# 1937 Huffman Model 2 Super Streamline



## 37fleetwood

AS some of you might remember, some time ago I built a 1937 Model 1 Super Streamline frame using a regular 1937 Mens frame. at that time the goal was to build one of each variant of Huffman's Streamliners.
Since then I have been thinking, where would I put them all, and why would I even want so many. at first I got much encouragement, but when it became more evident that I was going to actually pull it off, there were quite a few who seemed to get rather alarmed. I was told everything from I shouldn't do it at all, to I should make a few changes so mine would be identifiable, to some thinking I should alter the serials so they could be identified that way.
I must admit I was having a little bit of self doubt about these ending up being passed off later as real. in the end, I have decided not to alter them nor mark them, but I have also decided that these very few will remain with me as mine. if in the future they're passed as originals, so be it, the did start their life in the Huffman factory in 1937 and deserve to be allowed to find their way in the world after I'm gone.
There's still a long way to go, but this hurdle has officially been crossed, the Model 2 frame is done, the two frames have been made.


----------



## 37fleetwood

here's the ad and photo of the Model 1


----------



## irene_crystal

Very skilled craftsmanship! That model 1 is a beautiful bike I would love to own someday but will likely never have the cash to spend on an OG model. I don't see anything wrong with what you have done, but I am only a part time antique bicycle collector.. Big car guy though and people "clone" cars into something more than they were born as all the time and as long as both buyer and sellers are both honest in what they are selling then all should be safe.


----------



## Larmo63

*Safety/Super Streamline....?*

Why is there Safety and Super Streamline, what is the difference?

I know Trudy's girl's bike is a Safety, do tell......


----------



## JAF/CO

*Look good to me*

*i like both of them they look great *


----------



## 37fleetwood

Larmo63 said:


> Why is there Safety and Super Streamline, what is the difference?
> 
> I know Trudy's girl's bike is a Safety, do tell......




come on Lawrence, I know you saw this...
http://thecabe.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?22538-Huffman-Super-Streamlines&highlight=streamline

We'll wait while you catch up.................................................




JAF/CO said:


> *i like both of them they look great *



Thank you Jim,
from a fellow fabricator that means a lot! :o


----------



## 55tbird

*Nice Work!*

Nice craftsmanship! Now, if you could only make the light for my 36 safety Streamline.  Mike


----------



## babyjesus

*Wow!*

...a safety too.  I'm dead jealous.

One question about darts.

Did the sort of dart pictured on the safety ever appear on supers? Or did supers always have triple darts?


----------



## 37fleetwood

babyjesus said:


> ...a safety too.  I'm dead jealous.
> 
> One question about darts.
> 
> Did the sort of dart pictured on the safety ever appear on supers? Or did supers always have triple darts?




Technically both are Supers. and if I understand what you are getting at, there are two lines of Huffmans, each with their own paint schemes. I posted both without explaining it. the Model 2 tankless catalog page I posted is from the Huffman catalog, and the Model 1 page is from the National catalog. the tank type Huffman will have the same paint pattern as the tankless. likewise, the tankless National will be painted like the National Model 1.

Here's the Model 2 as a National:


----------



## supper15fiets

37fleetwood said:


> AS some of you might remember, some time ago I built a 1937 Model 1 Super Streamline frame using a regular 1937 Mens frame. at that time the goal was to build one of each variant of Huffman's Streamliners.
> Since then I have been thinking, where would I put them all, and why would I even want so many. at first I got much encouragement, but when it became more evident that I was going to actually pull it off, there were quite a few who seemed to get rather alarmed. I was told everything from I shouldn't do it at all, to I should make a few changes so mine would be identifiable, to some thinking I should alter the serials so they could be identified that way.
> I must admit I was having a little bit of self doubt about these ending up being passed off later as real. in the end, I have decided not to alter them nor mark them, but I have also decided that these very few will remain with me as mine. if in the future they're passed as originals, so be it, the did start their life in the Huffman factory in 1937 and deserve to be allowed to find their way in the world after I'm gone.
> There's still a long way to go, but this hurdle has officially been crossed, the Model 2 frame is done, the two frames have been made.







You should use that paint skeme too! Nice work, wish i could weld! Nice nice nice!


----------



## babyjesus

37fleetwood said:


> Technically both are Supers. and if I understand what you are getting at, there are two lines of Huffmans, each with their own paint schemes. I posted both without explaining it. the Model 2 tankless catalog page I posted is from the Huffman catalog, and the Model 1 page is from the National catalog. the tank type Huffman will have the same paint pattern as the tankless. likewise, the tankless National will be painted like the National Model 1.
> 
> Here's the Model 2 as a National:




I'm beginning to understand. It's not at all simple. I like the split single dart alot. It's more unusual to see it on the bikes that are floating around - most have triple darts. People obviously prefer them and restore/paint accordingly.


----------



## 37fleetwood

babyjesus said:


> I'm beginning to understand. It's not at all simple. I like the split single dart alot. It's more unusual to see it on the bikes that are floating around - most have triple darts. People obviously prefer them and restore/paint accordingly.




probably the biggest reason you'll see the Dayton National pattern is that the Huffman catalog pages are not widely known. another contributing factor could be that Dayton is the more deluxe model with more chrome, so people gravitate to it with the perception that it will prove more valuable. I'm not sure that would be the case. they're all so rare it shouldn't affect value.
I was thinking I might do one of mine as a Dayton level bike and the other as a Huffman level bike. I haven't really decided which will be which.


----------



## babyjesus

37fleetwood said:


> probably the biggest reason you'll see the Dayton National pattern is that the Huffman catalog pages are not widely known. another contributing factor could be that Dayton is the more deluxe model with more chrome, so people gravitate to it with the perception that it will prove more valuable. I'm not sure that would be the case. they're all so rare it shouldn't affect value.
> I was thinking I might do one of mine as a Dayton level bike and the other as a Huffman level bike. I haven't really decided which will be which.




The catalog image of the green #2E seems to have a regular rear fender as well as front. I have only seen Safeties/early Supers with huge skirted fenders on the rear.  I guess people always restore 'up' to a fancier model. The other thing is both the catalog ads you have posted show basic models with putter stems. It's actually very confusing. In part because some tankless models are infact supers and not all safeties. 

I also notice the (blue) one with the painted chainguard and single split darts has a regular saddle and no light at all, and a regular rear reflector. The green (Dayton?) one seems to be a 'higher' model with plated chainguard and airflow saddle and small tombstone and fenderlight (aluminium by the looks of it). 

I guess the putter stem and braced bars were common to alot of SS models if they appear on the seemingly lower models. Yet the electric tankless SS bikes sometimes have a regular stem and bars - which seem to be correct. 

I'm not going anywhere with this other than observing how confusing it is.  I think it might be clearer understood according to the 2 seperate lines of Huffman SS bikes you mentioned (each having their own paint scheme). Actually the confusing bike is the blue and red (low end?) one with painted guard and single split darts. 

Meanwhile I wonder where the early tankless electric Safeties appear in conjunction with the two catalog bikes you posted.  I am guessing that either the blue and green bikes are later tankless 'super streamliners' that are models down from the tank models and were leftovers from the previous electric models with the light on the headtube and crazy fenders. I guess the only thing I am thinking is the the electric tankless models were not produced at the same time as the later tank models - and that regardless of name (safety/super) the tankless models got more basic over time and were produced as lesser models to the tank models.  Maybe because they had a surplus of tankless frames when they realized they had to start putting tanks on their bikes before they lose out in sales.  It's sorta seems like the tankless electric models were a great idea that never worked all that well. 

Ok I'm really not helping I know.


----------



## 37fleetwood

Ok, I guess I didn't explain this all too well. :o

First thing to keep in mind Huffman is the Manufacturer, Dayton, Airflyte, Snell, Dixie Flyer, National, etc. are badge names.
The Daytons and Nationals are known as Dayton level, everything else is Huffman level.

Safety Streamlines:

On the first page of the Huffman Super Streamline thread are the bikes in order. They were made over a period of 3 years.
First in '36 was the Safety Streamline. It was marketed as the Safety Streamline early on. Most confusing to me, it seems the Safety line may have continued through '36 (not sure on this but later literature has the same bike called Super-Streamline).
The Safeties were designated as Model 44. Often there is a letter designation preceding the model. Model N-44 would be a National, and A-44 would be an Airflyte and so on. Electrically equipped bikes were designated with an E. So a Dayton badged bike with no lights or horn would be a Model D-44, and an Airflyte with lights and horn would be a Model A-44E

Super Streamlines:

The earliest Super Streamlines show up in late '36. They are designated as Model 44 also (see confusing 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ) for some inexplicable reason they changed the numbering for Electrically equipped bikes from having an E to having a K. So an electrically equipped National would be Model N-44k, and non equipped would be N-44. For us it makes it easy, you say D-44K and I know exactly what you mean.

Now we get to the part that has you confused. The bike in this thread is a 1937 model.
In 1937 they changed the frames a bit, and the outfitting on the bike substantially. For the purpose of this thread, the Model 2 is the tankless model. They went back to E for electrically equipped models.
In 1937 they went with much more "normal" looking fenders.

So, for tankless models in 1937 there are 4 bikes.

Models D-2 and N-2 for the Daytons and Nationals without a light 
Models D-2E and N-2E for Daytons and Nationals with a light 
Model X-2 for any Huffman badged bike without a light 
Model X-2E for any Huffman badged bike with a light 
(replace the X for whatever badge you have, ie. Airflyte = A-2, Snell = S-2, etc.) 

the "Putter" stem was new for 1937 and was problematic. it was discontinued later in the year.
"Putter" stems were offered on all 1937, 26" balloon tired bikes.


----------



## babyjesus

37fleetwood said:


> So, for tankless models in 1937 there are 4 bikes.
> 
> Models D-2 and N-2 for the Daytons and Nationals without a light
> Models D-2E and N-2E for Daytons and Nationals with a light
> Model X-2 for any Huffman badged bike without a light
> Model X-2E for any Huffman badged bike with a light
> (replace the X for whatever badge you have, ie. Airflyte = A-2, Snell = S-2, etc.)




It's definitely making sense to me now.

Was there a time when they were producing both tankless electric (X-44E/X-44K/X-2E/X-2K) bikes and tank bikes? 

Presumably the tank models were considered electric. 

Thanks anyway - it's a little confusing. What is great now is we can forget using the 'Safety' or 'Super' names because they
really don't actually get us anywhere when identifying the bikes.  Before this I used to think the tankless models were all
Safeties and the Tankers were Supers - how wrong I was.


----------



## 37fleetwood

babyjesus said:


> It's definitely making sense to me now.
> 
> Was there a time when they were producing both tankless electric (X-44E/X-44K/X-2E/X-2K) bikes and tank bikes?
> 
> Presumably the tank models were considered electric.
> 
> Thanks anyway - it's a little confusing. What is great now is we can forget using the 'Safety' or 'Super' names because they
> really don't actually get us anywhere when identifying the bikes.  Before this I used to think the tankless models were all
> Safeties and the Tankers were Supers - how wrong I was.




this will be a confusing answer, but bear with me.
the Safeties, Models 44, and 44E were believed to have been made starting in April or May 1936. I don't know when the Safeties (defined as the ones with the hornlight and no front fender braces) were discontinued.
the Supers, Models 44 and 44K start somewhere in October or so in 1936. I also have no idea when the first Supers (defined as having the big rear fender but deep McCauley front with fender braces and a hornlight on the fender and a Defender on the rear instead of the built-in rear tail light) were discontinued.
not sure about overlap here.

I don't have the 1937 American Bicyclist showing the announcement of the '37 Super Streamlines.
by 1937 Huffman's catalogs are more consistent and regular, and year models seem more well designated, so I'm thinking there wouldn't be much overlap from 1937 going forward. You have to remember, Davis folded in 1922, and Huffman started making bikes in very late 1934. by 1936 Huffman was still a very new, and very small company, and had nothing really in common with Davis, everything had changed so much in the intervening years. from 1934 to 1936 things were changed and things were announced pretty rapidly and sporadically as Huffman got their bearings. 1937 seems to be the year that everything became much more systematic. 

we really should be discussing this on the main Streamline thread so it will be easier to reference for others later. it gets kinda far flung this way. :o


----------



## babyjesus

37fleetwood said:


> we really should be discussing this on the main Streamline thread so it will be easier to reference for others later. it gets kinda far flung this way. :o




Thanks again Scott - yes I realize it's my fault we've gone on a bit of a tangent. I apologize for that. It's been really helpful though.


----------



## cyclingday

The early 36 Safety frame had a continuous loop rear stay. Did the later 36/37 model 2 have the same arrangement, or did it use the detachable loop, the way the later model 1s did?
Obviously, Scott built his frame with the later detachable loop. I'm just wondering if the model 2 was the factories way of using up the old Safety frame stock, or did they continue to actually build those frames well into 1937.
The continuous loop stay would probably be the telltale sign if that was the case.


----------



## 37fleetwood

cyclingday said:


> The early 36 Safety frame had a continuous loop rear stay. Did the later 36/37 model 2 have the same arrangement, or did it use the detachable loop, the way the later model 1s did?
> Obviously, Scott built his frame with the later detachable loop. I'm just wondering if the model 2 was the factories way of using up the old Safety frame stock, or did they continue to actually build those frames well into 1937.
> The continuous loop stay would probably be the telltale sign if that was the case.




this is a great question Marty! my answer is going to be a bit confusing, but I have been wondering for a while now whether these bikes overlapped.
I'm going to doubt whether there were any 1937 Model 2 bikes using a Safety type frame. I don't think the '37 Super Streamlines small fender would have fit over the end of a Safety frame, especially if it's true that the safety frame is a bit longer to accommodate the battery box.
I have however wondered if the Safeties and early Supers were made a bit longer than originally thought. something like the original Safety like yours were made starting in April or thereabouts, and the early Supers started in October. it has been presumed that they each stopped being produced at the release of the next model, but I'm not so sure about that anymore. I'm currently inclined to believe the safeties were made until the true 1937's were released, and the early model 44 may have made it at least partway into the 1937 season.
the one thing we should check out when next we have the bikes together is whether the safety frames are truly longer than the Super frames due to the placement of the battery box.


----------



## 37fleetwood

not really much of an update, but just thought I'd post a photo. we had a kinda "Safety Sunday" ride, and while mine isn't a Safety, it is a tankless Streamline, so I hastily assembled it and brought it out.


----------



## babyjesus

37fleetwood said:


> not really much of an update, but just thought I'd post a photo. we had a kinda "Safety Sunday" ride, and while mine isn't a Safety, it is a tankless Streamline, so I hastily assembled it and brought it out.




Wow - you don't see that very often!  Or ever....  These are one of my favourite models of bike.   Shame there weren't any ladies one there as well.
The one furthest away looks orig and in good condition.  Pretty special photo that is 

Scott at some point I will have a bunch of info for you regarding my streamliner Huffmans.  I don't want you to think I don't plan on doing it for some strange reason.  I do, and I will, it's just I need time.  Don't know how long, but at some point, as soon as I can physically do it, I want to get them all together and photograph them and record the serial numbers etc etc  - for yours and for any other registry they might be useful for.

I'm still looking for a ladies Super S tank bike.  I also have a mongrel - a FFleetwood restored almost 100% to SS tanker spec.  So has dual lights, similar paintjob, mesh guard, SS fenders I think, not the leaf sprung seat sadly, ....and I don't know what the hell to do with it.  It's nicely restored but looks wrong somehow, because it is wrong technically.  Wish I could magically curve that upper rear stay - then I'd be sorted  

This is a good thread - good to bump it up once in a while.


----------



## 37fleetwood

sadly this ride fell apart on us. I tried to get Lawrence to bring out the blue ladies Safety, but he couldn't make it, and John was going to bring two up, was afraid of getting wet. 
so instead of 6, we had 2 and my sad project bike.


----------



## Robertriley

*Nice meeting you the other day*

The bike looked great, I couldn't tell the difference between yours and a real one.


----------



## 37fleetwood

Robertriley said:


> The bike looked great, I couldn't tell the difference between yours and a real one.




the one in primer is the fake one...
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



but seriously, thanks, I tried really hard to make the 2 I have made as accurate as possible. it's not done yet obviously, but it did ride nice enough.


----------



## mike j

Cosmetically enhanced, is a good thing. Great job, not easy, looking forward to seeing the finished product.


----------



## 37fleetwood

finally got these sorted out. it's amazing how hard it is to find nice Torrington men's pedal tubes and bearing cups!


----------



## 37fleetwood

some projects just seem to take forever!

here it is on the ride a week ago.







put the pedals on, they work great.




decisions to be made, I love this aftermarket Delta Dominator, but I really need to pin down just what it is I'm building.


----------



## 37fleetwood

with the completion of the pedals, I'm getting to the point where I have everything. well, when I say everything, I really mean I've come to the point where I have everything that is common to all of the Model 2 bikes. this leaves me with the final decisions. 
so, I thought I'd ask for some opinions. 

1 which line do I go with. by line I mean there are distinct differences between the Dayton/National badged bikes and the Huffman badged bikes.

2 from there the next decision is which version of the Model 2 do I go with. the plain model 2 has no light or horn and makes keeping the Dominator a good option. if I go with the Model 2E I need a horn-light and battery tube.

3 how close do I try to get to what would have been an actual bike. this includes stuff like I like the Dominator light, do I keep it, or do I go with the Dual Silver Rays, or the aluminum Torpedo, or the more Huffman level painted Torpedo. I love the chain guard I have on the bike, but I have the correct one, I also wanted to put the correct rack on the bike but hate that the rack legs cross the swooping rear end, do I use the later Huffy rack mount and eliminate the rack legs? the rack will look the same, just no legs. if I keep the Dominator, I can't use the correct braced handle bar. all questions that need an answer before I move forward.

4 if I go for a completely factory look, do I allow some cross mixing of parts. I hate things like this, because it opens the door to the "Woo-Hoo, I can do anything I want!" mentality, but I do have the Huffman "jobber" sheets which have stuff like, "kick stand instead of rear stand (except where specified) $0.15 extra" the idea being that when the Huffman rep came around to sell you the Huffman line you had some lee-way in how the bikes came. this isn't carte blanche to do whatever you want, but there is some latitude, and you do see this in some of the bikes that have been found. one of the main examples of this is, if I build a Huffman level bike, which should have a long spring Messinger seat, can I get away with using the Dayton level "Tornado Spring" Messinger seat? and same with the lights, if it's a Huffman it takes a painted Torpedo, or Delta Hornlight and battery tube, if a Dayton an aluminum Torpedo or the dual Silver Rays are correct. these are issues that if I were Bob's Mercantile back in the day and I had said I'll buy your bikes but I want these things changed the Huffman rep would almost certainly have said "no problem!"
the big issue with this is we already have people on here who have used these jobber sheets to say stuff like maybe they ordered it in 1938 with the 1940 tank and an after market rack! what I would have to do is consider carefully what was an actual option that year, and how likely it would be that Bob's Mercantile would have said I like the bike but want these instead of those.

5 is perhaps the silliest issue I seem to face. what if any responsibility do I have to make this bike as close to correct as I can considering that though it's not a true Huffman Super Streamline, it is one of only two 1937 Huffman or Dayton Model 2's that I know of. I know some don't agree, but this model which has quite a few physical differences from any other model Super Streamline, is in fact the rarest of the Huffman Safety or Super Streamlines.


----------



## cyclingday

I say, go with the look you like the best.
If you could travel back in time, and order the bike with the equipment and finish that you like best, then that is exactly what you ought to do.
Personally, I like the one with the opalescent blue color and the Delta Hornlight and battery tube. 
But, because it looked so good, everybody builds these bikes that way. So, you'll end up with a bike that looks just like every other one that has ever been built or restored.
 The aluminium torpedo Dayton would be my second choice.


----------



## 37fleetwood

The base Model 2 comes like this:





I made these to show the different factory options, let me know which you'd go with. remember we're not looking at the rest of the bike yet, just the lighting.

Plain Huffman level with painted Torpedo light:





Deluxe Huffman level with Delta Hornlight:





basic Dayton level with aluminum Torpedo light:





Deluxe Dayton Level with Dual Silver Rays:


----------



## cyclingday

Well, after seeing the catalog pictures, I'm liking the base model No.2.
No rack, no light. With frame lines like the Super Streamline, less is more.


----------



## 37fleetwood

that's where using the later Huffy rack mount comes in. I think after looking at the photos, I kinda like the color-keyed Torpedo.
here it is with the painted Torpedo and the Huffy rack mount.


----------



## 37fleetwood

how about this?





or this?





or this?


----------



## Joe Buffardi

I like no rack with the dual silver rays.


----------



## bikewhorder

Chrome rack, guard and silver rays.


----------



## clunker

Joe Buffardi said:


> I like no rack with the dual silver rays.




I'm with Joe


----------



## 37fleetwood

the silver rays are very cool, the only reservations I have is on a bike that's all about streamlining I hate to have a battery tube hanging there. it kinda disrupts the flow if you get my drift.


----------



## Joe Buffardi

Mount the battery tube vertically on the seat tube if you can. Like a bike pump.


----------



## 37fleetwood

if I did that I'd have 10 feet of armoured conduit running all over the place.
I'm tending toward the painted Torpedo and no rack.


----------



## bikewhorder

You should fab a Colson Vogue style battery box and plumb the wires through the tubing.


----------



## Joe Buffardi

Oh thats a great idea! Vogue battery box.


----------



## fordmike65




----------



## 37fleetwood

fordmike65 said:


>




come on Mike, they thought they had a great idea, and you just had to go and ruin it for them.


----------



## 37fleetwood

well I've taken all of the advice seriously, but making these fantasy catalog photos has been very helpful and I think I really like the painted Torpedo and no rack. I also like the reverse fenders and no nonsense no frills approach. the basic bike speaks for itself. I made another catalog page in the color I'm favoring, it's not perfect, just a quick job to get an idea, let me know what you think. I had to remove the yellow background of the catalog, it was way too distracting. I really like the Huffman "Cream" and Maroon. the Cream is a soft butter color. with this combo I think I'd go with the very Huffman turquoise pins.


----------



## Fltwd57

37fleetwood said:


> the Cream is a soft butter




Mmmmm, soft butter cream... Time for dessert!!


----------



## JAF/CO

I like that look . what color is the pin stripes ????


----------



## cyclingday

I like that combination as well.
This is what I like about restored bikes the most. Getting to pick out the color and trim detail as though you were ordering from the factory back in the day.
FUN!


----------



## 37fleetwood

these are the actual colors I'm thinking from the PPG codes.


----------



## 37fleetwood

moving forward on this project. I've made a few refinements.
found a torpedo, and finally changed out the reflector for the correct one, also changed the drop stand clip to the correct one. now that the headlight has been sorted I'm going back to the correct braced bars.
I still need to decide what to do for a stem. being the lower end bike I could use the easy out and go with a Wald 3, or try to find one of the good repop putters, but they still tend to slip. as another option I have a Wald stem that is very like the base stem of the tomahawk stem that I may make a fin for shaped to mimic the shape of the mesh guard.
I'm getting the bike together for this weekend's Cyclone Coaster ride, I'll take photos. don't get too excited, it is still in primer, but with the addition of the light, I have all of the painted parts, so it should be getting painted soon. I now have all of the parts for this project, all I need now is to do the fitment build, then start prepping for paint. I may switch out the maroon for a more standard Huffman red, and either the green or maybe blue pins.


----------



## bicycle larry

37fleetwood said:


> well I've taken all of the advice seriously, but making these fantasy catalog photos has been very helpful and I think I really like the painted Torpedo and no rack. I also like the reverse fenders and no nonsense no frills approach. the basic bike speaks for itself. I made another catalog page in the color I'm favoring, it's not perfect, just a quick job to get an idea, let me know what you think. I had to remove the yellow background of the catalog, it was way too distracting. I really like the Huffman "Cream" and Maroon. the Cream is a soft butter color. with this combo I think I'd go with the very Huffman turquoise pins.



 reelly like the paint colours . i am doing a roadmaster that come out in that colour with black pin stripping . from bicycle larry


----------



## 37fleetwood




----------



## 37fleetwood

ok, people complained that I had a rack on at the last ride. what can I say, it makes carrying the camera much easier. so I took it off. I still need to take the crank out and add a washer behind the sprocket to get the proper clearance between the frame crank and chain guard if you're wondering about the wing guard, however I really do love the look of the wing guard.


----------



## cyclingday

Much better without the rack.


----------



## Uncle Shish

I agree, the lines flow so much more without the rack.
It's distracting to the eye ... like a supermodel carrying an ironing board!
Guess you could try a small backpack or be a super nerd and go the way of a fanny pack!


----------



## Freqman1

I suppose we could start a poll. I'd vote large fanny pack with your name embroidered on it! V/r Shawn


----------



## rustjunkie

Coming along nicely!
The swoopy McCauley guard is neat, but for me, I've not yet seen it mounted on a bicycle where it worked really well.
On this bike, to my eye it puts too much upward curviness toward the front which interrupts the flow, and counteracts the streamline design.
The original guard allows the eye to sorta bounce from the roundness of the rear fender, to the guard, to the front fender, then sweep back over the lines of the frame like smoke through a wind tunnel.


----------



## azbug-i

Great bike and 911!


----------



## 37fleetwood

if nothing else, this bike rides spectacularly!


----------



## Evans200

Let me know when you get tired of looking at
 those Wingo hub caps!


----------



## SJ_BIKER

37fleetwood said:


> if nothing else, this bike rides spectacularly!



 I love it....bikes cool too...YOSEMITE!!.....tree hugger paradise if there ever was one..........so long as the dam miners don't pollute the water....


----------



## azbug-i

Im still slowly assembling this guy since i bought it. Swapped tires to plain black. Personal life has been a bit rough and havent had time for bikes. Its a beauty though. Its on the stand at home right now. Might get it all built by this weekend.


----------



## Joe Buffardi

Wow!! So damn nice!!


----------



## Freqman1

I wondered who Nate sold that to. Nice bike. V/r Shawn


----------



## 37fleetwood

almost forgot to add this update. I finally got around to installing the washer to get the spacing correct so the mesh guard would fit. now we're really there. all that's left is cleaning and painting.


----------



## Bikermaniac

Can't wait.


----------



## Balloonoob

Well dang. I read through this incredibly enlightening thread and got very excited to see the finished bike painted. Oh well. 
Looks like 37fleetwood hasn't been around for a while. 
Come to think of it I haven't seen @bikewhorder for a while either.


----------



## cyclingday

I think 37 Fleetwood sold this bike, before he  finished it.


----------



## Balloonoob

cyclingday said:


> I think 37 Fleetwood sold this bike, before he  finished it.



Oh OK - well thanks for the update.


----------



## bobcycles

37 Fleetwood is spending some "time" somewhere....


----------

