52 Wishbone frame

[Chris Haynes]

My factory photos of a 52FL7219 doesn't show that marking. Admittedly it is difficult to see but I have studied it long and hard.

[Steve Little]

Hi Chris.
I wasnt sure if we were on a hunt for something that was too rare.
But this morning I recieved information that we are in fact chasing down a real frame.
We need to find someone with a very early 52.

I just had a quick look at Bruce Palmers book. Have a look at page 599 in The "How to restore" book. Use a magnifying glass. The middle section of the neck is conveniantly lighted. What do you see?

Regards Steve

[Chris Haynes]

This is what I see.

I also see that this bike is a 1952 PROTOTYPE, as it is stated on page 599, and it is actually a 1951. 51FL8265 to be exact. Approximately 8305 were built, subtract 1,000 from that vin and it is number 7265, so this is a late 1951.

[Steve Little]

Hi Chris
Nice picture.
How come your pictures are so clear?
I'm squinting through 1&1/2 times glasses and a 6" magnifying glass at a grainy picture and you come swaning in with that.

Now that it is established that the L J frame exists within the OEM range we need to establish the correct time period and VIN numbers.

Anyone have or know of a really late 1951 Pan or a really early 52 Pan.
A unrestored/Known history bike is really what we need.
I have a really late unrestored 51 Pan that was imported from the US.
It spent some time in Pasadina "sticker on handlebar" but I do not have any other history on the bike.

Regards Steve

[Steve Little]

Hi Chris.
How do you know the engine number of this bike?

I have read all the info on this page and I cant find where it is listed.

That picture you have supplied looks to be a close up of the same picture in the "How to Restore" book.
The light glare is reflecting off the same areas.

I am wondering, did you supply some of the pics and info for the Palmer book?

Regards Steve

[Steve Little]

Chris
You dont need to answer that. I just looked in the forward section of the book in Acknowledgements and can see your name.
I should have looked there before asking.
Regards Steve

[bmh]

51FL81XX was just up for sale the other month, it appears to be an original paint machine. Got a few pics off the guy though they are not the best quality the lighting is very good and I see no trace of the "LJ". Keep an eye toward police bikes. It seems that a large batch of police machines was built at the end of the 51 model year. I have pics of one of the last 150 or so built for the 51 year but nothing good enough to see that area.

[Chris Haynes]

[QUOTE=Steve Little;83691]Hi Chris.
How do you know the engine number of this bike?
Simple. I have the photo of the other side of it.


I am wondering, did you supply some of the pics and info for the Palmer book?
Yes.

[Chris Haynes]

[QUOTE=Steve Little;83679]Hi Chris
Nice picture.
How come your pictures are so clear? Because I have the original photograph

[Steve Little]

Hi all.
Chris.
Thanks for the:
clear
consice
congenial
clarification.

Brian. Thanks for the info.
Its a shame the picture you got of that bike didn't show up that area of the neck.
It would have helped to isolate the VIN range.
Also the Police bike range is a good lateral thought.

A mate just dropped in and we were talking about this isolated frame.
I said I couldn't think what the L J could have stood for... and straight away he blurts out Law and Justice.
Hate it when I dont think that fast. Its only a guess as yet.



I have just tracked down some information that may help refine the criteria of the search for the L J frame.
A collector here in Australia has a unrestored civilian 1952 Pan. VIN FL144#
This is about the 440th bike to be made in 1952.
The frame on this bike is not a L J frame.

I think Chris's supposition of very late 1951 is looking stronger although I still think very early 1952 is in the range.

Speaking from a manufactures point of view, the "set up time" of a job can be time consuming.

A certian amount of components must be made to offset this "set up time" before profit can be achieved.

The pattern maker has invested time and worked on this neck for some reason.
If it was the original forge set from 1951, the forge set had to be annealed before the pattern maker could use his pantograph to put the L J lettering into it.
Then the forge set needed to be case hardened again, to be made ready for production.

The number of L J necks could be minimum of 500 but more likely 1000.

If it was a new set of forge plates... a huge amount of money would need to be recouped to offset this cost.

Has anyone ever aproached the HD museum or HD head office for this type of information.
And if so, what was the response like?

Any information "supported or unsupported" or ideas is welcome.

Regards Steve Little
Race Frame Engineering P/L
AMCA 1950

[Chris Haynes]

[QUOTE=Steve Little;83749]


I think Chris's supposition of very late 1951 is looking stronger although I still think very early 1952 is in the range.

How can you consider the fact that 51FL8265 had the marking on the neck as supposition? It is definately a 1951 production machine. My photo of 52FL7219 doesn't show that marking.

[bmh]

Steve, I have a question for you. I notice that you refer to the parts of the frame a forgings, as most people do. Are they in fact drop forged parts? Or are they more simply cast of steel alloy? How do you manufacture yours? While some parts would lend themselves to drop forging quite well such as axle clips and seat post tops, the neck would seem a very complex piece to drop forge, especially the area of the socket for the lower support tube. To say nothing of the fact I would expect a forged part to have a crisper appearance. I agree that the capitol investment on a set of forge faces would be high and that many parts would need to be run just to hit the break even point. So it would also stand to reason that if the forge faces had been anealed to be repaired for some reason and the "LJ" mark added and then returned to production that it would have remained untill the faces were worn and in need of replacement, or further repairs were needed. But a casting mother used to make the sand molds used in casting production is a fairly easily modified piece and replacement costs on something like that are minimal. Of course I don't see any of the tell tale lines where diferent sections of the mold come together as on a set of crank cases on the frame neck either, only the flash line up the middle. And a set of molds in only two pieces would be equally hard to accomplish.

[Steve Little]

Hi Chris.
Your description of the picture you supplied follows:
"I also see that this bike is a 1952 PROTOTYPE, as it is stated on page 599, and it is actually a 1951. 51FL8265 to be exact. Approximately 8305 were built, subtract 1,000 from that vin and it is number 7265, so this is a late 1951.

You have supplied a good clear picture of the L J neck which clarified that the neck existed from HD. This point is no longer supposition.
The VIN from a factory Proto type will only serve as a loose guide to actual production dates. This Proto type bike may have sat around the experimental department for months before going into production.
The L J necks may or may not have been used in the interim time.

Until all the facts of this particular frame are in, most things are a supposition.

You have also written that the photo of 52FL7219 doesn't show the L J marking.
That helps to narrow down the search.

I have found a unrestored civilian 1952 Pan. VIN FL144#
which also does not have the L J marking on the neck so we keep looking back from this VIN and "perhaps" forward of the VIN of that 51 PROTO TYPE you supplied.

I have no real idea what the L J means but my friends quip of Law and Justice was just a funny quip. Supposition

Brian.
Over the years I have had conversations with my pattern maker on the manufacture process of original frame components.
I believe the frame components of all Knuckle and Early Pan frames are of a forged process.
This could be simply due to the speed they can be produced. Forge plates are hellishly expensive but the production time is tiny compared to sand casting and pouring a part. The HD factory could justify the expense of a forge set due to the production estimate for the year.

The part numbers and foundry marks on the early original parts are too sharp in detail to have been high production sand cast. The granuals of sand make sharp lettering almost impossible to achieve.
Later in the 50's I believe they started sand casting parts for swing arm frames. The swing arm pivot area and strut mounts look to be sand cast.

The original steel used by HD was a mild steel which was then normalised after forging.
All my parts are cast in 1030 mild steel and then normalised.
My patterns all have joint lines that follow the flash line of the HD forgings.
Keep in mind that Harley were only making one style of neck per year. I have 6.

I have no idea why the pattern maker has marked the necks with L J or if the forge plates had any other work done to them.
I was really only making the point of how expensive "set up" time can be, and what would need to be done to make a small change in an existing forge set.
And that the time for all this pre manufacture work needs to be covered in production component numbers.

Hope I have answered all the questions adequatley.

On a side note. Years ago a friend told me he had seen a short antique movie about the parts being forged. Can anyone verify this or any old pictures. I looked at the link that Chris posted on the antique Harley pictures but not one was about frames.
Does anyone know if the DIF foundry is still operating?
Regards Steve

[Steve Little]

I forgot to add that a forge die set are usually highly polished. The mottling effect on original necks would come from shale flaking of the red hot ingot as is being pounded by the forge. The shale gets between the forge plates and the neck forging and creates lines and grooves.

[Chris Haynes]

[QUOTE=Steve Little;83759]Hi Chris.
Your description of the picture you supplied follows:
"I also see that this bike is a 1952 PROTOTYPE, as it is stated on page 599, and it is actually a 1951. 51FL8265 to be exact. Approximately 8305 were built, subtract 1,000 from that vin and it is number 7265, so this is a late 1951.

You have supplied a good clear picture of the L J neck which clarified that the neck existed from HD. This point is no longer supposition.
The VIN from a factory Proto type will only serve as a loose guide to actual production dates. This Proto type bike may have sat around the experimental department for months before going into production.
The L J necks may or may not have been used in the interim time.

Until all the facts of this particular frame are in, most things are a supposition. [QUOTE}

You have also written that the photo of 52FL7219 doesn't show the L J marking.
That helps to narrow down the search.

This bike is a high number of 51FL8265. The negative for this photo was entered into the Pohlman Log on May 03,1951 and that June was the change over month. The fact is that this number is only 40 from the last 1951 FL produced. It is obvious that your supposition that it has been sitting around is incorrect.
My feeling is that the neck was most likely on late /51's and possibly early '52's. Only the MoCo records would confirm this but the good folks at AMF made sure that nobody will ever see those again.

[QUOTE] Has anyone ever aproached the HD museum or HD head office for this type of information.
And if so, what was the response like? [QUOTE]

Until a recently I had contacts at the MoCo who could research or refer me to someone who could answer the questions. But they are all now retired or dead. The problem today is all the MoCo employees are too young to know what went on and when. They only know the company line. Valuable records for this type of research were destroyed by AMF. A few MoCo blueprints that have found their way into private hands help some. The MoCo blueprint for the Panhead rigid frame notes the dates of design changes. But no mention of makers marks on parts. Many times these marks simply were the number for the tooling/mold/die used to make the part. As that tooling/mold/die wore out or had a design change the number would change.
I was fortunate enough to be allowed into the MoCo archives in the basement of Juneau Ave. a couple times. It was great to look through their books of photos but it was much more fun to be able to read the Presidents reports to the Shareholders. Sadly I was locked in this vault and there was no copy machine in there so I could only take notes.
For a few years I had unlimited access to the Pohlman Studios photo archives. Sadly that door was closed by Tom Bolfert when he assembled his "Big Book of Harley-Davidson" and he didn't want anybody else to have access to the photos. Although I didn't get all the photos I would like to have had (they weren't cheap) I did get a lot. I always snag any factory photo I find on the Internet. I trade photo scans with other collectors. At this point I have close to 2,000 factory photos. Quite a few but still not enough.