Tweet
This is a sort of post script to the 10-22-17 post on 24J footboard rods. I ran into a slight puzzle with my 21F restoration. As I’m 80% or more through the restoration I’m running more and more into these questions. This one involved the front stand and, related to that, the footboard support rods.
To recap the previous thread, the circa 17-23 H-D J Model footboard support rods were of two types, with different lengths on the right-hand side. This photo shows the two types from my spares stock. The top rods are the 1921(with heel brake) to 1923 type. The bottom pair are the 1917 to 1921 type.
The 1923 parts book shows the two types of rods and is clear about their application.
P1040745.JPG
It seems a reasonable deduction that (a) the heel brake was introduced as an option in 1921 and (b) that both short and long rods were available in that year, the longer rods to accommodate the heel brake lever and fittings. From 1922 only the long rods were fitted to new machines, whether or not a heel brake was fitted - probably as an economy measure to reduce the number of parts required. I’m certain my 21F was never fitted with a heel brake. However, at an early stage of the restoration I painted and fitted later, longer rods – mainly because I didn’t know any better.
A front stand came with the original bike and, because of its patina and residual paint, I am fairly sure that it had been fitted to my 1921 machine. (It is now repainted.)
However, from the 1921 and 1923 Spare Parts books, it is obvious that this is not a 1921 front stand. The 1921 front stand in the scan below has a joggle or a cut-out to, presumably, clear the heel brake when fitted.
Furthermore, after some careful measurement and some shaky math based on the picture in the parts book, I'm certain that the stand I have is about ¾” narrower at the top end than the 1921 stand illustrated. That means that it is not a good fit on footboard support bars which are bolted to the later, longer support rods.
I have come to the conclusion that my 21F was (a) never fitted with a heel brake; (b) was fitted with the shorter, earlier footboard support rods from new; and (c) was therefore fitted with the pre-21, narrower front stand.
But I’m left with one more question. If I’m to fit the front stand, which might be a useful accessory, I will have to use the shorter rods in the first photo. But these rods seem slightly more tapered than the later ones and have a distinctive flange just before the threaded end. This flange is not visible on any of the rods, pre- or post-1921, illustrated in the scan from the 1923 parts book. Nor is there a flange on this damaged short rear rod.
But the flange is present on a front rod illustrated in the 1921 Spare Parts book.
P1040743.JPG
P1040744.JPG
I'm well aware of the possible pitfalls in interpreting parts books but my guess is that the flanged rods were an earlier style. It seems too that exported bikes may, on occasion, have anachronistic parts fitted. But, subject to any comments or further information that members might have, I will go ahead and fit the shorter rods in the first photo so I can fit the front stand. Although the flanged rods may turn out not to be 100% correct, this will be a reversible decision.
Mike
To recap the previous thread, the circa 17-23 H-D J Model footboard support rods were of two types, with different lengths on the right-hand side. This photo shows the two types from my spares stock. The top rods are the 1921(with heel brake) to 1923 type. The bottom pair are the 1917 to 1921 type.
The 1923 parts book shows the two types of rods and is clear about their application.
P1040745.JPG
It seems a reasonable deduction that (a) the heel brake was introduced as an option in 1921 and (b) that both short and long rods were available in that year, the longer rods to accommodate the heel brake lever and fittings. From 1922 only the long rods were fitted to new machines, whether or not a heel brake was fitted - probably as an economy measure to reduce the number of parts required. I’m certain my 21F was never fitted with a heel brake. However, at an early stage of the restoration I painted and fitted later, longer rods – mainly because I didn’t know any better.
A front stand came with the original bike and, because of its patina and residual paint, I am fairly sure that it had been fitted to my 1921 machine. (It is now repainted.)
However, from the 1921 and 1923 Spare Parts books, it is obvious that this is not a 1921 front stand. The 1921 front stand in the scan below has a joggle or a cut-out to, presumably, clear the heel brake when fitted.
Furthermore, after some careful measurement and some shaky math based on the picture in the parts book, I'm certain that the stand I have is about ¾” narrower at the top end than the 1921 stand illustrated. That means that it is not a good fit on footboard support bars which are bolted to the later, longer support rods.
I have come to the conclusion that my 21F was (a) never fitted with a heel brake; (b) was fitted with the shorter, earlier footboard support rods from new; and (c) was therefore fitted with the pre-21, narrower front stand.
But I’m left with one more question. If I’m to fit the front stand, which might be a useful accessory, I will have to use the shorter rods in the first photo. But these rods seem slightly more tapered than the later ones and have a distinctive flange just before the threaded end. This flange is not visible on any of the rods, pre- or post-1921, illustrated in the scan from the 1923 parts book. Nor is there a flange on this damaged short rear rod.
But the flange is present on a front rod illustrated in the 1921 Spare Parts book.
P1040743.JPG
P1040744.JPG
I'm well aware of the possible pitfalls in interpreting parts books but my guess is that the flanged rods were an earlier style. It seems too that exported bikes may, on occasion, have anachronistic parts fitted. But, subject to any comments or further information that members might have, I will go ahead and fit the shorter rods in the first photo so I can fit the front stand. Although the flanged rods may turn out not to be 100% correct, this will be a reversible decision.
Mike
Comment