replacement parts

[bmh]

OK, the judges hand book says repro parts are allright on a restored bike. So what about the "Parts counter" parts Harley sold for older models after they went out of production? They generally have some slight differences from the "production line" version. For example: 47 - 54 tail light lenses, factory replacements have "GUIDEX" in script on them where production lenses ( at least early ones) do not. Would this be a deduction? I would rather use factory parts than Tiawan Ted if at all possible and replcement parts are easier to find than production parts in a lot of cases. Of course Tiawan Ted's lenses don't have the name or guide # on so they would almost certainly be a deduction so this may not be the best example of what I'm asking , but you get the idea.
Brian

[schmittm]

bmh,

I could fill a page or two with comments on this subject but I'll try to keep it short.

Bikes entered for AMCA judging only fall into 2 categories; original or restored. The judging standard for a restored bike is that it should look the way it did when the dealer received it from the factory in the year of manufacture. The word "look" is the key here, remember that judges are not allowed to touch the bike, all judging is visual.

Remember also that there is a huge difference between replacement (reproduction) parts and replica parts. The commonly accepted terminology in the parts supply business these days defines a reproduction as a part which will fit and function like the original but may not appear the same. A replica part is one that attempts to duplicate the original in all details including finish and markings.

So, repops are ok only if they look exactly like the original part. Your tombstone lens is a good case in point. You can tell an acrylic lens or smooth glass lens just by looking at it, totally wrong, instant point deduction. OEM replacement glass lenses with Harley-Davidson, Guide H-R5, and even the diagonal "Guidex" script should not result in any lost points. There was also a later version, sold by the Harley stealerships, but made in Taiwan. These lenses were glass and had a raised cast in Harley-Davidson across the top but no Guide H-R5 markings on the bottom, obviously not OEM or available during the production years, expect a small point deduction if the judge is sharp enough to catch it.

Similar items which were, and still are, available from a Harley dealer, are items such as the '47-'50 tank badges and the logo rubber half-moon floorboard mats. The tank emblems come in official H-D packaging but the letters are painted black and the speed ball has a slightly different shape. The repo mats do not have rivet holes or a cloth core. Both item can be modified so that they will be overlooked by a lot of judges but if you install them as-is you can expect some minor deductions.

I guess what I'm saying is that you can use repop stuff but a lot of it requires a little re-work to make it look like an original part.

I'll get off my soap box now, I need another beer....

mike

[bmh]

Thanks Mike,
I guess I'm not up on the latest lingo, when I refer to repro parts I am thinking of what you refered to as replica, anything else that fits and looks sorta like it should is just parts. I am painfully aware of the effort that some of the stuff takes to get it to look close enough and would rather spend my time refurbishing old wore out stuff than reworking something to make it look right. Unfortunatly some of the used up but savable stuff is getting rather scarce and pricy thanks to fools on e-pay. I do however still see factory replacement parts in good enough shape and the purists don't seem too interested in some of it because it isn't exactly right. But before I bought anything like a tail light lens or innner primary cover I wanted to know how it would be veiwed on judgement day.
Brian

[Chris Haynes]

A reproduction part is allowed as long as it is the highet quality reporduction available. One thing that receives a lot of interest is the "Reproduction" hand brake lever for the 1940-1964 H-D's. This thing is in no way a correct reproduction for A 1940-1948. It look nothing like it. Sure it fits and works if you are using the '48 and later brake cable, but if you have one on your pre 1949 machine get ready to take a hit.
A lot of "REPRODUCTION" parts are sold as being correct for such and such a year. But just because the part fits and works does not make it a reproduction. It is a replacement and will be judged accordingly.