Beehive Brouhaha History

[Steve Slocombe]

At the risk of digging in deeper, 'the new beehive tail light lens' in the 1935 Police bike description could be read as referring to the lens for the new beehive tail light. The knucklehead was originally the 'sump oiler project' when it was started in 1932, then the Overhead 61 before it was described as the knucklehead. I doubt the Panhead and the Shovelhead were called that by Harley on their release, even though they would call them that today. Times change and new information comes to hand, so the concept of 'correct' gets a little blurred, even to the numerous AMCA judges we have on this forum.

[FCJ]

At the risk of digging in deeper, 'the new beehive tail light lens' in the 1935 Police bike description could be read as referring to the lens for the new beehive tail light.

It may not be digging deeper if it doesn't challenge conventional wisdom. I would certainly understand that possible reading (i.e., Chrome License Plate Frame vs. French Glass Goggles) absent any context (e.g., if the lens was not new and the tail light was new). Absent any context, "the new beehive tail light lens" could also refer to the new lens for the beehive tail light. But, we have context (e.g., contemporaneous references in H-D literature to a "new beehive type lens .... fitted to the tail light" and a "new beehive lens featured on the tail lights...").

The lens is clearly beehive-shaped and fairly called a beehive lens. And, I understand why a tail light with a beehive-shaped lens would be called a beehive tail light (even if H-D did not call the lens a beehive lens). But, I had not seen that argument made by anyone before now. I only saw the "H-D called the tail light the beehive in literature" argument in the prior 10+ years of discussions. That is the argument that I didn't understand and disagree with. But, like I said, I may alone in this regard and I may be wrong. I wouldn't be shocked to see a clear reference to a beehive tail light. I haven't seen one yet, but I am new and haven't seen much at all compared to everyone else.

[FCJ]

If you actually spent time with motorcycle people instead of your books and computer you might learn something. Next week is the AMCA meet in Wauseon, Ohio. Go there and learn. Your collage degrees aren't going to help you in this. I sincerely hope that this will be the last time you hang this subject up for a beating again.

True to form Chris! I'm not challenging your expertise or authority or position as the god of all H-D knowledge or the king of all forums. Although I did not intend to disparage or disrespect you, I apologized and kowtowed when you took a Facebook post the wrong way. I have consistently praised you and gone out of my way to avoid offending you or injuring your pride or sensibilities. But, you appear to view historical, factual questions as some kind of personal attack or affront. You tell me to do this and do that and suggest that I "invest several thousand dollars and years reading" all the literature that you have, but then you throw a hissy fit when I ask a question or try to research something. I am happy to invest in this. It would be faster and easier to pay someone else to do everything, but I'm here trying to learn what I can for myself in what little spare time I have. I may be new to this, but I have already read enough and spent enough time with motorcycle people to learn a little bit about you. If you don't want to be helpful or constructive, that's your choice.

P.S. I don't know why you keep talking about my education or what you think you know about me or how I spend my time, but I don't have any degrees in collage [sic]. Your statements may say more about you than they do about me. If you want to name call and make threats and try to bully on the internet, that's your choice. If a beehive discussion causes you to act like this, I can't imagine the weeping and gnashing of teeth that would ensue if any mere mortal dared question a jiffy stand.