# Huffman/Snell



## martyc (Mar 15, 2008)

Can anyone tell me the age/value or other info about this Huffman/Snell?  I picked it up recently at an estate sale.  Apparently it had been stored in the rafters of the garage for awhile and had flat tires.  On a whim I pumped them up and sure enough they held air!   I cruised it around my neighborhood and it is a tank made for downhills!  Unfortunatly the brittle leather seat has torn since I took the photo...

Thanks.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 15, 2008)

Are you selling it? let me know I might be interested. I don't know about value but it looks to be from around WWII. it still has some chrome so it isn't likely during the war but shortly before is more likely. what size are the tires?
here is a page from the 1940 catalog:



 
Scott


----------



## martyc (Mar 16, 2008)

Thanks for the quick reply!  

I haven't decided if I want to sell, but i'll keep you in mind.

The tires are fat-26 x 2.125.  The tires in the catalog pic you sent seem alot skinnier.  I found a catalog picture on Nostalgic.net of a Model No N-17 Men's Lightweight roadster on page 8 of the 1937 National Dayton catalog.  That bike looks like it has the same chainring as mine.  However, like the picture you sent, the tires look alot skinner than mine.  Makes me wonder if my tires are aftermarket, but then again the rims and fenders seem to be pretty wide and appropriate for the tires.  See attached pic.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 16, 2008)

we need better photos of the wheel and fender area. the crank isn't that much of a problem, here is a photo of a Huffman made lightweight bike from Firestone in 1939.
Scott


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 16, 2008)

I got going and forgot to mention that the wheels may have been changed. the original wheels may have been 26 x 1 3/8". this would explain why the bike has chrome and the wheels don't. Huffman used the chainring you have from the mid '30's and stopped on their main line of balloon tire bikes in around 1937, they did however use them on their lightweights until much later. the Firestone catalogs show your chain ring up til 1948. actually this should be good news for the balloon tire guys as a suply of what is a hard to find chainring. however you never see these lightweight bikes because no one seems interested in collecting them.
Scott


----------



## martyc (Mar 17, 2008)

Thanks for all the info you have provided!

I think you're right about the wheels being newer.  I looked at the rear hub and it is marked with:

36-16
Made by
Eclipse Machine
Elmira, NY
USA
54

Maybe the "54" means 1954?

Here are few more photos:


----------



## sam (Mar 17, 2008)

Huffman made cro-mo tubed L/Ws in 37 before schwinn came out with the paramount(1938)and they made them in 28"wheels and 26" wheels.These frames were luggless.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 17, 2008)

sam said:


> Huffman made cro-mo tubed L/Ws in 37 before schwinn came out with the paramount(1938)and they made them in 28"wheels and 26" wheels.These frames were luggless.




you are corrsct sir though the catalog shows 27" and 28" wheels 
here is a copy of the lightweight page of the 1937 catalog. though I doubt this bike is this old looking at the fenders, peddles and bars etc. but I suppose it could be possible.



Scott


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 17, 2008)

I'm mainly looking at this photo and noticing the spacer between the frame and fender making the fender fit closer to the 26" wheel. do you think this is factory? are the fenders correct. does the front have one also? what is the serial on this bike? it should be located under the crank housing.



Scott


----------



## JOEL (Mar 18, 2008)

The "54" on the Morrow hub is actually S4, which is a date code. (A is 1930, B 31, ect). So the hub is clearly newer than the bike.


----------



## martyc (Mar 18, 2008)

Now that I look at the gap between the front wheel and the fender, it does seem a bit excessive.  Maybe it was built to fit a 27"?

There is nothing "lightweight" about it in my opinion.  It is definitely a tank.

The serial number (best I can read) is 20694.  Are there records to link the serial number to the date?


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 18, 2008)

martyc said:


> Now that I look at the gap between the front wheel and the fender, it does seem a bit excessive.  Maybe it was built to fit a 27"?
> 
> There is nothing "lightweight" about it in my opinion.  It is definitely a tank.
> 
> The serial number (best I can read) is 20694.  Are there records to link the serial number to the date?




it is lightweight compared to its 85lbs full dress bretheren. and no it is dificult at best to get close with the serial. we face two problems, first is it numbered in sequence with the balloon tire bikes or did they use a different scheme, second the balloon tire bikes arent easily decipherable as it is. can you make a quick list of all the parts that are actually black and not just spray painted black at a later date. I'm getting the impression that the blackout aspect of this bike is going to be a red herring.ultimately it may be futile trying to figure out the year exactly as they made the bike with little to no changes for so many years and they are so uncommon that there aren't enough of them out there to be able to study the differences in them and in the case of your bike so much may have been changed that we are just guessing based on possibilities. anyway I would keep the bike as it is. it is a really cool bike. I don't think it is particularly valuable as the lightweights usually don't have the demand the ballooners have. they just aren't as visually stunning as a full dress streamlined tank wearing bike with gleaming white walls.
Scott


----------

