glass-action.com

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:03 am

Does anyone have any experience with http://www.glass-action.com? I'm interested in their fenders.

I have heard Creative Car Craft makes good stuff, but their front fenders are 2½" wider whereas their rear fenders are either 1¼" or 3½" wider.

Glass Action gives choices of equal widths (stock, 2", or 3") for the front and rear.

Bill K. · Post by **Bill K.** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:13 am

No direct experience with Glass Action fenders. I think they are chopper(not hand laid) and don't fit as well as CCC. I have +2 front and +3 rear from CCC. Having the rear wider is a good thing for handling... Not visually noticable. I wish I would have got wider running boards as my rear fenders are getting dinged up.

Are you addressing a wheel fitment issue with equal front/rear?

Chris V · Post by **Chris V** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:57 pm

I've got 2-1/2" wider than stock CCC front fenders and 1-1/4" wider rear fenders for our (father/son) project `69 Std...rear trackwidth is wider...and though I've only mocked them up w/o being painted to match nor bumpers...I'd say it'd take a close look for the average person to notice anything abnormal, unless perhaps a stocker was right next to it.
The car has polished billet running boards and they look nice even with the extra width in the fenders.

I've got a Glass-Action rear luggage tray and stereo/glovebox...the luggage tray was a pretty simple fit in our `67 baja. I don't know about their fenders, but the quality and service was great.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 6:26 am

Bill K. wrote:Are you addressing a wheel fitment issue with equal front/rear?

Yes. I may be able to solve the issues while retaining my stock fenders. It'll be real close.

CCC has only 2.5"-wider for the front. That would force me to go spacer crazy. CCC has 1.25"- and 3.5"-wider for the rear. The larger will do the same thing.

Chris V wrote:I've got 2-1/2" wider than stock CCC front fenders and 1-1/4" wider rear fenders for our ... `69 Std. ...I'd say it'd take a close look for the average person to notice anything abnormal.

Ah, but that's the difference. I've got a '71 Super. My front track is 0.9" wider than the rear track.

If CCC made 1.5/2 or 2/2.5, that would make me happy enough. But they don't. While 2.5/1.25 may not be so bad on a standard, I think it might look goofy on a Super. And as I replied to Bill above, 2.5/3.5 is a lot more than I need.

Chris V wrote:I've got a Glass-Action rear luggage tray and stereo/glovebox...the luggage tray was a pretty simple fit in our `67 baja. I don't know about their fenders, but the quality and service was great.

The strange thing about G-A is I have received a 60-40 report on them. Those who have had good things to say have had direct contact with them. Those who have not good things to say, didn't deal with directly and half of them knew them by their former name, "Innovations in Fiberglass."

I'm not discounting the hear-say reports, though.

The nice thing about G-A is they offer a 2/2 option -- so far the least without being stock.

Thank you, both, for your responses!

Chris V · Post by **Chris V** » Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:56 pm

oasis wrote:
Chris V wrote:I've got 2-1/2" wider than stock CCC front fenders and 1-1/4" wider rear fenders for our ... `69 Std. ...I'd say it'd take a close look for the average person to notice anything abnormal.
Ah, but that's the difference. I've got a '71 Super. My front track is 0.9" wider than the rear track.

If CCC made 1.5/2 or 2/2.5, that would make me happy enough. But they don't. While 2.5/1.25 may not be so bad on a standard, I think it might look goofy on a Super. And as I replied to Bill above, 2.5/3.5 is a lot more than I need.

Stock track is only a relevant point if you've got well, stock track - meaning you haven't increased either (f/r) track with suspension or brake components...and if you're running equal width wheels with the same offset and tires or the appropriate combo of width and offest to net you the same frontspace...and what are the odds you desire wider rear fenders than front fenders if that's the case.

Besides supers look goofy to begin with

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Mar 23, 2005 5:03 am

Chris V wrote:Stock track is only a relevant point if you've got well, stock track

Stock track was a relevant mention on my part because it was in response to you saying front track is less. That is true for poor, poor pitiful you -- a standard owner

.

Chris V wrote:increased either (f/r) track with suspension or brake components...and if you're running equal width wheels with the same offset and tires or the appropriate combo of width and offest to net you the same frontspace...and what are the odds you desire wider rear fenders than front fenders if that's the case.

The suspension and brake components (four-wheel disk) are all TopLine. All four BBS wheels are the same; all four tires are the same.

Except for the nose-up stance of a Super -- cured by the MaXX struts -- I prefer the looks of the Super. I'm working on a solution to keep everything I want under the stock fenders. If that is not going to happen, I'm looking for alternatives as mild as possible with regards to appearance while further improving the superior handling capabilities I require since my driving doesn't consist of quarter miles and sand dunes.