Trying to mount the pattern carrier made by Jan, I experienced difficulties to fit it to the rear lifting stay 66-6947; it was too wide.
So what's this stay for? Total height 420 mm (16.535433"), width at the start of the bend 170 mm (6"45/64)
The original stay seems to have a short and a long leg, but on my rear frame the studs are at the same level. Is there a difference between the normal rear frame (which I had to replace because it was completely rotten) and the post war one for side car?
There was never any difference in the stud locations in the frame and the lifting handle would have had legs of equal lengths for all years.
The purpose of it was its use to pull the bike onto the rear stand. However, with a rear carrier fitted it is not accessable and the carrier itself takes over that function....Ian
There was never any difference in the lengths for all years. The purpose of it was its use to pull the bike onto the rear stand. However, with a rear carrier fitted it is not accessable and the carrier itself takes over that function....Ian
Are you sure about that Ian? Isn't there a little difference in length for the offset of the frame at the brake drum side? I seem to remember that civilian items had a L or R stamped on them to avoid mixing them up?
In that case a little more investigation is required. I haven't noted any difference in the position of the frame studs and the fact the rear mudguard stays (upright) both come under the same part number appears to confirm that. So, there is no difference in the length of the vertical stays which, it would be assumed, also have to take into account the 'kick' in the nearside frame rail.
The lower stays (horizontal) are under seperate numbers as they are 'handed' but a check on the comparative length of these would be interesting...I don't have any off a bike at the moment.
As far as the lifting handle is concerned there could be a difference in the length of the two sides...or one side may run at a different angle to the other. Either or both would give a reason to mark them for correct fitment. Again I don't have an original off a bike to examine at the moment...Ian
Hi Hans,
Are you having issues with the upper part of the stay (the "handle" portion above the upper mounting holes) or the lower leg length?
I just measured the rear stay, on mine the legs (both sides)
are 10 &1/2 inches from upper to lower mounting holes- but there is a stud on a boss on one side-about half way up. if you look at Rob Miller's picture you can see it on the illustration. I figured it must be for the early spot to mount the sidestand clip. On my bike, the stud was on the right side, so I took it off, reversed the stay, and refitted it, it seems to be symmetrical other than the stud.
Hope that helps,
Vincent
1943 M20
Draganfly has the same part number for the vertical stays: 66-6945 from 1940 up to 1952. But then they differ: the left hand one gets part number 66-6901. So it might have something to do with the change to the plunger model?
The same goes for the lifting handle stay; up to 1952 it is 66-6947, from there on 66-6949. And the mudguard changed also, from 66-6835 to 66-6833. Was this mudguard perhaps an inch wider?
So I think I have a lifting handle stay for a plunger model; anybody needs one...?
I bought one of those lifting handles with the field stand clip stud welded on. I wanted to fit it to my bike as I have an early frame with the field stand lug on the down tube. I just wanted it as a talking point as I now have the panniers fitted. But I couldn't get it to fit as one leg was slightly too long? Ron
I think the problem I had since starting the restoration around 1995 has finally been solved: I tried to fit the wrong part.
Now I have to find a correct lifting handle, or take a 3/4" section out of the present one and weld.
Thanks to all who helped
The few mm difference in lenght between left and right is due to angle difference. The centre of the rim is not the centre of the studs.
Regards, Lammert