Will Harley JDs Be The New Knuckleheads?

[Buzz Kanter]

I am stunned by some of the prices I am hearing for even rough Knuckleheads. Seems everyone wants to ride a Knuck these days.

But I am also seeing a growing appreciation for the older Harley Js and JDs (JDHs have always been hot).

So are the Harley J series going to be the next hot thing? I think they will be.

[fabercycle]

Buzz, interesting observation. just curious why you picked J's and skipped over VLs?

VLs got alot over Jds......Lower CG, Similar art deco styling that the 30s knucks have, better brakes than Js, no exposed valve gear, ridable drop center rims as opposed to clinchers.

I've actually noticed the price of restored RLs has gone way up.

[Buzz Kanter]

Buzz, interesting observation. just curious why you picked J's and skipped over VLs?

VLs got alot over Jds......Lower CG, Similar art deco styling that the 30s knucks have, better brakes than Js, no exposed valve gear, ridable drop center rims as opposed to clinchers.

I've actually noticed the price of restored RLs has gone way up.

Not picking or ignoring VLs, but I have seen more people take a greater interest in the JDs, especially after the Motorcycle Cannonball (yes, I know technically the 1915 and earliers were not JDs). I like VLs too, but people seem to get excited when they see the exposed rockers moving up and down on the old pre-1930 Harleys.

[Chris Haynes]

Buzz, interesting observation. just curious why you picked J's and skipped over VLs?

For the same reason the customer base did.

[silentgreyfello]

I like the J's and JD's much better than the VL's, BUT the VL series is much more rideable. I think the J and JD will eventually go the way of the Model T because they are not as practical as the later stuff, and the old guys that identify with them are fewer. I think pans and shovels are the next rage, and VL's too. However, knuckles will always be king in the HD line.

[Steve Slocombe]

Dear Buzz, in my biased opinion I find the JDs flimsy compared to the VLs, and hard to restore accurately with no shop manual available. Harley production figures show around 220,000 big twins produced 1915-29, compared with 44,000 VLs and 38,000 knucks. For anyone who rides, the 1930-40 bikes on 18 or 19" drop centre rims handle better than the heavier later ones with smaller rims and fatter tyres. The VLs also have those very stiff forged forks and the low centre of gravity, plus Harley ran one of the first 36 bhp VLDs up to 104 mph on Muroc dry lake around 1932 to take the AMA production bike speed record. For myself, I wouldn't ride a pre-1928 Harley with no front brake, and I'm not a big fan of clincher tyres. The VL is 220 pounds lighter than a Heritage Softtail Classic, and that big flathead motor pulls like a freight train in the mid-range where you need it. What's not to like? At present the VL is a lot less money than a knuck - which I hope to see change.

[Chris Haynes]

The 1930 VL was a total failure. With small flywheels they wrapped up quick but had a hell of a problem maintaining high speed. The Mo Co redesigned the lower end with new larger, heavier flywheels. They installed this lower end in a new frame designed to hold the larger lower end. Each dealer that had bought an early 1930 got one of these frame/lower ends for each bike. The parts form the original bike were transfered onto this new frame/lower end at the dealers expense. This did not make the dealers happy.
The VL still suffered from lack of power. For the 1934 models Bill Harley redesigned the VL top end with it "T" shaped intake and replaced it with a better flowing "Y" shaped intake. He also added a better oiling system, but it was still a total loss system.
All in all the VL's were not popular with riders. Dealers stocked up on JD parts to keep their JD customers on the road. This is one reason why older dealers still had JD stuff sitting on the shelves in the '70's.
The Mo Co was designing a new 65 inch Flathead to replace the VL. This new model had a wishbone frame, welded steel tanks with speedometer and dash, tubular forks. Does all this sound familiar?

In 1932, realizing the lack of popularity of the VL they scrapped the new Flathead project. They did incorporate all of these new ideas into the the new 61" OHV they started work on when the 65" flathead was dropped in 1932. The 61" OHV project had a lot of development problems. Originally slated to be a 1935 model the project was nearly dropped as problems continued. As late as October 1935 they considered dropping it. But Bill Harley continued on with developing it. Engineers cured the oiling and excessive chain and sprocket wear problems and without advertising fanfare the bike finally hit the streets in the middle of 1936 production. It was an immediate hit. The Mo Co kept the production down to around two thousand units a year for 1936 and '37. In 1937 the new UL appeared and outsold the 61 OHV 3 to 1. It took a few years for the 61 OHV to catch on. In 1940 the OHV finally outsold the UL and continued outselling it till its demise at the end of the 1948 model year.
A good running 74" J will still leave a VL in its dust.

[big jesus 151]

I hope so I've got tons of that junk !!! LOL Pusherman Racing

[Steve Slocombe]

Dear Chris, that recall of the first 2000 VLs in late 1929, plus Harry Sucher's unsympathetic write-ups, certainly cast a long shadow over the reputation of the VL. However, Jerry Hatfield's 'Inside Harley-Davidson' tells a different story. Long time Harley dealer Tom Sifton tells the story of a 1930 VL beating a 80 cubic inch JDH and concludes 'The JDs were not faster. That's wishful thinking and I've straddled a lot of JDs.' Harley service manager Joe Ryan reckoned the JDH was good for 85 mph and the 1930 VL 87 mph. Sifton again reports 'When you take those things [JDs] out on the highway and run them 70 or 75 mph, mile after mile, those things fell apart.'

If you look at US motorcycle production figures 1930-36 there were practically no imports, just a few knucks in 1936, and Henderson/Excelsior out of business in 1931. Harley was outselling Indian about two to one, and about two-thirds of Harley production was the Big Twin sidevalve VL. So for seven model years through the Depression, roughly half of all motorcycles sold in the USA were VLs. As the dominant bike of the period it's hard to believe so many customers were wrong.

[Lonnie]

While I believe that the JD's will always have a certain appeal based on what you basically said, Buzz, that being the "mechanicalness" of the design, I believe they will never touch the broader appeal of the Knuckleheads. Whereas a good well-maintained knuckle is fully roadworthy, a JD would require significantly more maintenance on an on-going basis. Something not for the light-hearted, especially on a long road run over a long time period. Also, there is the issue of parts compatability and availability.

[exeric]

I love J's but must reluctantly agree that the knucklehead will never be toppled from it's throne as the pre-eminent Harley Davidson. I will say that having owned and worked on VLs, Knucks, and Pans; I prefer the J series. I think it's the most interesting of all H-Ds; but I would just as soon hope the J stays in the shadows and let the speculators continue to ruin the later bikes.

[silentgreyfello]

A good running 74" J will still leave a VL in its dust.

I disagree here. I have both, in good running order, and the 74" VL will leave the 74" J. In fact, I have owned five J series bikes (2-74's, 3-61's) and three VL's, and a VLH. Each of the VL's were more powerful, and more reliable for that matter. The least powerful of the VL's that I had was the 32V, but it was at least equal to the J's.

[silentgreyfello]

Originally Posted by fabercycle
Buzz, interesting observation. just curious why you picked J's and skipped over VLs?

For the same reason the customer base did.

Chris, there were more VL's sold in 7 years, than knuckles sold in 12. By your reasoning, the VL is better than the Knuckle? I think one has to consider that in the 20's, the economy was booming. In the 30's all through the VL series run, we had the great depression. And then WW2 in the knuck's run.

[D.A.Bagin]

When I got my 34 VL in the late 80s my friend David Sarafan asked me, "Why did I want that boat anchor?" It was fun while I had it tho.

[c.o.]

As far a J models reaching Knuckle prices.... well I hope it doesn't happen and that's purely due to to the fact that I wouldn't mind owning one someday!!! As far as rideability goes I always come back to this story of Indian Jeff and his Sturgis trip.... http://www.onionwerks.com/seattle_to...s_and_back.htm I know it's been posted before but it's good stuff for those that haven't read it.