Howard/Fred, good question on the mounting base. I can see the flat part that screws to the door in Fred's picture and it looks like it moves (as it appears slightly askew in the photo) and, as I can't see the second hole, I'm not sure how the swan neck attaches to the mounting plate. To your point Howard, the idea of the screws being hidden completely with maybe just an Allen screw on the stem assembly would be 'cleaner'. I am certainly not being overly fussy here though, my main objective is jut to get something that looks period appropriate, covers up my holes and is functional for rear viewing; something which I am REALLY lacking with only the small, interior rear view at this point.

Thank you Fred for going to the trouble of the pictures. I agree with you, that style will work fine and look good as well. You mention you sell them in pairs.... I have read in the forums that a passenger-side mirror on that body style (the '39) is ineffectual due the 'arrow' shape of the body and that to be utile, it would have to be so long it would look ungainly. Your advice? Re the used one, it's difficult to see the quality of the actual mirror surface; if it's not too 'splotchy' I might opt for that. (my car is a driver, not a show car) I can look up the new ones on your site, how much for the used?? Thanks again for your time.

Thanks Fred, is there anything in the Kanter lineup that would be appropriate? I had called in and was told because it was a '39, it was an oddball and therefore no-can-do.
Do you have any swan neck style mirrors whose base would cover those holes? 2 1/4" would be ideal. Also, I'm not sure of how long the arm should be to give optimal rear vision - presume you would know from experience which length and style would work best here. Thanks.

In follow up to the replies on the '39 driver's side rear view mirror, I have attached a photo of the holes in my car door. In measuring the center-to-center on them, I come up with +/- 2 1/4". It looks like just SLIGHTLY over that, maybe 2 9/32", but if I could find a mirror that had 2 1/4" mounting holes I'm sure I could make it work. Does this look familiar to anyone?? And, by looking at the size of these holes, would the likelihood be that the previous mirror was attached with appropriate size sheet metal screws or was there more probably machine screws with nuts and washers that attached from the inside of the door?? Keep in mind that the car was painted after whatever mirror was there had been removed.
If this is truly a needle in a haystack and as good as impossible to find, I would surely throw my name on the petition to generate 'sufficient interest' to have that 'clamp' style mirror remanufactured. I don't know how many are needed to create equitable numbers, but I am sure there are lots of Junior owners out there who would love to have access to a manufacturer-authentic and period appropriate side mount mirror.

Attach file:

---

  (208.19 KB)

Thank you Howard and Fred for your replies. I guess my car must fall under the aftermarket mirror installation category as the holes in my door are on the door panel, just under the fly window. I will take a picture and post it to show the exact setup. The center-to-center hole spacing is odd too, I will re-measure that and include with the post. Again, thanks for the follow up!

I am looking for info on door-mount rear view mirrors for my '39 Six touring car. I have poured over Ebay and all the 'usual suspects' to try and track down what was originally on the '39's when new and cannot definitively identify an example to give me a base line for what I am looking for. Can anybody provide a pic or info. The gentleman at Kanters says the problem is the year. Apparently the '39 cars had a different body line or something unique, and 'regular' side view mirrors are not interchangeable. I have the holes (in my driver door only)to receive a mirror and before I go with the window frame 'clip-on' peep version, I would dearly love to round up an original. Can anybody give me some help or direction??
Thanks in advance for any replies!!!

Thank you to all who responded. I believe I now have a clear path forward to 'get it right'.

Re the idle speed comments, I asked this because it is hard to see the timing marks on the flywheel when using a light. They may be marked with some indication as to BTDC or ATDC, or with a '+'or '-', but I can't see them, and wanted some positive way of knowing which way was retarding and which way was advancing the engine. From the comments received, this is now perfectly clear.

I was surprised by the ambiguity on this question; I asked my 90 year old Dad, who was a real car buff back in his day, and he said 'retard', as did a couple of other folks whose opinions I respected. The retired licensed mechanic obviously agreed with 'retard' as this is what he did when setting the timing and, at the end of the day, this could end up being my whole problem on the car stalling. Also, I remember when seeing mechanics time engines when I was a kid, and the engine always seemed to slow down when the correct setting was achieved, so that seemed to endorse the 'retard' vote. I am not yet wanting to do handsprings or anything, but do feel I have uncovered a glaring error that just MIGHT be the solution to a very long standing problem!! Thanks again.

I have researched timing on the net and gotten conflicting and ambiguous info. My question is: if the engine is at TDC on the timing light and one is trying to achieve 6-7 degrees BTDC, do you advance or retard from TDC??

And am I correct in my thinking that retarding the timing will slow the engine down and advancing it will speed it up???

This may sound very neophyte but I can't get a straight answer via my Shop Manual, nor Googling the question online.

Thanks to any who are willing to read and respond. Merry Christmas to all the Packard folks out there!!

When timing the '39 Six, I am confused as to 'which way to go'? Once the light shows TDC and one is looking for 6 to 7 degrees BTDC, which way should the distributor be turned?
When we timed mine, the guy helping me said it should be retarded and turned the distributor such that the engine slowed down and the TDC mark moved away to the left from the sight hole in the bell housing. Is this correct? I thought afterward, if we went the wrong way here, I would be 12 to 14 degrees out. So, my question: when showing TDC, should the engine speed up or slow down as 6-7 BTDC is achieved???

Re the counterweight - I PRESMUED that the counterweight would pull the valve closed and the helix spring would expand with heat and open it. Am I backwards here?!?!?

The HRV was frozen with the counterweight down and the exhaust was getting really hot really quickly, and in researching online, this was mentioned as a possible reason. I got it freed up and then wired it with the counterweight up. If this is wrong, it is as easy as snipping the wire to let the counterweight go back to the down position, but the problem existed and was unchanged with either scenario. Is counterweight down definitely the 'open' position???