Unknown Belt Drive Frame

[MMasa]

I need help with an ID on this early belt drive frame. Note that the tube under the fuel tank has been cut out at some point. Some distinguishing features are;
1. The somewhat thin tank that would be needed to squeeze in there.
2. The lower front motor mount.
3. The odd rear wheel attachment method. (looks like the hinged sections are missing)
4. The seat would attach into the frame horizontaly into the rear of the top frame tube.
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
Mark Masa

[MMasa]

Unknown Belt Drive Frame

Another Pic

[MMasa]

Unknown Belt Drive Frame

Last Pic

[silentgreyfello]

Hi Mark, Does the frame look like it was modified at some point to accept a rear shieve? It is hard to tell from the photo, but it looks a bit cobbled on the seat stay where it turns out for the belt. The motor mounting configuration is similar to Exc but the rear axle attachment looks European... I guess I'll dig out the Stephen Wright's latest book, which is awsome for the early stuff.

[Tommo]

Mark
The engine mount on the bottom of the front down tube has got me wacked but I reckon that should be the thing that identifies it.
It looks English to me and has been fitted with a Roc two speed hub hence the rear wheel mounts.
At first glance I'd have said Humber but that front mount is not like any early Humber I have seen.
The other frame is circa 1915 Radco two stroke, built by E.A. Radnell & Company. I can send you quite a bit of info on them if you want it. I have an unrestored 90% complete Radco I can photograph for you.
Regards, Tommo

[MMasa]

Unknown frame ID

Tommo
Would you think that the frame would have been made to originaly accept the Roc rear hub or do you feel that it had been modified? I agree that it's either British or European in make. I'll take a closer look at the frame and try to determine if it looks original or modified.

On the Radco, ANY infor would be GREAT. If that is in fact what it is, do you feel that an engine would be an atainable thing from someone somewhere in the world? Also, there seems to be a gear change lever on the top frame tube. Looks like the kind used on a douglas. Do you feel that that is for a Radco as well or added on? Would a Radco have had a two or three speed gearbox of some sort.
Thanks again for the help.
Somehow I knew that it would be you coming in with the answers.
Thanks
Mark

[MMasa]

Unknown Frame

I took a closer look at the frame this morning and it looks like the dog-leg in the rear left stays is original as opposed to a later mod. However, it does appear that there was originaly SOMETHING on the upper and lower stay that went to the inside as well. This has been hacksawn off at some point. I'll get a couple of close up pics to show it better. It's almost as if there was a guard of some kind between the belt and the wheel. Perhaps it was a mount of some sort for a brake mechanism that worked on the inside of the shieve.
Mark

[Tommo]

Mark,
At present I'm confined to the house and bed if my good lady has her way. Surfice to say I'm pretty crook but Jennifer is away at the moment so I snuck outside and had a quick look at my 1911 Humber.
Humber used the two speed Roc as early as 1910, could even be 1909, and it is possible that your frame is a 1909-1910 Humber and that the factory altered the front engine mount to a two bolt mount for 1911. Maybe that one bolt saddle type of mount was too light for the job.
My 1911 has the same style of seat mount as your frame so it just might be a 1909-1910 Humber.
The Roc gear was a bit like a Model T with bands and a low and high gear pedal with an additional small pedal that released the high gear lock. As you can imagine there were a lot of rods and cross shafts that operated all of this and on my 1911 there are guides bolted to the rear stays that stop the rods getting tied up with the belt.
Whatever it is it left the factory fitted with that Roc two speed and at the moment Humber is the only make that comes to my mind but I will do some reading and see who else fitted Roc.
As to the availability of bits, I think it would be easier to find rocking horse doo.

Now to the Radco. The gear lever is what took me to Radco when I first looked at the photos.
Radco were fitted with a two speed gearbox in 1914 that could easily be confused with Douglas but closer inspection will show all the subtle differences that tell you it's not Douglas.
1915 was the first year of the dropped tank (rounded down at the back to allow a lower seat height) so that is why I said C1915 as this is the earliest yours can be.
Radco was extensively advertised in the period magazines here in NZ but my 1914 is the only known survivor here in NZ and I have never seen a engine, gearbox or any bits for that matter at swap meets here. Maybe some of our English members might comment here as to whether or not there are bits available in the UK.
Perhaps the fact that some previous owner of my bike has had the word "FAITHLESS" signwritten on the tank says it all.
I'll photocopy all my Radco info and post it to you as soon as I'm up and about again.
Hope this helps, Tommo

[MMasa]

Unknown No Longer

Tommo
You are the MAN! I've been sending pictures of that frame around the world on and off for the last 4 years and NOTHING. You take one look at it and Wham! Right on spot. A quick Google search of Humber and a few other keywords yielded photographic proof that you are correct. It the front left view attached you can clearly see the front motor mount as well as the dual stay tubes on either side of the drive belt. Unfortunatly I don't see anything else on the bike that looks familiar, so I guess I have a frame available for trade / sale. At least I know what it is now.
Thanks a TON.
Mark

[MMasa]

Unknown No Longer

Another pis and I also forgot to mention that this bike was described as a 1913 3-1/2 HP Model

[Tommo]

Mark,
I spent a day at the National Motorcycle Museum in England last year and was extremely surprised at how many of the machines on display were incorrectly dated. Not just one or two but dozens in fact and when I raised this issue I was told that the majority of visitors wouldn't know the difference and those that did were not a concern to them.
That is obviously a pre 1911 model and the photo is obviously taken at the National Motorcycle Museum in England.
The fuel tank became less angular in 1911 and I own examples of 1911 /1912 /1913 and 1914 Humbers which look nothing like that bike especially that front engine mount.
I do have a spare motor thats about 1910-1911 and is in very rough condition but as to where you would get a Roc hub I don't know.
I'll ask around here and my contacts in Aussie you never know what might turn up and even though I have four of them they are a pretty rare bike so if you could restore that one in the USA it would probably be the only one there.
Best of luck, Tommo

[MMasa]

While we're on a roll

While we're on a roll, how about taking a crack at the following forks and rear frame bit? The one fork looks like it may be for the Humbler. It seems quite similar to the one in the picture from the museum.

[MMasa]

another view

[MMasa]

fork no. 2

[MMasa]

Fork no. 2 another view