|
|
Board Moderator & Exner Expert 10K+
Posts: 13042
Location: Southern Sweden - Sturkö island | https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/352212845857?ul_noapp=true
trusted seller, not mine |
|
|
|
Expert 5K+
Posts: 9855
Location: Lower Mainland BC | Indeed, 1689 932 = 57 Chrysler Right Hand taillight (1689 933 = left). Why in H*** didn't they design the taillights so there was no left and right, just taillight = unnecessary additional cost = downward spiral of profits?
|
|
|
|
Veteran
Posts: 145
| I've had a "mate" to this one for several years. I always thought that it was an aftermarket replacement as it didn't have chrbd anywhere. All of the oem lenses I have from that era have either chrbd, desbd, plypv, etc., molded into the lens. I saw in a recent Mopar Collector's Guide article that Chrysler sold replacement lenses for brand x cars. Did they also sell non oem for Chryslers also?
(tail lite 001.JPG)
Attachments ---------------- tail lite 001.JPG (53KB - 117 downloads)
|
|
|
|
Regular
Posts: 61
| Why aren't they the same left and right? Because they had style and personality back then, as opposed to today's boring bar of soap cars. Ever look down the rear quarter from the rear? A thing of beauty! |
|
|