1939 seat discrepency

[Paquette]

Here is a scan of the 1939 catalog.

[Lonnie]

It would seem that what is screwing everything up is the reference, in both catalog photos shown, to the -39 part number. From what I've seen H-D was not particularly regimented in adherence to originality of part to part number and I do not find it out of the question for them to have made a running change once the "correct" seat was out of stock.

Has anyone examined a bonafide 1939 year (a first edition if there is such a thing) catalog and compared the difference in text and photo?

As a sidenote, the "holstein" deluxe seat was also a 1939 item but I've heard that due to its "love it or hate it" appearance, was commonly installed, perhaps by the dealers, onto bikes through 1942 until the inventory was depleted.

Lonnie C from SC

[Paquette]

Sorry, but here in the dial-up world sending pics and scans is a real pain. Perry, my original 39,40, and 41 accessory catalogs are all prited on a yellow/brownish stock paper. I also have a reprint of the 1941 catalog that is the same as the picture you posted. The original was 8 1/2 x 11 while the reprint is smaller. H-D part numbers for accessories is often confusing to say the least. For example, the standard full pan solo seat first came out in 1934 but was given the part # 3181-25 because it could be retrofitted back to the 1925 models. And lastly, I hardly consider myself an "expert" on anything. Experts sort of scare me!!!!!

[silentgreyfello]

Originally posted by BNSONS
This ebay seller was not confused- to say the least. Palmer's book is indeed a great reference tool. However, I would be remiss to have doubts and not consult my archives of Factory original catalogs and advertisements. I had hoped by scanning my fragile book I would avoid and confusion from people who don't have the same access I do. The picture of the tan seat with the jewel in the back is a '39 and a nice one. It has become the standard by which most people judge what is or isn't a '39 seat. As my Factory original catalog shows that isn't the only seat Harley sold for '39. I hope this ends the confusion.

BNSONS... Could you please check your catalog again? Perhaps there are two different issues for 39? The one that I lifted off of the ebay auction didn't show the cover, but the format is definitely different than the one Paquette posted. Did they date the catalogs anyplace?

On a side note, a buddy of mine has the accessory catalogs from 36-40, but doesn't have 39. He is planning on mailing some copies to me anyway. If anyone has a '39 catalog for sale, please let me know.

[Paquette]

Silentgrayfello,
I have the same catalog that you posted the picture from eBay. The third page states " Boy--Am I having fun since I traded for this '41". To the right of the deluxe solo it shows the deluxe buddy seats part #'s 11240-30, 11240-29D, 11240-25D, and 11240-36D. I also have a copy of the original production drawing for the deluxe solo dated September 1941.

[silentgreyfello]

Cool, sounds like it maybe isn't that much of a discrepency afterall, just a case of mistaken literature.

Do you make the floral crystal or is it available? I'll be sending my pan as soon as it's painted.

Thanks again!

[Paquette]

I am working on having the crystal ornaments made. The originals are rare as hen's teeth ( not to mention expensive!!). They are actually bridle rosettes that were used on horse and mule harnesses!!!

[silentgreyfello]

Are all the floral crystals white w/ yellow center like the ebay seat? I talked to a guy who thought his old '39 had a red rose crystal, not white. He sold it a few years back.

[Paquette]

I have seen roses for the most part but these oraments came ( not specific to H-D) with deer, horses, you name it. If I can get them made, you can even have your wifes picture in it..... or not.--LOL

[JohnA]

Can anyone tell me if these are original or repop crystal ornaments
Thanks!
Also if you know what the trim parts go to.
Crystal ornaments.jpg

[Chris Haynes]

[JohnA]

They are NOS. Thanks!