The "1906" Harley-D at Wauseon?

[HarleyCreation]

Bruce's motor and the Factory Lobby bike (SNO #1) motor, both 1905 models, do not have serial numbers.

Lonnie Sr.'s motor and the Factory (SNO #2) motor, both 1906 models, do not have serial numbers.

All known 1905 and 1906 model motors have 6-stud construction.

Yep, Earl's right on target.

Original photos of 1906 model Harleys also show bikes with 6-stud motors.

Obviously the owner of this bike THINKS he has a 1906 model. But the question remains on what evidence or basis did he do this restoration/replication bike on?

Personally, I think he's dead wrong when he says "1906." Being an 8-stud, the motor is a 1907 (possibly 1908) depending on the serial number.

I have a hunch why and where he came up with this "1906" scenario.

Anyone care to guess?

(Hint: who makes more mistakes than anyone else about early Harleys?)

I wish the owner would join us here. That is an important motor he's got there and we could help him straighten his bike out so it makes sense to what it really is.

It's amazing how befuddled the strap-tank Harley thing remains.

[silentgreyfello]

Obviously the owner of this bike THINKS he has a 1906 model. But the question remains on what evidence or basis did he do this restoration/replication bike on?

Personally, I think he's dead wrong when he says "1906." Being an 8-stud, the motor is a 1907 (possibly 1908) depending on the serial number.

I wish the owner would join us here. That is an important motor he's got there and we could help him straighten his bike out so it makes sense to what it really is.

I am not speaking for him, barely know him, but what reason would he join the discussion at this point? So you can further your own self-promotion? Let's take a look at your bike (if you have one) that you have dumped your heart and soul into and critique it in front of the world and let the critics insinuate it's a fraud. Would you want to join that? You almost sound like our long-lost, self-rightous friend Martin...

[c.o.]

I am not speaking for him, barely know him, but what reason would he join the discussion at this point? So you can further your own self-promotion? Let's take a look at your bike (if you have one) that you have dumped your heart and soul into and critique it in front of the world and let the critics insinuate it's a fraud. Would you want to join that? You almost sound like our long-lost, self-rightous friend Martin...

Wow, I read this post last night and at first wasn't sure what to think about it. But it did cause me to ponder so here goes........ when I saw the machine this thread is referring to in the new mag, it immediately jumped out at me that the machine pictured could not be an '06. It's been established that six bolt motors were '05-'06 machines and in '07 the eight bolt version shows up. How this particular machine got badged as an '06 has yet to be determined here. It's very obvious that the owner put a lot of work into his machine. It would be nice to hear his version of how he determined the year. Was he told the motor was an '06 when he bought it? I don't think it's been insinuated that the bike is a fraud, but merely mislabled. Now I can't and won't speak for Herb but another way to look at it could be that he is a historian that put a lot of time and effort into researching the early days of H-D. He came up with quite a bit of documentation that has disproved the Motor Company's version of events. I don't know about you, but if I found this out, I'd sure talk about it and point it out everytime I could. A good historian finds out the truth and tries to keep things straight for others and in years to come future generations will have an accurate version of events. It's been a recurring theme lately to hear about what is said here through the grapevine and then join up just to have an all out war over whatever thread it may be. Old Black Joe and a certain thread about seats comes to recent memory. I've been under the impression that a lot of us are here to discuss old motorcycles and the history behind them. But for some reason the typed word in a post can for whatever reason (whether negativity was or wasn't implied) can cause a caustic response that ruffles feathers and we all know that usually ends with people leaving and this forum has suffered due to this before. There has been no attack on Danny or his machine, just questions and we can only get answers if he provides them. So if the grapevines open let him know. If not then I guess we are merely left to wonder and the thread will drop out of sight and virtually be forgotten about........

[exeric]

Well said Cory. You always stay cool and exhibit a voice of reason. I'm trying to learn from you. However, even when these discussions get hot, a lot of valuable information is exchanged.

[HarleyCreation]

I am not speaking for him, barely know him, but what reason would he join the discussion at this point? So you can further your own self-promotion? Let's take a look at your bike (if you have one) that you have dumped your heart and soul into and critique it in front of the world and let the critics insinuate it's a fraud. Would you want to join that? You almost sound like our long-lost, self-rightous friend Martin...

Danny's bike was present at an AMCA meet, it appeared in the AMCA mag, and we are AMCA members politely discussing its merits on the AMCA forum. I don't see any problem with that. And I'm not disrespecting his work. Not at all. Like Cory said, we just would like to know how he arrived at a "1906" designation for that machine.

It's not about us, it's about the bikes. It's about straightening out the HUGE mess of faulty knowledge and confusion that strap-tank Harleys still suffer from at this incredibly late date, including well-intended guys (and billion dollar companies who should know better) claiming models that never existed.

Should we keep quiet and let faulty bikes slip by and maybe get judged as correct because many people are still in the dark about early Harleys? Instead, I hope AMCA judges are reading these posts and if a "1906" Harley with an 8-stud motor shows up for judging they are alerted and demand ORIGINAL period documentation showing that such a model existed. Because on the contrary, all known original evidence that I have seen suggests that a correct 1906 Harley would have a 6-stud motor, and would not have a serial number on it.

Yes, I wrote a book that deals exclusively with early Harleys and is fully documented with original material. But should that disqualify me from the discussion? I'm proud of that book. It took over 15 years to research and write and it contains findings that are radically new and relevatory to everyone. To date no one has refuted those findings in any way or manner, but I'm available here to discuss any and all aspects of early H-D to the best of my ability.

If you believe that there were 1906 model Harleys with 8-stud motors you should verify that with evidence and documentation. Personally, I am eager to learn new things provided there is proof of some kind. But if the bike is wrongly configured and labeled, let's help the owner correct it and improve the state of early Harley knowledge at the same time.

Again, I'm not criticizing the man, only wondering where that "1906" designation came from.

As to Martin, I miss him. Perhaps he can rehabilitate himself and come back under a new name and join the fun. He seemed to have strong opinions and considerable knowledge about early Harleys. But who was he really?

Will we ever know?

[pem]

Good for you Herb.

I always thought it strange that none of the mainstream motorcycle magazines or the niche magazines ever interviewed you in depth about your research. Did advertising dollars influence their decision or is it because they didn't feel it was relevant or pertinent? I also thought it strange that nobody from the television media did a story about your research. I for one would love to see something (documentary?) that the general public could appreciate and understand. Wouldn't you love to see a full length motion picture about board track racing staring some big name actors with period bikes. Could you imagine a new 1/2 mile board track built today. Or a mile. And for some reason I believe there would be no problem finding someone to ride the restored or repop bikes needed to make such a movie. Or a story about a young kid who started racing the local fairgrounds who ended up racing for one of the factories such as Excelsior or Indian. What time frame? Pre 1910! Post 1910! Definetely pre- 1916! Talk about drama and death defying action!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I find the early years of our sport facinating. So much has been written in the past by well intentioned historians that just wasn't true. And it just isn't about HD. Your research has brought us new information about Merkel, Comet and Mitchell to name a few. Not to mention Pennington.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Fellow members, go to your local historical societies and libraries and archives and look around. Find the earliest motorcycle photos in your local newspapers or periodicals. Locate your cities first motorcycles dealers. Find the buildings. Locate relatives of your local cities motorcycle pioneers. Just because you don't live in a large city doesn't mean there is no local motorcycle history. From 1900 to 1920 100's of motorcycles were built across this country by backyard mechanics and tinkerers. Maybe they only built one but it's still history and we should document as much of it as possible.
Then share your research with us. I like nothing more than to see an unpublished photo or
long forgotten newspaper article or letter. Better yet, a complete unknown motorcycle. Ok, now I am dreaming.

Dick

[HarleyCreation]

The Score

Thanks Dick,

You're right on target. Everyone should start looking in their own local area and new material will turn up.

As to the other stuff, we antique & history buffs are a small elite group. The mainstream media has gone with "Hog Heaven," tattoos, hot chicks (drool) on choppers, and the (ahem) "biker lifestyle" (posing) when covering the motorcycle universe. Little else exists for them. The real history? Forget that! Not enough chrome!

If I were a big shot college professor I might have a chance to be heard, or if I had a live wire New York publisher and a big PR firm behind me, or if I were a wealthy author who could jet around and promote myself. Instead, I'm a poor guy living back in the woods without any backing at all. Doing research on my own with my bike and tent plus help from dedicated guys like you, Earl, Bruce, the Harley family, etc. Then consider that we have taken on a BILLION dollar American "icon" firm with a $50 million dollar museum and their (bogus) claims. What chance is there outside of a miracle of spreading the truth quickly or universally?

Yes, I'd love to see that movie. Why doesn't Leno and his pals finance a excellent and ACCURATE movie about early Harley-Davidson? From Pennington's burning up the pavement in 1895 Milwaukee, to the first unsuccessful experiment bike, to the boys working in a backyard shed on the 1904 prototype, to Perry Mack hitting the dog in Chicago, to the building the great Red Brick Factory, to the blazingly fast 8-valve race bikes at Dodge City. Then a wonderful fast forward ending with the immortal 1936 "61 OHV" Knucklehead EL masterpiece and Bill Harley's greatest legacy!

They could hire us AMCA members as consultants to get the story RIGHT and put the right amount of action and excitement into it!

[Chris Haynes]

Jay Leno is an AMCA member. His contact information is in the club directory.

[aka HAWG]

while going through my motorcycle library today ran across this little tidbit of info

in the 1907 h-d riders handbook ( I just own a copy not an original ) it shows a drawing of a motor clearly an 8-bolt motor but on next page it shows what is called a buckboard motor, the drawing is of a six bolt, the only difference ( other than the case bolts ) is the hand crank on the buckboard motor, and an oiler- is it possible dan has a buckboard motor ?????? did they make these motors pre 1907????

I tried to post a scan of but comes up to fuzzy to make anything out once it gets enlarged - only about 2 3/4 inches tall in original form

aka HAWG

[aka HAWG]

while going through my motorcycle library today ran across this little tidbit of info

in the 1907 h-d riders handbook ( I just own a copy not an original ) it shows a drawing of a motor clearly an 8-bolt motor but on next page it shows what is called a buckboard motor, the drawing is of a six bolt, the only difference ( other than the case bolts ) is the hand crank on the buckboard motor, and an oiler- is it possible dan has a buckboard motor ?????? did they make these motors pre 1907????

I tried to post a scan of but comes up to fuzzy to make anything out once it gets enlarged - only about 2 3/4 inches tall in original form

aka HAWG

[c.o.]

Great info right there...........but I assume that in the '05 and '06 literature you have that there is no evidence of an eight-bolt...... I only have a photocopy of the '05 book so I'm of no great help here.......

[aka HAWG]

while re-read my post I made a mistake in my typing

should have asked if there is a possiblity that due to testing and research in 1906, is it possible that in late 1906 there was an 8-bolt motor????

aka HAWG

[Chris Haynes]

From Pennington's burning up the pavement in 1895 Milwaukee, to the first unsuccessful experiment bike, to the boys working in a backyard shed on the 1904 prototype,

Was there actually a backyard shed in 1904?

[aka HAWG]

I would have thought they would have started with a multi-million dollar factory like they have today

they could have worked out of a shed in any time pre 1904 - highly doubt that ma davidson let them work in the kitchen of the house

aka HAWG

[Chris Haynes]

My foggy memory seems to remember something about the first machine being built both in the kitchen of the home and in Henery Melks machine shop.