# Schwinn Kickstand Stamped 8337



## GWLW7272 (Nov 7, 2015)

trying to figure out what this is correct for ?


----------



## GTs58 (Nov 7, 2015)

I've seen the 8340, 8336 and 8338, but not one 8337. Hit up ole Charlie Harper on the SBF, he still has some old Schwinn parts catalogs.


----------



## island schwinn (Nov 7, 2015)

I looked in my 62 catalog and nothing.probably stingray or manta ray?


----------



## 2jakes (Nov 8, 2015)

GWLW7272 said:


> trying to figure out what this is correct for ? View attachment 249274View attachment 249275







1970 Schwinn stingray fastback 5-speed kickstand #8337.


----------



## rhenning (Nov 8, 2015)

They have just been discussing this in SBF and that is a kick stand for a 1972 or earlier Fastback.  Roger


----------



## GTs58 (Nov 8, 2015)

rhenning said:


> They have just been discussing this in SBF and that is a kick stand for a 1972 or earlier Fastback.  Roger





That's weird. The specs for the first years of the Fastback say the kickstand is #8338-F. And the F indicates a chrome finish.


----------



## Metacortex (Nov 8, 2015)

Schwinn changed the kickstand deployment angle (via the cam) to a more vertical position in 1971 to ease the stress on the kickstand housing. The older more forward angled deployment often resulted in twisting the cam in the frame housing when people would sit on bikes with the kickstands down. Because of the more vertical deployment angle the 1971 and later sprags were slightly shorter than the 1970 and earlier versions.

I don't have access to any Fastbacks to verify but according to the dealer parts catalogs 1970 and earlier Fastbacks used sprag no. 8338 combined with a 1-notch cam (pictured left). 1971 and later used sprag no. 346 with a 3-notch cam (right). You can interchange the earlier and later kickstands and cams as long as both are changed together.





I have dealer parts catalogs for most of the years from '62 through '83 and none of the ones I have show a sprag no. 8337. Perhaps it was a mis-stamp?, if not it seems to be a catalog omission or mistake that was never corrected.


----------

