get a cone shovel or hold out for a slabside shovel

so i can go get a basket case 83 shovel tomorow for 2300, or I can wait for another month or so for my tax return and buy a 60s panhead or slabside shovel. I would prefer the 60s bike for various reasons, but it will be at least twice as much.

fuck

That is waaay too much money for a basket case shovelhead. I like shovelheads a lot, but for that money, it had better start and run. I have seen running shovelheads, (ironhead Sportsters,) go for $1,000. (Ironheads are a bit more finicky.)

I think I would go for the panhead over the shovel, not because it's better, but because it's older and more rare.

thats pretty much what Im thinking. Just got all my log books (truck driver) organised for taxes so in a month or so I should be able to get a Pan/Shov. I personally dont really like the panhead top ends and the shovel has better top end oiling, so a late 60s slabside is what I'm gonna go for. And yeah that is too much for a basketcase IMHO whatever the make, although it does have a 93in stroket kit in it ;D

Id also take a 60XLCH happily, but not one of those 70s ones.

AlphaDogChoppers said:

That is waaay too much money for a basket case shovelhead. I like shovelheads a lot, but for that money, it had better start and run. I have seen running shovelheads, (ironhead Sportsters,) go for $1,000. (Ironheads are a bit more finicky.)

I think I would go for the panhead over the shovel, not because it's better, but because it's older and more rare.

Click to expand...

First off...

A Shovelhead and an Ironhead Sportster are two different bikes.

Secondly, buy the best bike you can afford. Like with anything else, the better the product you start with the better the end result with the least amount of headaches. Vintage HD parts are NOT CHEAP.

VonYinzer said:

A Shovelhead and an Ironhead Sportster are two different bikes.

Click to expand...

That is why I made the distinction. The ironhead IS a shovelhead, but it is a specific model. A subspecies, so to speak.

VonYinzer said:

Vintage HD parts are NOT CHEAP.

Click to expand...

Vintage HD parts are very reasonably priced. Vintage Jap bike parts are often MUCH more expensive.
Fact is, you can still get quality new parts for almost any vintage Harley engine, and the prices are not bad at all. I just priced a new connecting rod for a Yamaha Verago 1100 the other day, and it was $535! You can damn near buy a whole top end for a shovelhead for that.

If the 73 had not fallen in my lap I would not have done it much differently . That started as a worn out mostly stock rolling . running basket case ..
T&O wheels
Carillo rods
STD cases
Jim's lifter blocks
Velvatouch evo lifters
tubular adjustable pushrods (through pushrod oiling )
TMS rockers
Manley valves
alumina silicon bronze guides
new seats in seriously welded 66 castings
carefully timed and relieved breather
real oil pump
b grind
S&S g (followed by an E a year later)
dry up the primary and go with a Primo 1 1/2" enclosed belt )
Barnett clutch .

made about 75/75 as a 74"
the original cases were worn out and the stock wheels were trash from the get go . The stock wheels must have just been tossed in as they were not balanced in the least and may have contributed to the race walking around in the sprocket side case . Pinion side was a mess as well .

I can't begin to guess the miles Bear and I have put on the bike in the years since 92 (98 was an un planed freshen up) but it has worked out well . With the original Kendal disappearing and VR 50 introduction it's what I use .

I would even suggest a roller w/o engine or trans if you decide on 69 and up . That way the frame is titled and be damned what is in it . Earlier than 69 and get the whole thing for the numbers and resale . .

The one thing cone engines have going for them is the opportunity to convert to evo oiling . That and a careful bit of attention to valve geometry will fix most of what ails the trouble head , .

Yes Pans are cool but come with their own nightmares like the generator and the cam chest as well as the reduced thickness of the cylinders , Getting a manifold to seal is difficult stock let alone with strokers and that is a whole 'nother story .

Do what you will but in the end it's build your own mill past 69 or get something nearly complete pre 69 the rest is up to you

~kop

thanks man, yeah Im gonna wait till next month when my tax return is in and get a generator shovel. Id rather be able to run the title off the cases so i can throw it in whatever frame I like. As far as putting non numbers matching titled frame and post 69 engine together that sounds a lot like SEIZE AND CRUSH territory as that's what my friend in NYC is fighting even though he had paperwork to prove the two bikes he turned into one were actually legally owned by him.

SEIZE AND CRUSH
SEIZE AND CRUSH
SEIZE AND CRUSH
SEIZE AND CRUSH

NY needs to get their head outa their ass . Past 69 the frame is titled . that is a federal department of transportation reg that has nothing to do with states rights . I have several 78-79 vintage 2FO yamaha XS 650's , two actually have matching engine and frame numbers which is unusual , three do not which is the usual case . I had one temporarily seized but the officer and the sheriff's office were quickly shown the error of their ways and the bike released . Same with my sportster years ago . I had several engines and one chassis . I actually won a harassment beef over that one . It's really quite easy . If it shifts on the left and was built or imported 69 or later the title follows the frame . 68 and earlier the title follows engine cases and any replacement transmission must have a MSO .

This is all a long standing misinterpretation of the law that stems from "outlaw" biker clubs swapping parts within the club not necessarily using stolen equipment .\, that came later , It was all about taxes withheld from licensing agencies and a means for harassing otherwise objectionable but legal behavior .
Later it was about stolen vehicles being parted out and used by the clubs and past 69 three misconceptions are with us to this day .
That past 69 the title follows the cases (including the trans needing a MSO if replaced)
That the engine numbers have to match the frame regardless of make
That new construction using a pre 69 engine (H-D only) requires a MSO for the frame and the engine as well as the gearbox . It's one or the other . if the engine is titled the frame doesn't have to be .

These misconceptions are abused by law enforcement agencies that know full well what the facts are .
They hide behind ignorance of the law like we the people can not and claim possible malfeasance if they had not acted to detain , inspect , question , interrogate , seize and cite .

I now return the soap box to the corner of the room awaiting it's next use ...

~kop

i love it

My 83 shovel was by a long shot the bike I had the most fun with, you just can't beat the sound they make! I will build another of that era, 4sp and all... Honesty it will probably be my next project.


Subscribed to see what you get!

-Keith

Im just waiting on three years of long haul trucking tax returns. I should have enough to get something kinda special. Im pretty fixed on a slabside shovel, but a 60's xlch or the right BSA A65 might do it first.

I've had a bunch of American bikes, the oldest was a 1915, the newest a 1993. Not long before we moved back to TN I was GIVEN a 57 FL, in a VL or Knuckle frame (based on how bashed the seat tube was to clear the rear head), with a 21" spool in a real Knuckle springer. A week before we moved, I gave it back to my friend Nitro and told him good luck. Even making good money I wasn't about to drop $24-28K into ressurecting it, and it was complete, with great compression. A few inquiries with the title office and I found how just how hard it is for a former patch holder to get papers on a pre-70 engine, in a never stamped even older o.e.m. frame...

My last big twin was a 93 FXWG. 4 engines and 6 transmissions later I got over riding it. Had the bike all of 6 months... 93 was a transition year for bearing style/supplier in the lower ends. They aren't worth the headaches.

First Shovel was a 66. Other than eating electrical parts fairly frequently it wasn't bad. Second Shovel was a 70, 3rd Shovel was a 74 (rode it once and sold it, should have been junked, it was pretty much beyond saving). Unless it is free and in perfect working order, I won't have another nose cone Shovel.

If you really want a Pan, get a 58-65, they had the best oiling of the series. S&S oil pump is a MUST, JIMS gaskets are a MUST, if it needs new barrels go S&S (there are better out there but they'll set you back a couple months rent). New heads? STD, period, nothing else comes close. Throw away the 4 speed and get a Baker 6 in a 4 (take heart meds before pricing).

If I can find one worth rebuilding, my next Harley will be a UL or VL Big Twin flattie or an XA. I've had Knuckles, Pans, both flavor Shovels, both flavors of Sportsters, K models, 45s, even had a 1920 Sport Twin (fore and aft boxer). I've has Sport Scouts, Scout Juniors and a couple 1930s Chiefs.

The flatheads are more fun. More work, more money, but lot more fun to play with.

I had a minor heart attack when I priced the baker 6.

Four speeds is plenty for a Harley. I don't quite understand the obsession that some have with putting 6-speeds in a Harley. More is not necessarily better. <G>

Baker DOES make the best gearsets for Harley transmission.

Most trans cases I've dealt with were beyond saving. Took the covers off the 57 trans and the cracks looked like spider webs. One of my Knuckles had been bored and stroked to 103", wound out tight in third it would scatter transmissions all over hell and gone. And the fuel economy was terrible, when my junk is running it is my primary transportation, I hate driving. Even before I got a CDL and started heavy hauling I hated driving, since then, even more so.

If my bike of the moment is a modified antique I prefer it holds together. Couple extra gears to drop the cruising rpms is going to help. I'm hell on bikes, I even managed to blow the bottom end apart on an 800 Vulcan... and broke a KZ1300 crank...

I agree 4-speed is fine for a big twin in a light bike. I prefer 1970- ratchet top. The cases and gears and shafts can be had for not too much, factory or any number of aftermarket, and they look cool. I hate the later 4-speeds with the ugly top. If you use FX gears and 24t front and 48t rear sprockets on a rigid light chopper it works good. There is an article in the Horse BC this month telling what to look for when building a 4-speed. And you get a kicker and e-start if you want it.

yeah ive been following the horse articles on harley gear boxes

So Ive got the go ahead fromthe wife to buy the slabside "Ill pay off your truck when I get my investment money back, just buy what you want". SOOOOO I may do that when my two tax cheques get here. otherwise Ive got a lead on a 64XLCH that I can get for about a third as much as a comperable year big twin. A good buddy knows the guy and knows the engine, Should be good to go. I dunno. http://ottawa.kijiji.ca/c-cars-vehicles-motorcycles-street-cruisers-choppers-classic-1967-shovelhead-slabside-W0QQAdIdZ454369015 Is what I might get, Im gonna try and get him to 6-6.5 on the price and pretty much sell everything but the motor and tranny to get my money back. Drop that shit in a aftermarket frame, toss on the springer that I already have, bam, done.

Now that is a decent looking bike. Swap on your springer, add a Fab Kevin or similar rigid conversion to the existing swingarm frame... 21" front wheel to improve the handling over a standard 16" chubby wheel/tire combo, 3.00-21 and 5.00-16 work very well together...

The 64 Ironhead would be fine if want smaller and lighter from the start of the project.