Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: Beehive Brouhaha History

  1. #11

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    I agree about the hobby thing, Hank. Sometimes it gets to be "forest for the trees" when it comes to tracking down correct parts. However, I must add my two cents. First, I have often heard 40's tail lights, up to '46, referred to as "boat tail" tail lights. But that's just what I've heard. And Smitty, I don't believe the red lenses were made taller to accommodate a 2 filament lens for running and stop light. If you look at the pic in Palmer's first edition in the section on tail lamps, you'll see a pic of 2 tail lamp housings that he describes as having been used from 1934-1938. Look closely and you'll see that the tube that protrudes out the back is short on one lamp, and longer on the other. The short tube housing was for a single filament bulb, and the longer tubed housing was for a double filament bulb.Besides, even if the red lens was made longer, the bulb would still have been interfered with by the clear lens that had a closed end on it (kinda like a shot glass). I'd post pics, but me and Photobucket don't get along. If anybody would like to see pics, maybe I'll post them on the AMCA forum.

  2. #12

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Haynes View Post
    You just keep beating this dead horse don't you. H-D NEVER called the 1939-1946 tail light a Bee Hive. The did call it's predecessor the Bee Hive. If it has a Bee Hive lens it is a Bee Hive tail light.
    I am not claiming that H-D called the 39 tail light a beehive. I am claiming that H-D never called the 34 tail light a beehive. Is that a dead horse? Has someone made this claim before? If so, I haven't seen it.

    I have seen many people (e.g., in books and this forum) claim that H-D called the 34 tail light a beehive. The claim is often made when someone is correcting someone else for mistakenly referring to the 39 tail light a beehive.

    It just seems inconsistent (and ironic) to (a) correct Easyriders and others for mistakenly referring to the 39 tail light as a beehive (based on the fact that H-D never called the 39 tail light a beehive) and (b) not correct people for mistakenly referring to the 34 tail light as a beehive (based on the fact that H-D never called the 34 tail light a beehive).

    Why aren't the correct police pointing out that H-D actually called the 34 tail light the Air-Flo tail light? It seems like someone somewhere along the way "mistakenly" referred to the 34 tail light as a beehive and it stuck.

    H-D could have named or called the 34 tail light a beehive if H-D wanted to. But, H-D didn't. H-D did call the 34 tail light the Air-Flo tail light and did name the red sidecar lens as a beehive and did refer to the 35 tail light lens as a beehive-type lens and a beehive lens. Maybe it would have been awkward for H-D's marketing department to turn around a year later in 1935 and try to rebrand the 34 tail light as something else when the only thing that changed for the 35 models was the lens.

    You may currently be claiming that the 34 tail light is a beehive because the 35 tail light lens is a beehive-type lens or otherwise resembles a beehive, but that is not the claim that people have been making for the last decade. And, if having a beehive-type lens is a determining factor for what's "correct," then it may be correct to call the sidecar fender lamp a beehive and call parking lights beehives.

    The literature you posted doesn't tout a beehive tail light. It touts a beehive-type lens. I have yet to see any H-D literature that contemporaneously called the 34 tail light a beehive. If I do, I will admit that I am wrong. I'm just trying to understand the rationale for why some things are "correct" or "incorrect."

  3. Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    The "Castle Top" is my favorite.

  4. #14

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    Or better yet, the "Tombstone". Same lens, different name

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Sarasota, Florida
    Posts
    6,256

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    Quote Originally Posted by VCA Hank View Post
    Sometimes I think the people on this forum need to get a hobby.

    Hank
    I think this has been a valuable thread. People enjoy old motorcycles on many levels, but no matter how deep our interest is; everyone can learn something new. The history of motorcycles could have easily been lost to time, but devoted enthusiasts have made historical research a consuming passion and we have benefitted from their hard work.

  6. #16

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    I am not claiming that H-D called the 39 tail light a beehive. I am claiming that H-D never called the 34 tail light a beehive. Is that a dead horse? Has someone made this claim before? If so, I haven't seen it.

    I have seen many people (e.g., in books and this forum) claim that H-D called the 34 tail light a beehive. The claim is often made when someone is correcting someone else for mistakenly referring to the 39 tail light a beehive.

    It just seems inconsistent (and ironic) to (a) correct Easyriders and others for mistakenly referring to the 39 tail light as a beehive (based on the fact that H-D never called the 39 tail light a beehive) and (b) not correct people for mistakenly referring to the 34 tail light as a beehive (based on the fact that H-D never called the 34 tail light a beehive).

    Why aren't the correct police pointing out that H-D actually called the 34 tail light the Air-Flo tail light? It seems like someone somewhere along the way "mistakenly" referred to the 34 tail light as a beehive and it stuck.

    H-D could have named or called the 34 tail light a beehive if H-D wanted to. But, H-D didn't. H-D did call the 34 tail light the Air-Flo tail light and did name the red sidecar lens as a beehive and did refer to the 35 tail light lens as a beehive-type lens and a beehive lens. Maybe it would have been awkward for H-D's marketing department to turn around a year later in 1935 and try to rebrand the 34 tail light as something else when the only thing that changed for the 35 models was the lens.

    You may currently be claiming that the 34 tail light is a beehive because the 35 tail light lens is a beehive-type lens or otherwise resembles a beehive, but that is not the claim that people have been making for the last decade. And, if having a beehive-type lens is a determining factor for what's "correct," then it may be correct to call the sidecar fender lamp a beehive and call parking lights beehives.

    The literature you posted doesn't tout a beehive tail light. It touts a beehive-type lens. I have yet to see any H-D literature that contemporaneously called the 34 tail light a beehive. If I do, I will admit that I am wrong. I'm just trying to understand the rationale for why some things are "correct" or "incorrect."
    Never mind Chris. I can recognize posthumous equine flagellation when I see it, no matter which terms are used to describe it.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Minneapolis Metro
    Posts
    299

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    After a long, brutal, exhausting shift in the mines...

    With my last ounce of Give-a-Shit for the day, I decide to check in at my favorite site - and find "posthumous equine flagellation" deftly incorporated into a "Brouhaha".

    Just made a crappy day better.

    I love you guys.
    D.

  8. #18

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    I just hope no one finds out there is no such bike as a knucklehead.
    The Factory calls it 61 or 74 O.H.V.
    "Never wake up a Dummy, let him sleep. He might wake up and hurt himself." my good friend, John Fitzgerald (Southside Chicago)

  9. #19

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    Yeah. I'm still confused as to the logic and rationale and consistency for what is deemed "correct" and why, but I may be resigned to ignorance here and waiting for the experts to translate and interpret the gospel/literature for me.

    I researched the subject and tried to keep the post strictly factual and address issues that were not addressed in prior discussions. But, if I am being accused of beating a dead horse and equine flagellation, then I may have failed. Maybe everyone is just sick of beehive discussions or maybe there isn't any other literature on point and conventional wisdom is based on a shared view of the literature that Chris has already posted. Maybe I forgot my place as a newbie and only succeeded in shooting myself in the foot when it comes to getting help from Chris.

    I don't agree with all of it, but, according to "conventional wisdom" (as I understand it now): (1) H-D called the 1934 tail light the Air-Flo tail light; (2) H-D called the 1935 tail light the Beehive tail light (e.g., in the literature Chris posted); and (3) if a light has a beehive lens (i.e., a lens that H-D has called a beehive lens), then the light is a beehive light. I am familiar with the second claim, but I was not previously aware of the third claim. This thread has been educational for me in more ways than one.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Missouri City, Texas
    Posts
    10,917

    Re: Beehive Brouhaha History

    Boattail......

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Beehive tail light
    By paddy in forum Restoration
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-13-2017, 01:56 PM
  2. Beehive tail light
    By paddy in forum Motorcycles & Parts Wanted
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-11-2017, 06:43 PM
  3. Boat tail/beehive
    By Budster 95 in forum Harley 1936-1964
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-01-2012, 10:30 AM
  4. Beehive tailight gaskets
    By ricmoran in forum Harley Pre 1936
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-25-2011, 09:50 PM
  5. Beehive / Boattail taillight
    By DaveAus in forum Harley 1936-1964
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-19-2010, 06:03 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •