FRAMING JOHN DELOREAN - ON VOD www.framingjohndeloreanfilm.com
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Brand new left fenders announced!!!

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date:  Jun 2016

    Location:  Austin MN

    Posts:    609

    My VIN:    03500

    Brand new left fenders announced!!!


  2. #2
    Senior Member AugustneverEnds's Avatar
    Join Date:  Jul 2012

    Location:  Syracuse, NY area

    Posts:    1,054

    My VIN:    10287

    Club(s):   (DMA)

    LFFs, mythical no more!
    Nick A.

    1988 BMW 325is
    1982 DeLorean DMC-12
    1989 Jaguar XJ6

  3. #3
    Senior Member JRNY13's Avatar
    Join Date:  Aug 2012

    Location:  Massachusetts

    Posts:    176

    My VIN:    5757

    Bravo!

  4. #4
    Senior Member r00b's Avatar
    Join Date:  May 2011

    Location:  Co

    Posts:    361

    My VIN:    2245

    Because of a clerical error more rights were made then lefts. The seemingly low amount of lefts compared to rights caused people to horde them. The hoarders might now decide to sell their fenders. Better to wait and grab an original from ebay then take a risk with DMCH's historically poor quality remanufactured parts.

    Alternately you could use something like incremental sheet forming to make fenders or whatever other panels you need.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Rhye's Avatar
    Join Date:  May 2013

    Location:  Poland

    Posts:    126

    My VIN:    3771

    Quote Originally Posted by r00b View Post
    Because of a clerical error more rights were made then lefts.
    I've read somewhere that they made a bigger stock of RH ones 'cause the RH die was nearing the need of a time consuming maintenance (not sure if that's confirmed).

    Anyway, if it's true that the new-made ones are 20% thinner than OEMs (some facebook sources say that), than I guess it can hardly be called a reproduction part at all - unless the thinner sheet was used for sample part only (not sure if it'd make any sense).

  6. #6
    Senior Member r00b's Avatar
    Join Date:  May 2011

    Location:  Co

    Posts:    361

    My VIN:    2245

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhye View Post
    I've read somewhere that they made a bigger stock of RH ones 'cause the RH die was nearing the need of a time consuming maintenance (not sure if that's confirmed).
    Could have been I haven't herd that one before though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhye View Post
    Anyway, if it's true that the new-made ones are 20% thinner than OEMs (some facebook sources say that), than I guess it can hardly be called a reproduction part at all - unless the thinner sheet was used for sample part only (not sure if it'd make any sense).
    It would not be surprising to me, new cars have much thinner body panels than older ones. My Model T and A fenders are super thick compared to thin sheet metal used today. Also DMCH operates with the greedy algorithm, they choose the cheapest next step which is clearly not the way for maximum profits in the long run. I think that's just because the decision makers are cheapskates, that's why you don't get quality parts from DMCH.

  7. #7
    Senior Member 82DMC12's Avatar
    Join Date:  May 2011

    Location:  Olathe, KS

    Posts:    1,772

    My VIN:    11596

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhye View Post
    I've read somewhere that they made a bigger stock of RH ones 'cause the RH die was nearing the need of a time consuming maintenance (not sure if that's confirmed).

    Anyway, if it's true that the new-made ones are 20% thinner than OEMs (some facebook sources say that), than I guess it can hardly be called a reproduction part at all - unless the thinner sheet was used for sample part only (not sure if it'd make any sense).
    I'd be careful spreading that rumor. The spec for the original fenders is 0.8mm +/- 0.25mm and the resolution on most of those cheap calipers is in fact +/- 0.2mm. The comparison could simply be margin of error. You would need to measure the both old and new panel with both calipers to prove it. That has not yet been done.
    Andy Lien

    VIN 11596 Jan 1982 build - owned since Nov. 2000!
    Total frame-off restoration completed 2021-2023

    Photography and Backpacking is life.

    Was Fargo, ND
    Now Kansas City

  8. #8
    Senior Member 82DMC12's Avatar
    Join Date:  May 2011

    Location:  Olathe, KS

    Posts:    1,772

    My VIN:    11596

    There have been a lot of rumors as to why there are much fewer LFF's than RFF's. Some stories I've heard over the last 25 years -

    1) Lapple was very much in tune with JIT (just in time) manufacturing and had the factory stayed open they would have produced more LFF's just as the existing supply was running out. Just bad luck, could have been RFF's we run out of.

    2) At least one crate was delivered stamped LEFT FRONT FENDER , which was recorded in inventory that way, but when the crate was opened it was actually RFF's

    3) a Government conspiracy

    Anyway, I've never really worried about my LFF because there are so many of them hoarded and on garage and man cave walls that I know if I ever needed one, I could get it as long as I'm prepared to open the wallet.
    Andy Lien

    VIN 11596 Jan 1982 build - owned since Nov. 2000!
    Total frame-off restoration completed 2021-2023

    Photography and Backpacking is life.

    Was Fargo, ND
    Now Kansas City

  9. #9
    Senior Member r00b's Avatar
    Join Date:  May 2011

    Location:  Co

    Posts:    361

    My VIN:    2245

    Quote Originally Posted by 82DMC12 View Post
    The comparison could simply be margin of error. You would need to measure the both old and new panel with both calipers to prove it. That has not yet been done.
    Yes that's true, though it would be consistent with DMCH's greedy algorithm approach to everything.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Rhye's Avatar
    Join Date:  May 2013

    Location:  Poland

    Posts:    126

    My VIN:    3771

    Quote Originally Posted by 82DMC12 View Post
    I'd be careful spreading that rumor. The spec for the original fenders is 0.8mm +/- 0.25mm
    That's why I said "if". Actually hope that's just someone's error/misinterpretation.
    Didn't expect the tolerance being as high as +/- 31% of thickness (but never had anything to do with sheet metal stamping).

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •