Frame identification question?

[mshd63]

I recently purchased a 1952 FL from a member on the AMCA Facebook page. The bike was located about 1400 miles away so I had to rely on pictures and phone conversations with the seller.
The bike shows up and after a brief inspection I see it has an early 51 frame. It has 10-32 horn mount holes, vertical tool box mount, and the small type top motor mount. The seller tells me that this is correct because the VIN # is very low, FL 1600's. Is this possible?? I look forward to the groups feedback on this . Thank you.

[Speeding Big Twin]

Hi Mike. Has the seller found any paperwork yet to support his opinion? If so he should provide it for you to examine (and to keep for future reference). But if he still has no documentation then how can he prove the frame is original to the engine?

And as I indicated earlier, the seller’s opinion seems to contradict The Enthusiast from Sept 1951 because that issue announced the new-for-52 Pan frame and reference was made to the new top engine mount and toolbox bracket. The new frame seems to have been a big deal at H-D so I can’t see how any 1952 model Pans could have originally had a frame that was an early-51 style. Here is page 22 again for the benefit of anyone who hasn’t seen it. And maybe you could suggest to the seller that he read it as well.
Eric

[mshd63]

I agree. They made upgrades due failure with the earlier frames. The seller said he spoke to a Harley archivist that confirmed his side of the story. I believe it would be a liability to continue to use a faulty part, especially a Frame!!

[Speeding Big Twin]

Who is the archivist and how did he confirm the seller’s story? Does this archivist have factory evidence? If so I’m certain we’d all like to see it and it could then be placed in the AMCA virtual library for future reference.
Eric

[chuckthebeatertruck]

if I understand correctly. . .

Production swapped over in the autumn. Early 1952 would have been made in autumn 1951 or winter 1952.

the vin in question is 600+ bikes into the production season, and the economy was BURNING in 1951/52 with the lowest unemployment since the 1920s. In other words, money was flowing and all durable goods were in demand. It was so bad that car makers shipped vehicles with no, or poorly plated trim (due to nickle shortages) for much of their season in order to meet consumer demand. The 1953 recession wasn’t on anyones screens in autumn 1951.

if a random bike 600 into the production year has a ‘51 frame from 9-12 months before, that would be highly unusual.

in other words, if this was “common” then there would be many bikes in the same VIN range wearing 1951 frames, not one bike.

So, the deeper question is whether there is evidence of multiple early 1952 wearing 1951 frames?

HD does not have multiple archivists and so it should be a snap for the seller to put you in contact with them to back up the story. In my world, without an actual letter traceable to a verified employee of HD, the story is just that, a story. If the evidence exists as claimed, it shouldn’t be hard to receive confirmation.

For my own curiosity, did you buy the bike from an actual amca member, or simply someone on the Facebook page? There’s a lot more Facebook amca members than there are actual amca members.

[vph-d]

IIRC, there was an early and late version of the 51 frame. You have an early 52 with an early 51 frame which seems unlikely. The bike was likely in an accident and had the frame replaced at some point.
VPH-D

[mshd63]

I am going to contact the seller and ask for the archivist name? Thanks Eric for posting the Sept 51 article. I'm also asking the question, where are all the other '52 models with "51 frames??
The seller misrepresented the bike and now is telling me our business is through. And yes he is an AMCA member!

[tfburke3]

Without a reference or recomendation the Amca membership just means they have the same magazine subscription.
Tom

[T. Cotten]

Without a reference or recomendation the Amca membership just means they have the same magazine subscription.
Tom

But doesn't that also open them up to this forum for dialogue, Folks?

Let us hope the seller is tuned in, and can discuss, and even promote the machine...

Somebody else might like it.

....Cotten

[mshd63]

I'm just looking to get what was being represented as a 1952 FL that had been together since new according to the seller. He has been adamant that he knew the bikes history and it is correct.

[chuckthebeatertruck]

Did info from the hd archives show up? I’m genuinely curious about this one.

[mshd63]

Well after being told many times that the frame was a 51 a gentleman asked me how I was identifying it as such?? He then asked me to read the casting/foundry numbers on the frame. According to those numbers the frame is actually a 1949!!! Neck number is 19. Axle numbers are 8&12. The seller and I, after much back and forth have come to a monetary settlement. Thanks to all for your input, literature and time. I am moving on with the bike at this time. Thanks, Mike.