Even when GM-H were pumping out 13,000 HK, HT or HG vehicles a month the panel fit was variable and often lousy. When you pull an original fender off an untouched vehicle often the bending and bashing of the various lugs done in the factory to make them line up is something to see.
These cars were appliances back in the day, not showpiece collectors items and built to a price and built without the benefit of 3D CAD models, CADCAM tooling design and the kind of tolerances we take for granted today.
I have fitted quite a few original GM-H HT fenders over the years, and still have a few I bought in the late 1970s early 1980s and I can assure you they aren't paint and bolt on items. Some require tweaks to the indicator lamp recess, some to the headlamp recess, some to the inner fender angles.
The good old days were not as good as you might think. I think we expect a better standard of the cars we restore these days compared to what the factory was turning out 45 years ago, hence we are far more critical of the parts we fit.
Also, it isn't unknown for the bash and boggery industry (panel beaters) to exaggerate the challenges they face in order to charge more money.
I'm a big fan of using restored original parts wherever possible, but in my opinion a tweaked new panel should be a better job long term than an old rusty panel with a weld in section and filler over the top, no matter how good the panel beater is.
If there really are major issues with the panels, rather than denounce the whole panel why not feed the details back to Rare Spares and see if the issues can be addressed?
The tooling for these panels is a low speed low volume type, and much more easily modified and corrected than the high volume punch and die set type used for high speed production volumes.
Edited by user Wednesday, 28 October 2015 4:29:36 PM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
