The central dent you have outlined in the photo is not evident in my unused NOS rear guard. It was quite common to see this dent in standard and touring guards in 'the poor maintenance' 60s and was caused by the Vincent damper leaking all its oil away and so loosing its hydraulic bump stop. This on full suspension bump bent F28/2, the rear mounting bolt/stud, allowing the bottom of the damper to clout the mudguard
B Touring Fender Stay holes
- Thread starter Cyborg
- Start date
This might be a silly idea/suggestion as I have no experience of Touring mudguards but if it is really true that the standard stays require dents to be made in the guards themselves why not just have wider stays made? I assume that the width over the rear hinge is standard so that the lifting handle should be the same. These are not complicated items so is there some good reason why stays a little wider at the top are not used?
My rear guard doesn't have any dents to clear the stays, just to clear the rear sub frame and get the fender installed so it has sufficient tire clearance. The lifting handle has plenty of room. The front guard stays on mine have sufficient clearance (with no dents), so I would suspect that dents in a front fender means the stays are not the correct ones, but I'm new to this assembling Vincents out of boxes game.
So as I start the dry build of the rear guard to the RFM, it becomes apparent that the FT22/4 inner guard stays are for an alloy fender and are too long. I can easily modify these ones to fit, but it would help if someone could post a picture of where the FT22/4 bolts onto the fender, so I can make them the same as the originals. Please and thank you.
Now that I actually bolt them on at the bottom and stare at them in the light of day, my request for a photo could possibly be classified as stupid. This photo was taken with the lifting handle bolted in place. I originally thought the stays would have to have the upper portion of the tube flattened some more, but once I "adjust" the dents and firmly bolt the fender to the RFM, they should be ok in that regard. I will definitely have to drill a new hole in the top of the stay and cut the excess off.
No dents in my touring mudguards, front or rear. The bike has a shiny but not very well executed black paint job on it, so the dents may well have been "fixed" at some point in the past. Yet they seem to bolt-up alright. I'll try to find someone around here with a touring twin that I can look at up close. I can't imagine it being easy to re-dent them once they've been straightened.
I don't think so. I think on some bikes they may have been attached lower down, but who know why. I looked at what I had and I think post 20 is an original. I have this of a Glenn Bewley restoration that matches that position:
Glenn does a great job.
I think you set-up looks quite good.
David
Attached lower down due to different wheel size perhaps. Mine has 18 & 19. Not sure if they were all that way with steel fenders. It would be easier for me to drill a new hole in the stay and trim it rather than weld shut another hole on the fender. I welded shut the 2 in the tail flap today. Simple job, but a PITA, as was knocking the dents and rash out of the front stays and straightening them. I suppose to be correct (if there is such a thing) I should move the holes in the fender and leave the rear inner stays as they are.
That one of Glenn's looks nice. Mine has Bramptons that were plated along with the RFM. The plating will probably stay for now. Trying to focus on getting it to be a reliable road bike, so some of the painting will have to come later.
That one of Glenn's looks nice. Mine has Bramptons that were plated along with the RFM. The plating will probably stay for now. Trying to focus on getting it to be a reliable road bike, so some of the painting will have to come later.
If you put a bend in the stay ?, Would that make the hole lower ?, Or would it take too much. Cheers Bill.