Chris,
While I agree that what an original photo shows is about the best proof you can get you also have to bear in mind that a bike prepared for a model release photo shoot may differ in some ways to the final specification of production models and you need to know when the photo was taken.
With regard to the photo of the 1926 posted under the paint section of the forum, I'd like to know exactly when that image was taken because if you look at the paint most of it appears to have been rubbed over with some form of abrasive and it's only where the paint was out of easy reach, like on the rear chainguard between the frame stays, that the paint retains any form of shine.
If you also look at the striping line around the primary chainguard you'll see that it's almost rubbed away on the top run.
If this image was taken in 1925 as a model release image for the 1926 range the H.D. standard of presentation and quality control must have been worse than in the
AMF years.
I'm pretty sure that if you presented a restored 1926 for judging in the condition portrayed in that image you would lose a lot of points.
Now if that image was taken following some of the restorations and clean-ups that have occured at the HD museum over the years it would explain why the bike appears shop soiled and has different finishes to the spoke nipples. To me it looks like someone has inadvertantly put the wrong wheel into that bike and the frame shoe under the engine appears to have a build-up of dirt,oil,etc in it because the finish on the castings are not normally that rough.
The exact date that image was taken is very important, especially to someone who is using it as a restoration guide.
I'll be interested in your thoughts on the issue.
While I agree that what an original photo shows is about the best proof you can get you also have to bear in mind that a bike prepared for a model release photo shoot may differ in some ways to the final specification of production models and you need to know when the photo was taken.
With regard to the photo of the 1926 posted under the paint section of the forum, I'd like to know exactly when that image was taken because if you look at the paint most of it appears to have been rubbed over with some form of abrasive and it's only where the paint was out of easy reach, like on the rear chainguard between the frame stays, that the paint retains any form of shine.
If you also look at the striping line around the primary chainguard you'll see that it's almost rubbed away on the top run.
If this image was taken in 1925 as a model release image for the 1926 range the H.D. standard of presentation and quality control must have been worse than in the
AMF years.
I'm pretty sure that if you presented a restored 1926 for judging in the condition portrayed in that image you would lose a lot of points.
Now if that image was taken following some of the restorations and clean-ups that have occured at the HD museum over the years it would explain why the bike appears shop soiled and has different finishes to the spoke nipples. To me it looks like someone has inadvertantly put the wrong wheel into that bike and the frame shoe under the engine appears to have a build-up of dirt,oil,etc in it because the finish on the castings are not normally that rough.
The exact date that image was taken is very important, especially to someone who is using it as a restoration guide.
I'll be interested in your thoughts on the issue.
Comment