Magazine comments

[Rubone]

Having read many of the Original Posters publications I am just reminded of the old saying, "the pot calling the kettle black".

[kitabel]

Just for fun, why not post some of my worst mistakes?

[T. Cotten]

Just for fun, why not post some of my worst mistakes?

I still have one of your early Linkert pamphlets, Kitabel!

There's got to be an error of omission somewhere...

....Cotten

[kitabel]

And here I was, rather naively, going to pick through the magazine, and amuse you all with the (in my opinion) serious errors, but anticipating the response, I believe I will let the opportunity pass.

I will, however, invite those interested to read and analyze just some of the hundreds of documents I have written, and made available to the public free of charge: http://www.victorylibrary.com/tech/tech.htm

Perhaps my critics will make the same offer of access to their volumes of work?

[PaulCDF]

Wow!!!!
To quote Buzz Lightyear:
"Impressive Wingspan" Mr. Diamond!!!

[Steve Slocombe]

All authors will be different in terms of ego, and 1976 is a long time ago in terms of Harley knowledge. We all learn by our mistakes, and I must have learned a lot because I've sure made a lot of mistakes. As an AMCA judge I am still learning after 25 years on the job, and both my JD and VL manuals say words along the lines of 'the true story is told by unrestored bikes and not the writers of books'. Why not try writing an article for our magazine, such as 'What Fits What Revisited'?

[pisten-bully]

I read the technical details. There are some errors, and more "why didn't they think to include this?"
I can e-mail the editors, but I'd like to know the members opinion of a forum specifically to comment on magazine articles?

I think one can start a topic any time in this category (Make suggestions, share ideas) or in Parking Lot Chatter to illuminate what discrepancies one sees in any article in the magazine. I think that could be a valuable service and maybe spark a lively discussion that could prove educational.

But I don't see how or why this original posting devolved into a criticism of authors, editors, or the magazine itself....way off track and serves no purpose!

[kitabel]

I was illustrating my own rather disappointing experience with another author, who clearly had no idea what he was doing (read the page to see what he thought could not be corrected), but was absolutely resistant to ANY criticism.
In retrospect, not fair of me to anticipate similar behavior from the Magazine staff. I apologize.

1976 is a long time ago in terms of Harley knowledge
If by that you mean fewer people were knowledgeable, and less history was known, of course I agree. The facts remain unchanged by the passage of time. Many people here would recognize the same errors in Arman's work.

[T. Cotten]

"What fits What" really meant what-could-fit-what, Folks...

It wasn't written for purists, obviously, but for the chopper Easyriders-mag crowd.

And I agree with Steve that the fossil record should rule, but how ironic that the judging system itself is responsible for the decimation of original machines, and the greatest loss of History in the history of vintage motorcycling.

....Cotten

[kitabel]

If there is a "golden rule" in the appreciation of antique motorcycles, I vote for "don't touch it!".

[T. Cotten]

If there is a "golden rule" in the appreciation of antique motorcycles, I vote for "don't touch it!".

When I said the fossil record should rule, I meant over the experts, Kitabel!

....Cotten
PS: The fabled '41-only brass manifolds are the contrary 'index fossils' that first come to mind.

[kitabel]

For the record, "expert" is a term I never presumed to apply to my own work.

[Steve Slocombe]

Dear Cotten, I can't let your judging comments go unchallenged, but this would need a different thread. The Judging Handbook and Judging Guidelines are both accessible through the AMCA Website. They place unrestored bikes above all others, and discourage owners from 'improving' them for the judging system. I know we've seen 'unrestored' bikes built out of swap meet parts, and original paint bikes actively faked for the money, but these actions are way outside the aims of our judging system.

[tfburke3]

"What fits What" really meant what-could-fit-what, Folks...

It wasn't written for purists, obviously, but for the chopper Easyriders-mag crowd.

And I agree with Steve that the fossil record should rule, but how ironic that the judging system itself is responsible for the decimation of original machines, and the greatest loss of History in the history of vintage motorcycling.

....Cotten

"What fits What,Indian 1934-1953"
Would it even be a full page?
Tom

[T. Cotten]

"What fits What,Indian 1934-1953"
Would it even be a full page?
Tom

It would be mighty tiny print, Tom!

Face it Folks,...

The AMCA judging system fostered the destruction of the fossil record, all for the vane pursuit of a mythical ideal.

I don't need to read another judging handbook, Steve...

Many, many of my customers have already digested it all for me, the hard way. And I trust their opinions.

....Cotten