65 FL Triple Tree Dilemma

[JSB55]

Hi, Guys

Been quite a while since I visited the forum, but over the years, it's been an invaluable resource, so thanks in advance for your help once again.

I have a 65 FL I bought from a reputable shop a number of years back. At the time, I was told it was once a sidecar rig, (police bike, actually) but the sidecar had been stored outside for so long it was complete trash when I saw it. I've since found a one owner 66 sidecar that I plan to attach and use.

The bike was (amazingly) virtually all original, except for a hideous rattle can paint job. FL engine, police speedo, skinny tank, hand shift, 3 speed w/ reverse transmission, steering damper, and has all the hoops and attachments for a sidecar. When I tore it down, however, I discovered a standard triple tree set rather than an adjustable rake setup.

I've since powder coated the frame, found a perfect color match for the original Birch White, rebuilt the engine, parkerized a ton of parts and fasteners and bought most of the correct cad fasteners, as well as sending out quite a few larger parts to have the cad redone. In other words, total resto, right down to the beautiful reproduction wiring harness, refreshed star hubs, and cad spoked wheels.

MY DILEMMA... I can put it back together with the non-adjustable front end and hook up the sidecar, knowing I'm only going to putt around my small town, and rarely if ever get the thing over 45 mph. I'm leaning toward doing that, but I know that the CORRECT configuration has the adjustable rake and might be dangerous without it.

Years of searching have failed to turn up anything but a Tedd's repop adjustable tree set, which I can buy and put on as a last resort, but I also know the stem mounted fork lock doesn't get used in that case. If I go this route, what is the fix for the opening in the neck where the steering lock normally goes? Do I plug it up, stick the lock in there knowing it's non-functional, or what?

Any and all (expert) thoughts and advice appreciated. Stock triple tree, or repop adjustable, and why?

Thanks!

John

[Rubone]

Why do you say you cannot use the factory fork lock?

[JSB55]

Hi, Robbie! From what I read in Palmer, the adjustable tree doesn't have the hole in the stem to accept the "piston" that the lock pushes forward when you engage it.

[Rubone]

Read it again...the fork lock hole was not deleted until '69 and later.

[kitabel]

The de-rake position reduces stability, the bike is safer with the std. fork at speed. The purpose of the rake is to reduce steering effort by reducing trail.

[JSB55]

Read it again...the fork lock hole was not deleted until '69 and later.

Sure enough, you are correct, Robbie. Had to get my magnifying glass out and read it again *LOL*. Unfortunately, pictures of the Tedd's repop appear that it is fashioned after the later version, since it has the welded on lock tab at the back. Can't tell from photos if the hole in the stem is there or not.

[JSB55]

To clarify ... I plan on using this *strictly* as a sidecar bike, almost exclusively around town. Never having ridden one, I have no idea how much difference the (repop) adjustable trees make, vs just using the stock OEM parts I already have.

[Rubone]

Sure enough, you are correct, Robbie. Had to get my magnifying glass out and read it again *LOL*. Unfortunately, pictures of the Tedd's repop appear that it is fashioned after the later version, since it has the welded on lock tab at the back. Can't tell from photos if the hole in the stem is there or not.

So drill it and cut the plate off. Easy peasy...

[JSB55]

True dat. I'll take that as a vote for the adjustable trees, even if repop. You're one of 4 or 5 voices on here I always know I can get solid info/advice from. Thanks!

[paddy]

John, You are in luck. I have a origional correct casting coded OEM adjustable tree setup that I was going to use on my 65. At this point I will never get to setting up a side car rig. It is ready to go . drop me a message and we can make a deal. I paid $800. for it Paddy

[JSB55]

PM sent, Paddy.

[JSB55]

Thanks to fellow Member Paddy, I now have a correct and nearly complete OEM adjustable front end! Sometimes, things just fall into place.

[JSB55]

So, thanks to Forum and AMCA Member Paddy, I now have a correct set of adjustable triple trees. As confirmed via the Palmer book, when these were used, the frame did not employ the neck lock, since the trees had an extra plate at the bottom, drilled for a padlock to be used to lock the front end. The neck lock boss was in fact blocked at the factory. For anyone who has done the modification, how did you plug the neck lock boss? A 3/4" cork or rubber plug can easily be driven in there, but how to hide it? I've thought about a thin coat of either JB Weld or Black RTV, then paint. OR ???

Same question re blocking the hole in the front of the neck that would normally be used to insert the lock "piston", then sealed. How was that done? My parts book doesn't show any sort of plug that might have been used.

Thanks!

[Rubone]

So, thanks to Forum and AMCA Member Paddy, I now have a correct set of adjustable triple trees. As confirmed via the Palmer book, when these were used, the frame did not employ the neck lock, since the trees had an extra plate at the bottom, drilled for a padlock to be used to lock the front end. The neck lock boss was in fact blocked at the factory. For anyone who has done the modification, how did you plug the neck lock boss? A 3/4" cork or rubber plug can easily be driven in there, but how to hide it? I've thought about a thin coat of either JB Weld or Black RTV, then paint. OR ???

Same question re blocking the hole in the front of the neck that would normally be used to insert the lock "piston", then sealed. How was that done? My parts book doesn't show any sort of plug that might have been used.

Thanks!

Sorry, but you are incorrect. If your forks have a welded on padlock bracket they are '69 and later trees. No '65-'68 ever had a lower fork bracket with a padlock plate. And the hole in the frame for the neck lock from '69 up was never drilled, just still in the casting. You are misreading Palmer's info.
Your parts book will not show anything for a plug because no such parts existed.

[JSB55]

Sorry, but you are incorrect. If your forks have a welded on padlock bracket they are '69 and later trees. No '65-'68 ever had a lower fork bracket with a padlock plate. And the hole in the frame for the neck lock from '69 up was never drilled, just still in the casting. You are misreading Palmer's info.
Your parts book will not show anything for a plug because no such parts existed.

And, or course, you're right as usual, Robbie. This front end has been driving me nuts. Confusing enough that HD used casting numbers that, in this case, were in some cases one digit off from the part number (DUH!???) Palmer Ed 2, p 115 describes the 60-64 setup for an adjustable fork, then in one sentence says 65-68 is the same, which I guess I glossed over, since he started a new section for 65-68.

It did not make any sense to me they would have introduced that plate for a padlock without a spot on the neck to also engage it, which, sure enough, showed up in 69.

Back to Plan A, cutting off the welded on lock plate and drilling the stem to accept the lock plunger.

As it happens, I had a lock kit sitting in my parts box, and it has the welch plug for the hole in the front of the neck, so that mystery is solved for me, as well.

Sorry to have troubled you, but glad I asked!

John