Have a question on the front frame, in this photo, I thought the attachement was intended for a sidecar connection, but looking at a photo that I am borrowing from Leon's Website (hope it is okay), it seems this is rather used to attach the headstay for the motor. Is that correct? Must be some bolt to fit in that large operning.

Beautiful bike by the way.

email (option): unpob@yahoo.com

Hi Henri..That is the sidecar attachment lug..with the sidecar fitting still in place. The head steady was attached to the main fixing that held the front and rear frame sections together...Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Thanks for your comments Ian, reason I asked, is because in these photos following, the headstay seems to be connected to the front of the frame and engine as opposed to the usual rear attachement

email (option): unpob@yahoo.com

It's certainly there!...that's another thing I didn't know about..I would be interested to know if the 39 military models were the same...or is the forward mounted steady 38?. I don't ever recall noticing it on a WD Model..Ian

email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com

Not something that I know about but I believe that I supplied Henri with that catalogue illustration.

It is the late 1939 printed catalogue for the 1940 season - the rear lamp confirms that.

As far as I know the bike in the drawing is the only bike with the head steady in this position. All production bikes seems to have had it in way we all know.

Henk.

email (option): ahum@quicknet.nl

Sorry Rik,

Stole that one also! I just wondered about a M21 being described as solo in the ledgers, but have a sidecar lug as well. Thought maybe it was for the headstay. Henk, the one in the photo from Leon's website has the headstay in the front also. Living proof. Was it Jury rigged?

Henri

email (option): unpob@yahoo.com

Not stolen Henri, I'm glad that it's being used to good effect and to support an interesting bit of rivet-counting. Anyway, Jan took the photograph. No point in having them unless you're going to share them.

Although the M21s were despatched as solos, they were very much intended as a machine for sidecar work and I don't think that there would have been any 'solo' frames pre-war.

The War Department deleted the sidecar lugs on WD M20s but that wouldn't have been the case in 1939 for machines sent to other customers.

This does all rather highlight the problems of relying on catalogue illustrations alone. The pre-war illustrations were invariably highly retouched. I can imagine a phone call from the design dept. to sales "Use last year's picture but don't forget that we've fitted a head-stady this year"...so the poor old artist added one where he thought it should go.

Norton published a wartime illustration of a 'next year's' bike with tele forks as well but it could never have worked as the mudguard was bolted to the stanchions

Henri if you put your head steady to the front and make a photo of it then there is a second foto to proove it. I have never seen an old photo with a head steady like in the brochure, drawing in brochures are artist impressions and are often quite different from the production bike. We should ask Leon, he is the expert for that period.

Henk

email (option): ahum@quicknet.nl