Help with Kick Starter Arm Identity

[Garym]

Can anyone shed some light on this?
I've looked through all my parts books and have not seen this P/N 33067-54
Thanks,
Gary

[Rubone]

If that is the number on the arm itself it is a casting number, not a part number. it will be close to but not the same as a part number. That is common H-D practice. How much offset does it have? You most likely have a 33068-54 for big twins from '54 to '69.
Robbie

[sirhrmechanic]

Were kick arms cast? I would have thought they would be a hammer forging... then machined. A casting is not very strong in tension, which is what I would think you need for a kick arm, which takes a lot of torsional stress. Putting a date number on a forging die is more difficult than changing a casting number, but it could be stamped easily. Just interesting and I may be completely off base... anyone know for sure?

Of note, last time I toured Smith and Wesson, their big hammer forges were working overtime... turning out shifter forks for new HD motorcycle transmissions. S&W is a forging subcontractor to H-D.

Cheers,

Sirhr

[upsrod]

Does anyone know if there is a type 1 and a type 2 version of the 33068-54 kick arm?
I have seen them with the 33067-54 casting # on them with the pedal boss drilled all the
way through and some with the boss closed. Is there an early and a late, different manufacturer
etc.....Rod
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...K%3AMEWAX%3AIT

[exeric]

I agree with Sirhr. There's no way a casting would sustain the abuse a Harley Davidson kicker arm has to endure. Only a forging can take that kind of torture.

[Rubone]

"Casting Number" is just a figure of speech boys. No need to get your panties in a wad over it. The point is that the number on the part, be it cast, forged, or paper mache, is not the number in the parts book!
Robbie

[exeric]

"Casting Number" is just a figure of speech boys. No need to get your panties in a wad over it. The point is that the number on the part, be it cast, forged, or paper mache, is not the number in the parts book!
Robbie

You and Chris Haynes are kings of nit-pickers. This is exactly the kind of thing that gets your panties in a wad. And there is a hell of a difference between a casting and a forging

[Rubone]

Actually, i could care less about nit-picking. the question asked was about a number. It had nothing to do with castings, forgings, or any other aspect of part construction beyond a number. But for some reason persons such as yourself have to make it into some sort of metallurgical heresy or an affront to H-D.
Nit-Picking?
Take a look in the mirror Eric!
Robbie

[sirhrmechanic]

Ok... time out.

Actually, I am interested in seeing a picture of the part that started this. And was not trying to nitpick...

I brought this up because putting a date code on a forging isn't easy to do. You have to change expensive dies every time you change a date interval. Generally in the automotive world (at least back in the analog hammer forge and sand casting days) on forgings, you find part numbers. On castings, you find date codes and/or part numbers.

One of the reasons the date codes were important on major castings was that issues with pours, alloys, mold cores or temperatures (all of which could cause a flawed casting) could be tracked to a certain date. If an issue was identified by analysis or issues on machining parts from a certain date or lot, then parts could be found in inventory and destroyed or fixed based on dates. On forgings, once it's hammered... it's fine. The hammer 'fixes' anything! You might want to put a date on something, but you didn't 'need' a date the same way as you might w. a casting.

One logical thing might be to have a date on each new forging die, to track when it was put into service. They do wear out and embrittle and you don't want to crack a die on a forge hammer. But why put that service date on the part itself? You can put that on the die. And for something as small as a kick start arm, I am surprised they would put a date on it.

Or is the date code stamped into the part after forging? That would be easy and cheap to do, but not sure I understand the logic in needing it on something that isn't, say, a frame or set of cases or a cylinder -- in other words, a major part.

So I'd like to learn what they did and hear the logic behind it... if anyone knows? It's an interesting question and this sort of detective work and understanding of 'how it was done' back in the day, is why I work on antique cars and bikes.

BTW, if anyone has Wagner's book on The VL and early EL (and the people who rode them) -- I can never remember the title) -- his 'tour' of the factory in the 1930's is fantastic. I had never thought about the level of hand-assembly and commitment to quality at H-D during the '30's until I read that. With the low-volume production of the Depression, it appears that HD was achieving a level of quality one would have only associated with a Brough or a Crocker or some other low-volume, high-end bike. But in a depression, you better give value and HD managed to do it enough to stay in business... It's a very interesting read.

Anyway, sorry to have started a tempest in a teapot... just trying to cipher out something that interests me.

Cheers,

Sirhr

[upsrod]

The 4th post has several pictures of the part attached with a legitimate question.
Rod

[Rubone]

Love to help you Rod, but since the part in question has "Die -casting" numbers on it I defer. Don't want Eric to stroke out over die cast kicker arms! I'll let those with a total knowledge of proper nomenclature deal with this!
Robbie
Merely a fool with no knowledge or background and should be dismissed.

[Garym]

Thanks, everyone, for your help. I've included a picture(in Gary's Album-on this site) of the kicker arm in question(on the right), along with my broken arm, from my '67 XLCH(same arm for my '65 FLH). Notice the missing upper portion. This is the first time(in 40 years) that I have ever broken a kicker arm.
Since the arm in question will not work for either of these bikes, I will post it in "For Sale" or trade, on this site.
Gary

[upsrod]

Gary,
The kicker with the #33067-54 on it would be correct for your 65. I can't
find your picture.

Rod

[Garym]

Rod,

OK, I uploaded the pic, again, hopefully correctly.

You solved the mystery. I thought that I tried this kicker arm on the 65, and that it would rub on the battery cover, but after checking, it appears to be OK.
I guess I'm not too old to learn.

Thanks,
Gary

[vph-d]

Gary,
The 67 XLCH and 65 FL do not use the same kick arm. The big twin arm is almost straight up and down, the XL arm has an offset.
VPH-D