65 pan restoration manual

[Chris Haynes]

Sorry this is off topic, but...
I found a copy of Tom Swift and his Electric Rifle in the trash.

Anyone guess the significance of it today?

....Cotten

Its not TASER.

[T. Cotten]

Chris!

The inventor of the TASER attributed it to Appleton.

Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle.

I have a copy for trade for Schebler cores.

Its pretty lame otherwise,

....Cotten

[Chris Haynes]

Cotten,
How does Tom Swift and his Electric Rifle, which is TSAER wind up as TASER? There is no letter A between Tom and Swift. I think ya must have breathed some bad fumes in one of yer dives.
Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle.

[T. Cotten]

Cotten,
How does Tom Swift and his Electric Rifle, which is TSAER wind up as TASER? There is no letter A between Tom and Swift. I think ya must have breathed some bad fumes in one of yer dives.
Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle.

Chris!

It was Jack Cover's idea, not mine: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Cover

Motorcycle content: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Swift

....Cotten

[Underdoggie]

Here is the best manual I have ever seen. Study all of the pictures and copy
them before the are off of ebay. As far as the book George Marakas is writing,
I saw his 65's at Davenport and three of them made the winners circle, all of
them had many, many incorrect parts.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...K%3AMEWAX%3AIT

Im with you Rod, the blue bike on ebay is the best example I have ever seen, even better than my 65 which is also a winners circle, The blue bike looks to good to be true in some shots but little things like the intake clamps, exhasut clamps, windshield hardware ( I could keep going) all look right, but in like new shape, mine has some wear and patina. I also agree with the comments about incorrect parts on some other winner circle bikes. I am sure they did lots of research when they restored them but when I am told the ring on my primary should not be polished, my kick stand should be round at the bottom, the ground cable should have a wing nut, no spacers between the buddy seat and T bar and inncorrect ground cable on the regulator are wrong and every picture in the manuals, parts book, factory pictures and other original bikes I have pictures of look like mine and the blue bike, well it makes me wonder.

[rbenash]

Hey UD - interesting comments as usual. My understanding (which is decidedly limited) as far as judging is that if you have factory manuals/info that support your argument that your bike is correct you are able to arbitrate and have those items removed/forgiven for lack of better term. Guess if you are Winners Circle you might not care and take the list as input to be taken based on what you know and whether you would really want to change it, etc.

As far as that Ebay '65 referenced. It is a "book" for sure. I was able to pull down full set of decent resolution images. Handy to have IMHO. Glad I saw the reference here or I would have missed the opportunity. Which he had that battery cover off to get some photos there as well. Would be good to know who bought it. One (of many) interesting details is that it does appear to suggest that dual exhaust was chrome.

[Chris Haynes]

Hey UD - interesting comments as usual. My understanding (which is decidedly limited) as far as judging is that if you have factory manuals/info that support your argument that your bike is correct you are able to arbitrate and have those items removed/forgiven for lack of better term.

That is correct. BUT!!! You must have the parts book for the year of your bike. Why? Because in many cases the MoCo updated a part in later years. This came in to play after gigging a 1965 Panhead for the wrong intake clamps. The owner drug out his 1968 parts book, which still listed Panhead parts, and showed me that the clamps were the ones shown in the book. However there was a 1965 parts book handy which showed the earlier, correct for 1965, clamps.

[rbenash]

Yeah, that's why I wish the copiers would have done a '65 parts book. I have an original '68 and still haven't been able to find a '65.

Speaks overall to the absence of a "manual" on a '65 and how strange a beast it is in that you really need to have a model year parts manual to go with it

[T. Cotten]

Let us all consider why Mr. Palmer did not include the '65 production in his landmark treatise.
Let us also consider why he only outlined '36.

There were un-counted un-documented running production changes during those production years.

Compiling an honest and definitive treatise on the variations of the '65 Electra-Glide would be monumental, if not impossible.
After all, there are probably more on the road today than the Factory ever produced.

....Cotten
PS: The previously mentioned Tom Swift books cannot be overlooked as a primary driving force in promoting motorcycling during its infancy. The first of the series is well known.
One could only imagine how history may have changed if the sequel had escaped the publisher's lack of zeal for the murderous machines!

[Chris Haynes]

Yeah, that's why I wish the copiers would have done a '65 parts book. I have an original '68 and still haven't been able to find a '65.

Speaks overall to the absence of a "manual" on a '65 and how strange a beast it is in that you really need to have a model year parts manual to go with it

Antique Cycle Supply has them.
http://antiquecyclesupply.com/partsCatalogs.htm

[rbenash]

Thanks - I'll be picking one up for the library.

Way back when I bought the 58-68 copy from them they weren't carrying these.

[duffeycycles]

When I was involved as an aprentice judge on George's '65s a few years ago I pointed out many things wich were inconsistent between them ,like the reproduction timers on all but this one. we wre told that they had been judged twice before and the newfound items wre not to be deducted, wich was way different than the last time I had apprenticed.It seamed to me the same old buddy gets his thru routine.I still pulled George aside and told him about thes obvious to anybody issues and he was suprised they had not been noticed in previous judgings

[rbenash]

Let us all consider why Mr. Palmer did not include the '65 production in his landmark treatise.
Let us also consider why he only outlined '36.

There were un-counted un-documented running production changes during those production years.

Compiling an honest and definitive treatise on the variations of the '65 Electra-Glide would be monumental, if not impossible.
After all, there are probably more on the road today than the Factory ever produced.

....Cotten
PS: The previously mentioned Tom Swift books cannot be overlooked as a primary driving force in promoting motorcycling during its infancy. The first of the series is well known.
One could only imagine how history may have changed if the sequel had escaped the publisher's lack of zeal for the murderous machines!

Antique Cycle Supply has them.
http://antiquecyclesupply.com/partsCatalogs.htm

Thought I would follow up. The catalog mentioned is actually 1958-1968. This is the same one I bought from them 10 years ago. They stopped reprinting the 1965 catalog in the late 90's, just never changed the name of the item when they moved to reprinting the 58-68 version.

Guess I'll keep looking for one at the meets to add to the library.

[Chris Haynes]

58-68 will give your incorrect information for a 1965. Start checking eBay.

[rbenash]

58-68 will give your incorrect information for a 1965. Start checking eBay.

Already understood that after finding out, understanding the differences over the years I worked at my '65 pan. Just never able to find/get hold of my own '65 version instead of borrowing others. Wanted to make sure folks knew that the source mentioned is really for a 58-68 and is not really a '65 reprint unfortunately. My project is pretty much complete at this point, but still wanting one for my reference library.

Thanks Chris!