along with a EI# (Engineer's Information) that gave a brief description on what design change was made. Depending on the build-date of the vehicle being restored, the print last made prior to the assembly date is what information should be used. As far as questions regarding specifics, I would be happy to do some light researching on this 'if' the Benson Research Center ever re-opens to the public.

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

Thanks for the clarification, Brent.

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

Is the lead in the glass as in lead crystal type molding? Lead crystal molding gives finer detail than other techniques.

Re: Taillight lens ID
 

ty brent