VIN Numbers

davomoto · Post by **davomoto** » Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:35 am

I was just looking at my 65 CL77 that's been waiting a couple years for me to give it some love. The frame # is 1000299, and the engine # is 1000277. Has the engine been replaced? I've never seen a lower engine than frame #. Of course, this is a very early 65, # 299 it would seem.

Davo

Quinn · Post by **Quinn** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:51 am

ive been wondering the same thing about my 65 super hawk the last two numbers on the frame are 60 then on the engine there 32

davomoto · Post by **davomoto** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:00 am

Interesting Quinn! Perhaps they start out like that at the beggining of the production run? Anyone else have a low #s bike to compare?

Davo

flathead · Post by **flathead** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:51 pm

Davo,
I've always heard (or maybe just assumed) that they pulled an engine out of sequence to test and stuck it back in randomly during production. Myth? or fact? that was the explaination I accepted as how the numbers got mixed up. I never really thought about it though, but if they did do that, then the bulk of the frame numbers would have been smaller than the engine numbers. I guess that shoots down that theory. My latest guess, what would make more sense in a 60's Japanese manufacturing plant, is that that the frames came sequential down the line from assembly, welding, and paint, to final assembly. The engines came to the final line in some type of multiple container. Being packed at engine assembly lowest number in the back or bottom of the container. Last engine in - first engine out. Theoretically half would have higher #'s , 1 would match , and half would be lower. Taking all this into consideration, it's kinda like what Joe Dirt's Daddy said about how a Posi-Trac works in a 69' Plymouth. "I don't know, it just does"
Mark

davomoto · Post by **davomoto** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:33 pm

Yeah Mark, we can theorize all we want, but unless yo were there.......

Davo

flathead · Post by **flathead** » Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:32 pm

Davo,

I checked the 4) 65 CL's Ive got in the attic this afternoon and I've come up with a mishmash of #'s.
All pretty close. The 305's all had a higher engine # and one 250 had a lower engine # and the other was a matching #.

CL721002854,CL72E1002854
CL721006833,CL72E1006801
CL771002909,CL77E1002975
CL771007825,CL77E1007933

FWIW My low mile restored 66 (titled) small brake was very unmolested when I got it 7 or 8 years ago. Has a 65 wiring tag and very late frame #'s for a 65 with 400 digits lower on the engine. If I hadn't disassembled this one myself I would have argued that the engine was early issue and the frame late. But I took it apart and there was absolutely no evidence of a bolt, cotter pin, or screw ever being touched. I've seen no documentation that there was any rules about what the range of #'s for frame and engine should be, so I'm sticking with what I saw. On another note the 66 (titled) big brake that I'm working on right now is s/n 8000 & E8001. So I gotta agree, if you wasn't there, or you haven't seen first hand...........................

Mark