Cibie Pallas lights

[JKH]

check em out; NOS , not mine ,but have seen em
http://www.914club.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=61784

[PJenkins]

Someone correct me if I am wrong...but, at closer inspection these are NOT Pallas...they seem to be modified Super Oscars made to look like the hood mounted versions.

The chrome rings are wrong, without the tab on the bottom, the lenses look concave rather than convex, and lastly the mounting plate is far to visible than normal.

Anyone else have an opinion on this...I would hate to see someone shell out the $1200 he is asking to eventually discover he/she is buying lights that are actually not that rare?

[JKH]

should it say , hood mounted cibies , pallas style
I dont think any ones being misled if you follow the link.
Here is some other reference
http://www.early911sregistry.org/for...ead.php?t=9772

[Zithlord]

I think they are correct, BUT if you scroll down and look at the pick posted by "series9" he shows a Cibie Oscar, but this is just for comparison reasons, read the text.


These are the light being sold(those on the blue 914 car):

http://www.914club.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=61784

The lenses look correct Cibie Pallas(correct pattern on lens surface), and so do the housings witch I have never seen reproduced. The mounting plates could be wrong because they are very easy to reproduce, but one have to see them in person to be sure. If correct the mounting plate should be slightly bent so that the unbent middle part form a triangle (difficult to explain). I am not sure if the chrome ring that was delivered without the mounting tab is supposed to have the small hole, but someone else can probably answer that. Any way I think the chrome ring is also correct, but could be an stainless steel repro.

John

[72targa]

For what it's worth, the ad title on the 914 board was "FS New Super Oscar Cibie". The lights certainly appear to be Cibie Pallas although the rings are different than any that I've seen. Very cool lights any way you cut it.

[Zithlord]

I think after looking closer at picture nr. 4 in the tread that you might be right 72targa. The chrome ring looks to have a slightly different curvature towards the front, is this what you where reffering to 72Targa?

John

[72targa]

Actually, it's the single hole at the bottom of the ring. The rings I have that are missing the tab have three holes (one circular and two rectangular where the tab was connected). The curvature you mentioned also looks different. Add this to the reference file!

[preS]

Since they are NOS and the lenses are mounted "Porsche style" instead of Citroen (slightly, 15 degrees off for Porsche as the Marchall pictured above) this might be a real set for Porsche's?

The hole in the ring - which indeed is different from the one's I have seen as well - make sense to me, to drain the water that it normally would have catched when driving in the rain. The stainless steel rings do not have the hole.

The buckets are/ were being reproduced. I have even seen them in plastic.

It would be interesting to see when Jim posts some pictures when he has received them. I would like to see pictures from all the parts and the inscriptions in the lenses.

Richard

[OliveR]

NOS mounting plates must be black and like John's description,but not really important.
Richard,
according to me,Cibié's were always 15 degrées off ,they were produced for Citroen ID(DS) and you always must drill the rings trim (or buckets) to fit Porsche hood.

[PJenkins]

My point about the lenses...is that the Oscars and Hood versions share the same pattern and almost the same size...but when side by side the the hood mounted lenses are convex and the Oscars are concave...from the picture they look concave to me.

Back when I was buying a set of the Hood Mounted versions I asked alot of these questions...how close are the Oscars to the Pallas? Can a set of Oscar's be made to resemble the Pallas? I think they certainly can be. Cut the bottoms out and fab a plate.

I am not suggesting that the seller is trying to mislead anyone...I am wondering if these are really what we think they are? I am by no means an expert!