Jockey Journal Forum banner
1 - 20 of 68 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I bought a another projectbike, a 1949 Panhead that will go so much faster to get together then my other Harley projects.
The engine is just a bottom but its complete and together but painted black, previuos owner removed the heads, pistons and cylinders after a total pushrod mayhem that destroyed the top end he said. Got no answear on where they where(i mean they should be repairible) but the con feels good and all, the oilpump looks ok and there is no metal flakes in the cam area and so on.

I have a set of AXTEL stroker pistons. New set of 0.60 over bore cylinders and rings. 1956 heads that are freshly rebuilt and ready to bolt on. My wonder is, how well those heads, pistons and cylinders work on a stock 1949 bottom?

Allso what frame is this, its no stock 1949 frame...Looks like Shovel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
the frame might have been a 1949 before it was modifed
looks like it was a few years before it became one. the neck has no key lock and the tank/dash mount doesn't have a spot for a steering damper, not to say it wasn't raked/deraked and had the mount put back on with an earlier piece. it has sidecar loops and a post 53 front motor mount. but the rear motor mount has no crossover tube (swing arm frame) but the lower rear cross member is stamped and not a tube (stock rigid). shaved OE axle plates too. it's a curious piece.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 · (Edited)
Me to Hotsos.

Does anyone have any opinion on the top end thing? I have a set of AXTEL stroker pistons. New set of 0.60 over bore cylinders and rings. 1956 heads that are freshly rebuilt and ready to bolt on. My wonder is, how well those heads, pistons and cylinders work on a stock 1949 bottom?

Im no enginemaster so i rather ask before doing my wild builds, on this first option on this bike is just so i can get i registreated and after that redo it.

Or should i take my 1946 Kuckleheads and cylinders and do a Panknuck:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
I was told that the cylinders was 1956, but i have to check that.

Started to test fit some things today. The first odd thing was that the 3,5G tanks i had dident fit but the tanks i bought from the same guy do fit. Second odd thing was that i couldent put a Starhub wheel(from my 47 knuck) since it was welded(dident see that first) smaller for some discbrake wheel. I have to messure that frame, cause i get a feel that someone did a allot of welding on this frame.

And then there is the front wheel choise, 16" or 19" or 21"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Nice Pan. How does the welding look that was done to the frame? I hope it will end up going straight down the road. Keep up the progress.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
If you do in fact have stroker pistons, they may not be compatable with a stock bottom end. Stroker pistons usually have a relocated wrist pin hole to accomodate for the extra travel of a stroker crank. If you put stroker pistons in a motor with stock flywheels, I would believe you would lower your compression ratio a substantial amount. I am not a pan expert, so I hope someone else with some pan experience will chime in here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
looks like it was a few years before it became one. the neck has no key lock and the tank/dash mount doesn't have a spot for a steering damper, not to say it wasn't raked/deraked and had the mount put back on with an earlier piece. it has sidecar loops and a post 53 front motor mount. but the rear motor mount has no crossover tube (swing arm frame) but the lower rear cross member is stamped and not a tube (stock rigid). shaved OE axle plates too. it's a curious piece.
Jesus H Christ.. I wish I could spout this much info. on a frame from just a picture....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
If you do in fact have stroker pistons, they may not be compatable with a stock bottom end. Stroker pistons usually have a relocated wrist pin hole to accomodate for the extra travel of a stroker crank. If you put stroker pistons in a motor with stock flywheels, I would believe you would lower your compression ratio a substantial amount. I am not a pan expert, so I hope someone else with some pan experience will chime in here.
That what i had heard to, great to get some inputs about it.

El Hueso when i really looked at it, kind of crappy, its not even in leavel and on the innerside it was really thick. So that will need some work. I have cross messured the frame and it looked good but there are some odd things here and there that i have to work on so it run straight down the road in the end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Thanks.
Since im gathering parts for the build, there are some things to deside about, so here goes, some comments are welcome.
First up Morris Magneto or Mallory Unilite Distributor?
Take my 56 heads(but that make my 56 uncomplete) or make someone fix my ruff 48 heads(for my 55) or buy V-twin remake of 48-50 heads?
Take the springer from my 47 Knuck, get hold of Hydra legs or buy a Dna?
I dont have allot of money so i cant just buy everything and try them out what looks best, even thou it feels like Morris Mag, 56 heads and 47 springer....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
The stroker pistons will not work with the stock stroke.As the other gentleman pointed out the wrist pins are in the wrong place and you will end up with a low or VERY low compression ratio.The V-twin heads are quite expensive.They appear well made(we have a set here at the shop)but dont look exactly like an original head.Given a choice between the mag and electronic ignition I would take the mag.Even better would be an OEM type timer.IME the various electronic ignitions for the generator engines are less than reliable.
 
1 - 20 of 68 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top