front forks

Production K Models

front forks

Postby gabbyjon » Sat Mar 10, 2018 5:30 am

I am building a 1954 KH,A friend convinced me that the early serial # on my motor calls for the forks to have the chrome covers instead of the rubber boots as most information dictates for the 1954 models.Is there truth to this? or should I be using the rubber boots?Where the early 54s still retaining the chrome covers?Also my motor has a trap door for the tranny another change that I have read came in the 1955 year model.Whats the story on these facts?
gabbyjon
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: front forks

Postby starcain » Sat Mar 10, 2018 8:44 am

All 1954 KH's and KHK's had the rubber fork boots. This was one of the changes to the 1954 model year. The Enthusiast 1954 announcement issue that came out in September of 1953 clearly shows the bike with rubber fork boots and also mentions ( Black, oil-resistant synthetic rubber boots with 9 accordion folds each, replace the former front fork steel covers). The 1954 Harley Museum bike also has the rubber fork boots. The trap door was a running change for the 1954 models. I'm not sure if anyone has ever nailed down exactly when it occurred but there are definitely earlier '54's with no trap door and later ones with the trap door.
Stan
User avatar
starcain
 
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:13 am
Location: Bellville, Ohio

Re: front forks

Postby Lisa » Sat Mar 10, 2018 9:00 am

Rare to see but a few early 54 had chrome covers same as trap doors coming later not as rare but true. Every body has the right to there opinion but read the parts book again carefully.
Last edited by Lisa on Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:55 am, edited 2 times in total.
Lisa
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: front forks

Postby starcain » Sat Mar 10, 2018 9:35 am

Hey Lisa,
Can you offer up any pictures or factory documents to corroborate your claim?
User avatar
starcain
 
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:13 am
Location: Bellville, Ohio

Re: front forks

Postby thefrenchowl » Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:03 am

My late 54 KHK, serial 2540, has no trap door and has welded up K top and bottom fork trees factory moded to new KH geometry...

I personnally think 1954 was a real mixed bag depending where/when they picked up the part carts, what with some early trap doors and late trapless...

Patrick
Flat Head Forever
https://web.archive.org/web/20071011184353/http://www.harleykrxlrtt.com/index.htm
I'm the one who has to die when it's time for me to die so let me live my life the way I want to...
thefrenchowl
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2015 4:33 pm

Re: front forks

Postby Lisa » Sat Mar 10, 2018 12:07 pm

starcain wrote:Hey Lisa,
Can you offer up any pictures or factory documents to corroborate your claim?
Can you ?
Lisa
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: front forks

Postby starcain » Sat Mar 10, 2018 1:41 pm

Well Tom, I mean Lisa- I don't have anything to prove the trap door thing in 1954. I just know there are some with and some without trap doors. Patrick most likely has it right and they used whatever cases were on the cart so like he says a mixed bag. On the fork tube covers however, you must have missed my mention of the 1954 announcement issue of the Enthusiast. It clearly states that the rubber boots replaced the former front fork steel covers for 1954. The 1954 Harley Davidson museum bike has the rubber boots. Is there any part of that that doesn't sound like proof or documentation. Since you claim that some early '54's had the steel covers maybe if you didn't care for the rubber boots you could have ordered the bike with the steel covers? I personally have never seen any unmolested 1954 with steel fork tube covers. I believe that all non special ordered 1954 KH's and KHK's came with the rubber fork tube covers.
Stan
User avatar
starcain
 
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 10:13 am
Location: Bellville, Ohio

Re: front forks

Postby EKHKHK56 » Sat Mar 10, 2018 3:11 pm

Rubber Boots. Yes. Anyone could have slapped Cowbells on the KH by preference. Take one afternoon.
User avatar
EKHKHK56
 
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:20 am
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska USA

Re: front forks

Postby curiousgeorge » Sat Mar 10, 2018 3:38 pm

I have always held with the human factor on the transition of new parts. It just depends on who was pulling the carts out. Regular guy whose right handed gets sick, new guy fills in and he`s left handed. Even as late as the 79 sportster I found motors with both o ring and cork push rod seals and push rod covers, also shows that some didn`t care or understand.
curiousgeorge
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 9:51 pm

Re: front forks

Postby hennesse » Mon Mar 12, 2018 12:58 pm

curiousgeorge wrote:I have always held with the human factor on the transition of new parts. It just depends on who was pulling the carts out. Regular guy whose right handed gets sick, new guy fills in and he`s left handed. Even as late as the 79 sportster I found motors with both o ring and cork push rod seals and push rod covers, also shows that some didn`t care or understand.


In any production environment, there will be anomalies - parts run short, and something else is used to get the product out the door. A worker mistakenly uses a wrong part. Et cetera. But we can't use anomalies to justify doing the wrong thing when restoring our bikes. We have to use factory documentation, unless we have a reliable source that indicates otherwise.

1954 - Cowbells or boots? The September 1953 Enthusiast touts the boots as replacing the former steel covers - see below. All 1954 advertising photographs - see the Literature section where I've just uploaded 3 new photos of the 1954 KH from the Enthusiast - they show the boots.
Since the prototype bike had the new boots, it's a very good indication that all 1954s had the boots.

The 1954 Spare Parts Catalog says cowbells for 1952-53 and boots for 1954. The 1954 Spare Parts Catalog is a bit of a problem though - it was issued in June of 1954 - close to the end of the model year - so it includes most of the changes that occurred during the year. The other years SPCs were issued close to the beginning of the model year - so they pretty much show the configuration at the beginning of the year.

The advertising photos were usually taken a month or more before the start of the model year - they typically show a prototype bike. Sometimes the prototypes have parts from the previous year, as the parts planned for the production bikes were not available yet. An outstanding example of this is tank decals on these boy and girl photos.

Take a look at the gas line on the left side Enthusiast photo and also the 20061 photo - the prototype has the 1952-53-style steel line. Is this because the rubber gas line was not yet available? Or was it because the early 1954's used the steel line? The 1954 Spare Parts Catalog doesn't help us here, since it was issued late in the year. The only close-to unmolested original 1954 is Jim Garrett's original paint 1954 KH 1629. Jim said he replaced the cracked rubber line with the earlier steel line since he couldn't find a good rubber one. This is a pretty good indication that the rubber line was available at least by s/n 1629.

The March 1954 Cycle magazine road test shows a rubber line. We don't know when Cycle received the bike they tested. An educated guess would be at least two months before March, but that would be around the same time as Jim's bike was produced.

So, based on the information we have, we can't tell for certain when the rubber line appeared. What we can say is that if your bike is s/n 1629 or later, you should have the rubber line. If you have an earlier serial number, your bike might have had either.
Attachments
ENT_0003.jpg
Enthusiast - Sept 1953
ENT_0003.jpg (116.67 KiB) Viewed 14275 times
User avatar
hennesse
Site Admin
 
Posts: 668
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:28 pm
Location: Warrenton, Virginia

Next

Return to K, KK, KH, KHK

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests