# 1936 Fleetwood Supreme



## catfish (Mar 24, 2013)

Today's find.


----------



## RJWess (Mar 24, 2013)

AWESOME!!!!!!!


----------



## Freqman1 (Mar 24, 2013)

So I'm guessing we'll see this beauty for sale soon? I'm thinking every bit of $400! Nice bike! V/r Shawn


----------



## catfish (Mar 24, 2013)

Freqman1 said:


> So I'm guessing we'll see this beauty for sale soon? I'm thinking every bit of $400! Nice bike! V/r Shawn




I think you forgot a zero.....


----------



## catfish (Mar 24, 2013)

Freqman1 said:


> So I'm guessing we'll see this beauty for sale soon? I'm thinking every bit of $400! Nice bike! V/r Shawn




But yes. This will be for sale soon............


----------



## Freqman1 (Mar 24, 2013)

I was joking but not _that_ much Ed! V/r Shawn


----------



## catfish (Mar 24, 2013)

Freqman1 said:


> I was joking but not _that_ much Ed! V/r Shawn




I was too. I've been fielding offers for the last hour.....


----------



## Gary Mc (Mar 24, 2013)

I bet you have been "eat up" with offers. These seem to be super popular lately, nice find!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## THEGOLDENGREEK (Mar 24, 2013)

Nice bike!!


----------



## Bri-In-RI (Mar 24, 2013)

I assume this is the bike that was staying nice and warm under the blanket today?
-Brian


----------



## catfish (Mar 24, 2013)

Bri-In-RI said:


> I assume this is the bike that was staying nice and warm under the blanket today?
> -Brian




That's the one. I didn't want it to get cold.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 24, 2013)

I certainly would call that Supreme...


----------



## catfish (Mar 24, 2013)

37fleetwood said:


> I certainly would call that Supreme...




Thanks! It's always nice to hear that from someone who knows.


----------



## dougfisk (Mar 24, 2013)

OK, I give up... who built this?  I recognize big McCauley fenders, but nothing else?


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 24, 2013)

dougfisk said:


> OK, I give up... who built this?  I recognize big McCauley fenders, but nothing else?




it's a '36 Huffy...


----------



## Oldbikes (Mar 24, 2013)

Killer score Catfish!


----------



## OldRider (Mar 24, 2013)

Holy Semolians Catfish, what are you doing with my Fleetwood??? Minus the chromed fenders I have the exact same bike,albeit much rustier! That is stunning..........now I can see what mine once was.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Mar 24, 2013)

a bit better copy of the catalog page:


----------



## dougfisk (Mar 24, 2013)

37fleetwood said:


> a bit better copy of the catalog page:





I need to ask my father if he wore "knickers" or "pedal pushers" like the lad pictured.  I am having a hard time picturing that...


----------



## OldRider (Mar 24, 2013)

After a conference with Professor Huffman I now realize I have the standard model and you have the supreme model, my bottom bar is straight where yours are both curved, I have the painted fenders, you have chromed, plus the pinstriping differs.


----------



## catfish (Mar 25, 2013)

Oldbikes said:


> Killer score Catfish!




Thank you !


----------



## bikesnbuses (Mar 25, 2013)

Suuuuuper SWEET!!


----------



## hzqw2l (Mar 25, 2013)

*Find?*

Where'd you find it?

I saw it at a Mark Vail auction about 2 years ago up in the catskills.  Couldn't get a shipper so couldn't bid...

Looks nicer now that it's clean.






and it had a nice speedo to boot...


----------



## ohdeebee (Mar 26, 2013)

*Serial numbers*

Can anyone decipher the serial numbers between this one and mine? They don't even seem close. Here's mine: 4 8 3 8 and then a sideways 3


----------



## Claysgarage (Mar 31, 2013)

*headbadge*



catfish said:


> Today's find.




I have a  Fleetwood headbadge, but mine is brass with no paint. It looks like the one on your bike but all brass. Do you think paint is just missing, or did they have some without?


----------



## catfish (Mar 31, 2013)

Claysgarage said:


> I have a  Fleetwood headbadge, but mine is brass with no paint. It looks like the one on your bike but all brass. Do you think paint is just missing, or did they have some without?




They all had paint.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Apr 1, 2013)

ohdeebee said:


> Can anyone decipher the serial numbers between this one and mine? They don't even seem close. Here's mine: 4 8 3 8 and then a sideways 3




Ok, I've looked at your bike and Ed's bike, I even went back to the serial project. I think there is a small typo in the latest assessment which I have corrected in this version.
the simplest explanation would be to say that your bike is earlier, hence the lower number. I would guess Huffman started numbering their bikes with a simple number system and added digits as needed, or somewhere in 1936 they simply added a digit for whatever reason. your bike is much plainer than Ed's bike, and not as like the catalog for late 36 describes, I would simply attribute that to being a very early bike. I have 2 1934 frames coming and will be able to add a few new and sorely needed numbers to the list so we have a little more reference of the early stuff.
another note, which could be viewed as a correction of sorts, the catalog which shows the original bike in the first post of this thread is Fall Winter 1936-37, so Ed's bike could fairly be called a 1936-1937 bike.



> *Here are some of the rudimentary findings so far:*
> (I used an 8 to represent any number, and an H to represent any letter,  except in the case of 1939 Firestones which all appear to have FAH  following the serial number.)
> 
> *8888 - 88888*
> ...


----------



## Freqman1 (Apr 1, 2013)

Hey Scott,
    What about 1940 Firestones? Still FAH or regular Huffman #? V/r Shawn


----------



## catfish (Apr 1, 2013)

Thanks Scott. But it's not my bike any more. I'm sure the new owner will be happy with the info too.

  Catfish




37fleetwood said:


> Ok, I've looked at your bike and Ed's bike, I even went back to the serial project. I think there is a small typo in the latest assessment which I have corrected in this version.
> the simplest explanation would be to say that your bike is earlier, hence the lower number. I would guess Huffman started numbering their bikes with a simple number system and added digits as needed, or somewhere in 1936 they simply added a digit for whatever reason. your bike is much plainer than Ed's bike, and not as like the catalog for late 36 describes, I would simply attribute that to being a very early bike. I have 2 1934 frames coming and will be able to add a few new and sorely needed numbers to the list so we have a little more reference of the early stuff.
> another note, which could be viewed as a correction of sorts, the catalog which shows the original bike in the first post of this thread is Fall Winter 1936-37, so Ed's bike could fairly be called a 1936-1937 bike.


----------



## 37fleetwood (Apr 1, 2013)

Shawn, in 1940 they used FBH and in 1941 FCH, at least on the couple I've seen. 

Ed, good news! those aren't the easiest to place. they're very rare, but not the fanciest bike out there. hope the new owner loves it!


----------



## catfish (Apr 2, 2013)

37fleetwood said:


> Shawn, in 1940 they used FBH and in 1941 FCH, at least on the couple I've seen.
> 
> Ed, good news! those aren't the easiest to place. they're very rare, but not the fanciest bike out there. hope the new owner loves it!




The new owner is very happy.


----------

