Good job. I had side by side the 69 Camaro gill trim and the CHQ parts were nicer than NOS.
Nicer?
Were the profile definitions as sharp as the originals?
This is my largest "issue" with the higher quality reproduction pot metal trim.
It appears as though an original is acquired and then polished to remove blemishes and imperfections.
After initial die cast the part appears to be polished before plating.
Nothing is as sharp as assembly line parts.
IF all of the definition is not being lost in the polishing and or tumbling before plating and is from the initial preparation of the model for the "clone"
The way to have generated a part as was done in 67 was to carve the part from wood clay what have you.
If a very nice example were located the main issue would be the duplication of the correct texture.
Pulling from a plated version would give you a very poor reproduction upon recasting and then plating again.
Pulling from a bare die casting would be more accurate,
Generating your own and then testing would probably yield the most accurate. Especially given that plating today and the 60's are different.
If the emblems were not originally plated Cu Ni Cr. The addition of Cu plating will serve to fill the definition and the part becomes even less defined if it is polished before Ni. (When the buffing wheel pulls on sharp edges it naturally removes the sharpness of the edge)
Put a straight edge to the side of a reproduction set of emblems (perpendicular to the mounting surface) SS or 69 CUI emblems for instance, they all appear to bulge, originals are flat. Side by side there is no mistaking them.
