I have a 1965 valiant signet 2dr hardtop. It didn't have a factory mirror on it when I got it and I put an aftermarket cheapo on it. I am in the process of putting it back together and would like to find what the correct mirror looks like.

Is the 2dr HT door mirror the same as the convertibles/4dr/2dr sedans? I believe my mirror was factory installed in the wrong location. It matched a 2dr sedan I used to have in terms of where it mounted to the door BUT the vent wing would hit the mirror in that location. The hardtop (and maybe the verts) had a larger vent wing which makes me suspect that the mirror was mounted in a different spot on the hardtop door.

So 2 questions....

1) are the mirrors the same and what do they look like

2) are the mirrors actually mounted in a different spot on the door.

Is this mirror a similar style to factory units? https://www.classicindustries.com/produ ... d2206.html

=-=

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Are we talking about a remote mirror or the reach-out-the-window-and-move-the-head type?

If you mean remote, those are '64-only, '65-only, 66-only, and then '67-'76 on the A-bodies. The '64-'65-'66-'67+ differences are limited to minor details of the shape of the mirror housing and control knob, so unless you're building a points-judged car, they don't matter. The 2-door cars with the bigger vent wing got a mirror assembly with a longer control cable, because yes, those cars had the mirror mounted forward of the vent wing's pivot, and the driver looks in the mirror through the vent wing. The 4-door/wagon cars had the mirror mounted right about even with the pillar between the trailing edge of the vent wing and the leading edge of the main window, and the driver looks in the mirror through the main window.

"Factory installed": the non-remote mirrors were often installed by dealers. Whether or not they bothered to use the mirrors supplied through MoPar (many of them just bought whatever they could get cheapest), they often just threw 'em on wherever, without regard to pesky things like whether you could open the vent wing or, um, see the mirror through the window.

As to that thing you linked: it is almost kinda more or less sort of a not-very-faithful copy of the MoPar twin-post mirror which would have been one of the factory-supplied options for your car. Be aware that Classic Industries is a garbage company selling garbage parts, and they do not deserve to receive any money. Same goes for PG Classics.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

I never knew that side mirror were dealer installed. That makes it easier to understand why it was always in the way of the vent.

So the classic industries unit is similar in appearance to what is period correct for a manual door mirror, but source it from somewhere else. I wondered about CA because 5 minutes after I was on there website I was getting youtube ads about them. Time to clear my cookies again, I hate this modern era of targeted ads.

Here's one example of "somewhere else" more worthy of your money. There are those who will say "Pfft, they all come from China, they're all the same, ur stoopid if you pay the higher price". Once in awhile they're correct, but usually not.

Consider turn signal switches: the vast majority of them on the market right now are Chinese junk, but they're not all the same; some of them are even crummier than others.

Some of that is more than one "company" in China making a given part. It's more common than you might think, and "company" is in sneer-quotes like that because it's often some individual schmoe in the rough equivalent of a dirt-floor shack. Some of those schmoes are very good at making things out of materials that look like the specified ones, that look a lot like the sample (for a little while, maybe long enough for the end user's payment to clear — see the PG Classics thread I linked above).

And some of it is just the way stuff works in China: dozens of outfits market a given thing and claim it's their own work, but it's just a pecking order of who paid how much to include it in their product line. Those who paid more (and/or their brother-in-law is the schmoe, or they have other connections) get the least-crummy parts. Those who paid less (and/or don't have connections) get the most-crummy parts. Same-same whether we're talking small-volume stuff like a mirror for an old car, or large-volume stuff like an aftermarket replacement headlamp for a Ford F-150.

Then along comes the Westerner, with his cute li'l assumptions about adherence to specifications and quality control, etc. As far as he's concerned, just lookit, it's capitalism! Otherwise why would he be able to shop on price? And then he goes bіtching and moaning when this inevitably happens (I would bet you a real nice meal this is happening with those mirrors).

Same planet, different worlds. That's the kind of thing one gets to learn as a product development manager. Also see this (the linked book can be read for free on the Internet Archive, here).

All that said: you might want to see about finding a 2292 194, which was the upgraded — larger, more adjustable — non-remote sideview mirror marketed to police-taxi car buyers:
That's this one (the linked one would need its glass replaced or resilvered). I have a faint bell ringing at the back of my head, saying I might have one of these mirrors on shelf; send me a PM if you want me to check.

It's a big damn shame this American invention never got commercialized. A couple discs of that kind of mirror glass would go great on either/both side(s) of an old car.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

I think I had one of the ebay ones you listed in my collection back when I actually had a spare parts collection years ago.

I will go with the Year one unit when the time comes. I know they have supported the hobby for 30+ years with quality stuff at a premium price.

I totally agree with the "china" problem. Some stuff sourced from china is top quality with world class quality control, other stuff is made in the dirt level of bad. I am not a member of the crowd that dismisses all product from that country, but I do wish they would give a little respect to IP's.

I think one of the best most clear cut examples was the harbor freight/snap on lawsuit of 15 years ago. Snap on had sourced a company to make them a jack that they were selling for 700. Harbor freight contacted that same company to buy the same unit and sold it for 200. The company clearly made a good product to a good spec but most jacks from the same country in the same price point are questionable at best.

A few years back I saw drivers door mirror with a vertical crack down the middle. It had the same basic effect as the nifty curved glass you linked.

Right, sooner than later there's always gonna be the one who says "If China is so bad, then how come iPhones are so good, huh? H'mm? Huh?".

What they miss is that Apple puts a very, very large number of dollars into each and every part of each and every tool, jig, fixture — they don't just go "Here's the blueprint; make us this", they specify absolutely everything in minute detail. Not just what's to be made and what it's to be made of, but how it's to be done at every stage. They put another very, very large number of dollars into enforcing their specifications, again at every step of every stage of every process, and yet more dollars — another very very large number of them — into babysitting to make sure their directives and specs are followed each and every time, and policing their contractors to make sure the production lines aren't turning out unofficial products alongside the official ones.

The assembly work is done by people who tolerate barely-paid slavery (in China for the time being; shifting to countries like Vietnam and Laos, and eventually it'll be countries in Africa) because that's cheaper than getting it done by people who won't.
Nobody can be, unless they want to live in a stone cave or something. But over the years I have certainly seen a highly consistent pattern when comparing items from China versus superior items (and behaviour) from Taiwan, and I'll leave it at that to avoid going off into the political weeds.
LOL! Shirley, you're joking. IP theft is China's basic business model.
No, not the same. That kind you're describing is almost universal outside North America. The larger inboard section is flat glass. The smaller outboard section is aspheric, which provides a wider view field, but with the usual distortion. I put those on my previous car and they were great, but not as good as the one I linked, which provides a big view field with no distortion.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.