equipment groups

[bmh]

Thanks Denise, I'll see if I can't get ahold of one of those gentlemen.
Brian

[schmittm]

Hi everyone, quite a thread you have going here. I thought I'd jump in and add to the confusion.

I had the opportunity and pleasure of being part of the post-war Harley judging team at Davenport this year and I probably learned more than I contributed. I will not present myself as an authority or speak for any of the other judges, I'll just throw a few observations out here that relate to the issues in this thread.

Equipment groups and packages, as a whole, are not judged as a unique criteria. If you look at the National Meet Judging Form you will not find separate categories for equipment groups or accessories. The pieces and parts that were available as individual optional items, from the factory or the dealer, are logically included as a component of one of the 25 named categories on the form and are evaluated along with the other items in that category. The same 3 considerations apply to components of an equipment group that apply to any other part on the bike:
1. Was the part commonly available during, or prior to, the production year. Does the part belong on the bike?, common sense prevails on some equipment group items; you wouldn't have a foot siren on a civilian solo model, etc.
2. Is the part correctly finished. When parts were offered in several different finishes (chrome or painted rims for example), any of the available finishes are acceptable as long as its consistent with similar parts on the same bike. (you wouldn't have one chrome and one black rim)
3. Is the part installed properly with the correct fasteners.

Category #5 Nuts/Bolts/Mounting Hardware. The fastest way to lose points is to use cheap modern hardware from the bin at the local home supply center. After WWII the factory bought most of the hardware from Chandler Products in Ohio. If you assemble your bike using "CP" headstamped bolts of the correct dimensions, thread pitch, and finish you can't hardly go wrong. If you are not absolutely certain that the original was cadmium go with parkerized. Here again, be consistent, do not mix and match in sets of the same application. (don't put zinc lock washers under parkerized nuts or cad nuts on parkerized bolts, it sticks out like a sore thumb!) I know, I'm preaching to the choir, enough said.

Of course there are always exceptions to the general rule. If you identify the specific model of your bike by displaying the model name with a piece of trim or decal, then all of the items which make that model unique should be present on the bike. For Example, bikes with "Deluxe" trim badges on the front fender should have all the items listed in the dealer brochure which actually made it a Deluxe, or bikes displaying FLH decals should be equiped with everything that set them apart from the FL's.

I got a little windy, its raining today and I was bored......sorry

mike

[Glenn]

great

that was great info on what to do. as I am about to embark on my 1950 pan and 1946 ford truck at almost the same time I look forward to all the help this great site has been and will be to my project.

moose aka glenn

[bmh]

thanks mike,
That was my take reading the judges hanbook, But I would rather be sure now than sorry later.
As far as hardware goes.... My on going research in early pans has turned up some iteresting points. For example lets take the exhaust clamp (the one at the ex. port) Bolt 3791, washer7040, nut 7676.
Nut 7676 is listed on the hardware list as cad, bolt 3791 is only used at this location until 52 where it is also used as a pinch bolt for the foot shift lever, and then in54 also to mount the horn power pack. It appears this bolt may have been parkerized for the 48 modles but seems to switch to cad in 49 and is definetly cad by 54.
Washer 7040 ( here's where it gets interesting) is used all over the bike in locals we know to be parkerized, such as under the 4000 bolt used for the lower tank mounts, wich are visible in old photos. We know the factory didn't buy one box of the same # washer in a different finish and make sure that only that one guy used it in one place only. Yet I tend to agree with you that this would not seem corect. Is the parts book wrong? wouldn't be the first correction in one of mine. Perhaps they used washer 7041 wich is the same washer only in " ZINK"? This washer is also on the hardware list but I have not yet been able to find it used anywhere in the parts book. Any body have any thoughts? I have one or two more if you like this riddle.
Brian

[schmittm]

Great research Brian!

Have you ever noticed that if you mix the letters around in brian you get BRAIN? (sorry, I just heard that in a Sonic commercial, I had to throw it out there)

The original period parts books are probably our best references, especially for hardware. When I find inconsistencies for some of the parts, as you have so well documented, I have to remind myself that those books where mostly for replacement parts and did not always represent what the assemblers had on hand at the factory. Some of the stuff that the Motor Company supplied to the dealers may not have been exactly what was used during manufacturing, simply a suitable replacement. If running changes were made from year to year they got what was in current production.

I still believe that consistency is the safe bet. The more things blend in the less likely they are to draw scrutany.

Remember that the factory photos are not always a good example of what actually went to the dealers. Many were retouched airbrushed photos of previous year models.

Something I forgot to mention earlier about equipment groups is the fact that some of the VIN #'s and engine serial numbers contain codes that specify certain equipment. For example, if your VIN indicates a foot shift model the bike should not show with a hand shift, same for "H" models; they should have the trim and decals designating that.

keep digging in those old books, most of the answers are there!

mike

[bmh]

Yeah I figuire this to be a parts book error also. I am also aware of the comercial artists role in H-D's advertising as well as a good few prototypes aren't real representations of what was done on the line. I've been mainly trying to use original period photos of biikes in service. But it is very hard to find good quality photos of other than police models. these seem to be better documented than civilian bikes for some reason or another. They are still full of valuable info, so long as you know what the differences are.
Brian

[SRG]

1951 correctness

What a great bunch of threads! I noticed there was no mention of Bruce Palmer's book. I'm doing a 1951 EL and I'm using his book as a guide. Palmer uses the quote from the dealers order book: "All new motorcycles are shipped from the factory with one of these equipment groups"., this does not apply to Servi-cars, sidecars, or package trucks. "Most items listed in the below equipment groups can be ordered separately in addition to a group at an extra charge". These qoutes open a whole world of possibilities to me. I hope I run into some of you guys \ gals at the meets.
SRG

[bmh]

Welcome to a fellow 51 EL, there's not many of us. Is yours early or late? Palmers is a great resource, but it is still up to the restorer to determine what is absolutly correct for their particular machine. Most of the info is solid and correct, but there are errors ( nobody could compile that much info on so many years and modles without making a few) and omissions . The judges handbook states that it is only to be used as reference up to the point it is known to be correct.
As for options and such. All motorcycles were shipped with an equipment group. This was kinda bait and switch, the low price you saw in the add was for a bike that had to be purchased with an "Options" package. Just as today , it's all marketing. All the items in the groups and a few not listed as well were available for purchase "A LA CARTE" as listed on the reverse of the order blank. Although I wouldn't go crazy with this. It only stands to reason that if the price of the 10 doo-dads you want totaled more than the equipment group, a guy back in the time would've purchased the group.
Brian

[servicardenise]

Hey Guys, If I am not mistaken they would offer some stuff that you could purchase from the dealer like the Roy bike in Sharon Pa. It had yellow rubber grips as well as other yellow rubber stuff. When Don Wrench had it judged he provided the original owners paperwork from the dealer. I was surprised at all the doo dads and gee gaws the dealer would add on. I also believe that dealers would add any paint prior to that year as an available option. I don't know what book there is that covers all these lovely little details but it does add to the fun and mystery of these projects. Also, I think it teaches us to never appear to act like we know anything for sure. Being wrong is sometimes the best way to learn. Merry Christmas, Denise

[bmh]

Yes , that is true. I've run across lots of old pictures showing all kinds of chrome plated parts on brand new machines that the factory wouldn't offer for years to come. I beleive that some of the larger dealers were doing a nice chrome exchange biz and of course that would mean new bikes on the floor already trimmed out. Funny, the more things change, the more they remain the same. And a Merry Christmas to you also.
Brian

[Paquette]

Just to throw in a cent and a halfs worth. When I visited the Harley Archive in Milwaukee ( that is where the bikes that will be in the new museum are stored) I was told that if a guy came in on Monday morning, started assembling a bike and ran out of say cad plated bolts and the stock room had only parkerized in stock, that is what he would use to finish that bike and the rest down the line that week. Their statement basicly was the bike that came out on Monday might not be the same, hardware wise, as the same model that came out on Friday. It was (and is) all about getting product out the door to the dealer. That is why the archive does not like to give out info on what is or is not correct. I am really looking forward to the opening of the museum but I think we all need to be very carefull about using the bikes in the collection as drop dead. that's it, documentation for restorations----PAQ

[exeric]

I agree with you Paquette, but you can see the dilema that judges in the AMCA have. I guess as an AMCA judge, you have to take a consensus view of a specific year and model of motorcycle and judge it on what parts are generally considered correct. I'm sure the factory mixed things up and made running changes based on part availability but if a part is generally considered to be cadmium plated and not parkerized then I think the AMCA judge needs to err to the side of consensus and say that part is suppose to be cad plated.

[bmh]

Yes , the hardware thing is a bit troublesome at times. Any one needing proof of assembly line substitutions only need start looking at the jamb nut on the handshift rod in old photos. Most times it's cad but quite often its parkerized. I think this was the only place on a big twin where a 7752 nut in cad is used ( actually 7753 is the correct Part # as all 7752 were parkerized) This seems to have been a common shortage , especially during high production years. So why do the parts books list it as 7752 not the 7753 that was supposed to be used? Parts books were published for maintanence not assembly. Dealers didn't order just one or two nuts, I think they had to buy a box. So to make it easier for a dealer to stock service parts Only the most readilly available parts are listed . Thats why everything in the book seems to be parkerized, while period photos clearly show cad. I've been having a blast learning and figuiring all this out, and it's nice to converse with others who are interested in these little things. Most people I know could care less if a nut is cad plate or parkerized ( couldn't you get that in chrome???)
Brian

[portagepan]

So, if you have a completely original bike, but it doesn't fit the consensus, it isn't right? Say it ain't so, Joe! I'm glad somebody besides me has to figure this all out. Since there are so many opinions, and lists, how DO you? You almost have to have a list of all possible options, and variations, and let it roll. I give a lot of credit to you guys and gals that try to restore, or keep a bike just so, for points judging. I'm just one of the ones that when I get it 99%, I'm happy. Of course, I am always open to new knowledge, and advice, and anything I learn I am glad to pass along. I guess that is part of what the club is all about. Merry Christmas!
Mike

[Paquette]

The best answer I can give is that The Motor Company never has an inkling that there would be folks out there like us, that give a tinker's damn about what is or is not correct!! As with my own research on seats, saddlebags, and related accessories I have copies of most of the original production drawing from 1941 --1970. I have also seen, held, measured, and restored most of the seats and saddlebags that Harley ( Milsco) has produced since 1933. What the drawings state and how they were actually produced often are different animals. The guys on the line made things easy for themselves to produce a product that for all intents and purposes looked like the drawing . But in the real world of production, engineers and designers don't know SQUAT. Employees in the old days ( and probably still today) look at the drawings and just make stuff work!!!---PAQ