Harley Davidson Flat Track Special.

[FXSTC Dave]

Hi.

I spotted this in an advert in Classic Bike magazine.

Harley Davidson Flat track special - 1960

A truly unique and individual motorcycle

www.lussoveloce.com

There's more photos on the website and a walk around video and it's specification.

So what do you think ?

 

[Skip]

Lord o'mercy!
I'd open a major vein for that brutally handsome wee beastie!

 

[Paul P.]

So in the tradition of Tribsa, Norvin, Triton do we call this a Harbsa? a Beson? a Beley?

 

[garethr]

Beezley?

 

[nickyt]

A bit confused by description of age of that bike--I take it A10 chassis is 1960? .
Reason I ask is my Lawwill replica --(so mert reckoned) was based on a gold star chassis he had been racing prior to joining harley in 63-64
This was first chasis mert built with help of Jim belland(builder of Goliath.)--it won daytona 100 lapper as a road racer with KR engine prior to TT use with XLR engine
I like to think difference is apparant in a frame made to suit a specific engine(in this case patrick,s old 67 stroker)rather than a special with transplanted engine(nicely done though)

 

[nickyt]

thanks for response --I can post article from1967 "cycle world mag." if anyone is interested.
Spoiler alert....he got it down to a weight of 308lbs dry!

 

[Ron]

Post away please.

Ron.

 

[nickyt]

thanks Ron..you may remember the bike in an earlier version(several years ago at V&S) ,though latterly i tried to replicate is as described in article(I came across article after I built bike)--hence correct engine for yeartank/seat /colours.
A couple of corrections ,front brake was never an oldani --that was goliath in its first 2 seasons also ,although I had used a modified sporty rear hub,Mert will have used a reversible KR--this allowed them to utilize the same wheels as described.
Interesting to some... was the use of an early steel touring tank for the longer distance TT,s! --I may have lost a page but again I have magazine so can take a pic. of missing page--but I am sure you will get the gist----goliath and mert bike side by side for reference(I tried replicating this pic. too!! but thats another story)

 

[Ron]

Thanks for that Nick. I did read somewhere (which of course I can't now find) that on Goliath the rear brake was linked to the clutch so that hard breaking would not stall the engine as it had very light flywheels to make it more responsive and, of course, to save weight. How I wish my Ironhead weighed 314 lbs not 540 odd. And a 260 lb flat tracker beggars belief.

Ron.

 

[nickyt]

I think I read that to but,like you, I dont have the article to hand but essentially it was referring to the KRTT drum brake when approaching a corner due to being operated by a rod --was uneven in operation over bumps....what Jim did was connect the linkage in the crossover rod and connect it to the spiral clutch shaft ,so when brake was operated, the clutch slipped and prevented chatter----obviously when they went to kosman disc it was solved --however if you study pic from article .....mert had a cable operated rear brake for same reason.
To put in context in reynolds 531 weighed 20lbs without swing arm--same as MK3 rickman OIF scrambler!--bulk of remainder of weight saving was barrels /heads /flywheel and clutch(all thanks to patricks experiments that i was the beneficiary of.
Another version attached 85 engine installed.

 

[nickyt]

Sorry i realised(after rereading original article) my comments might seem a bit garbled in reference to errors in article ---Allan Girdler book on Harley racers had the same pic with wrong info. ---he also did not realise it was same frame as bike featured on page 70 of his book--see extract--your comments on weight(must be an age thing)is mainly what has spurred me on with these replicas.
I take my hat off to these special builders ,I was very lucky in having access to autocad- draughting ,a machine shop and specialist chro-moly tube bender/welder.I just tried to tap in to the work of gifted rider/builders like Mert --who, to give an instance ,designed his frame with swing arm pivot bolt secured from INSIDE primary cases(see official harley KR pic registered at the time of daytona with AMA)--all so he could maintain his 55" wheel base and 7" wide swing arm mount.--If you lived closer you would be welcome to my jig and make one for yourself!
Ken Ridder by the way was a Go-fer at Dudley Perkins who went along as driver --in payment he got to ride Merts bike in the junior event.....the rest as they say ...is history

 

[Ron]

Hi Nick, It seems that I've got my twickers in a nist again The brake/clutch link I was misremembering was on bike that used to be Bart Markel's TT bike. It's in Girdler's Harley Racers, top right on page 69.

Ron.

 

[nickyt]

Again Ron, difficult to know who invented it as I guess(some) factory tuners shared info.
I was told that direct from Jim(via e mail) another interesting story that he told me was when Brelesford had his major prang at Daytona---up till then each dealership tuner did their own thing with the equipment they were given by the factory.
Jim never liked the headstock location on the first XR,s--it was only when it was apparent his modified frames(with Brelseford as the pilot) , that his version was the best,the factory wanted the info,however he refused to tell the factory the dimensions but when Scott(Marks brother )was left in charge of the van with all Marks dirt bikes, the factory stepped in and offered to "look" after them!
The following year(75) the factory reissued the standard frame with Jims dims!
I can vouch for how good his version was....I was reluctant to adopt what i thought was a fairly radical rake for what I knew would eventually be used as a road bike and asked if he needed a steering damper(the XR,s did!) he said no---and 4 years of road riding later he was correct.
Attached pics to show difference though EXACT dims very critical.

 

[garethr]

Sorry i realised(after rereading original article) my comments might seem a bit garbled in reference to errors in article ---Allan Girdler book on Harley racers had the same pic with wrong info. ---he also did not realise it was same frame as bike featured on page 70 of his book--see extract--your comments on weight(must be an age thing)is mainly what has spurred me on with these replicas.
I take my hat off to these special builders ,I was very lucky in having access to autocad- draughting ,a machine shop and specialist chro-moly tube bender/welder.I just tried to tap in to the work of gifted rider/builders like Mert --who, to give an instance ,designed his frame with swing arm pivot bolt secured from INSIDE primary cases(see official harley KR pic registered at the time of daytona with AMA)--all so he could maintain his 55" wheel base and 7" wide swing arm mount.--If you lived closer you would be welcome to my jig and make one for yourself!
Ken Ridder by the way was a Go-fer at Dudley Perkins who went along as driver --in payment he got to ride Merts bike in the junior event.....the rest as they say ...is history

View attachment 1190627

That frame looks rather like a "wideline" Norton Featherbed with a single top tube to make it narrower.

 

[Ron]

Thanks Nick, that number 87 is one handsome looking motorcycle, and the bare frame would grace any wall it hung on. Mind you it would be a waste.

Ron.

 

[nickyt]

I agree and the first version I got made --was by a guy who replicated these for a hobby, he was suprised at the choice of 1" tubing on the factory harleys(he also had a genuine 77XR)
Again the thing that was mentioned in the article is the flex in the narrow swing arm support casting on XLR,s of the period.
mert maintained that his first frame was the best handling one he had and gave a stable platform for his style of riding.
The frame also reminded me of the rickman Mk 3 mettise which has the double loop but narrower than the featherbed at top of frame--interestingly ,that frame evolved from a gold star as well.
However the down side (for using as a road bike)on both the mettise and merts frame,s, is with no compromise (in order to get shorter wheel base) I could not run a generator on my pre unit bonny engine in the mettise ,and with merts bike the left engine frame bracket is designed to be hard against inside of chain case, which (in the case of the 85 engine) clashes with alternator feed socket .I also wrecked a gearbox casing by not leaving adequate room thro the tunnel for the chain under full suspension movement and chain snapped.(my fault) --if you see factory pic......,they took a welding cutter to expand the arc the chain goes thro.(rough as.....!)
Jim told me they gave up on the twin loop frames(there were later versions) as they found the flex in the narrow casting actually gave more traction on the ovals!

 

[nickyt]

Ron, I can confirm from the horses mouth that this is pic is the most recent anyone has seen of "goliath"
Jim ctold me he restored this for a guy who has had it sitting in his living room for at least 25years --- some people knew of it-- but as usual, I was only forwarded pic 3 years after finishing mine ....main thing to note is engine tilted forwards, C of G and compression lowered by stroker pistons and truncated barrels, and rectangular(he was one of the first to use them)swing arms located 1/2" below stock.
I think the use of Barracuda cams is reason Mert felt his was unrideable but it suited Marks riding style.
Mine is based on same concept (slightly milder) with compression 7/1 and p cams with .330 lift as opposed to Barracuda .580 lift--accent was on traction above all else as Mark only weighed 9 stone!
I agree that the replica for me is the way to go as it would not be end of world if I dropped it......if it was Goliath it woud!(that bike never lost a race from 69-73 with exception of one when it broke down).....probably mag as they could not cope with 8thou.revs--as they found out with XR,s

 

[nickyt]

Sorry meant to say cam lift is .330 over stock based on titan minus minus drag cams.

 

[nickyt]

sorry ,realised decimal point in wrong place on cam lift ....also attached missing page from article and proof that in every design there is usually a flaw!---in this case Mert broke his chain link ,presumably in the same way i did.
The issue with this frame (was broken up and disposed of in 72) --it was asymmetrical and if you look at swing arm --it even has a dog leg in it.(also pivot 1/2" below stock location)
All I know was it was a pain to build but boy did it handle well at dirtquake ,pity the rider was not up to the job!!

 

[Ron]

Hi Nick, you build and know some fascinating stuff. I couldn't do a fraction of it but I do enjoy reading about it.

Thanks again.

Ron.