Vintage set of the week: Harley-Davidson 1000cc
Posted by Huwbot,
This week's vintage set is 394 Harley-Davidson 1000cc, released during 1976. It's one of 4 Hobby Set sets produced that year. It contains 143 pieces.
It's owned by 642 Brickset members. If you want to add it to your collection you might find it for sale at BrickLink or eBay.
78 likes
40 comments on this article
The Copper Chopper
393-1 looks so much better and it came out in the same year too.
Woah, are those 1X1 tiles inserted between two studs on the front? I didn't think that was a legal Lego building technique.
I wonder if this was actually licensed.
@terfsten said:
"Woah, are those 1X1 tiles inserted between two studs on the front? I didn't think that was a legal Lego building technique."
The idea of legal and illegal techniques didn't really exist back then, but tiles are fine to insert between studs, as they're marginally thinner than plates.
I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together?
@mjduling said:
"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Glancing through the parts list, it would seem so, but Brickset doesn't have instructions linked for this one
Back when box arts weren’t black. Man, those looked awesome! I’ve always loved this set for that reason. Don’t entirely know why.
TV Ad announcer: Ponch and Jon NOT sold at all...:)
@GSR_MataNui said:
" @mjduling said:
"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Glancing through the parts list, it would seem so, but Brickset doesn't have instructions linked for this one "
https://lego.brickinstructions.com/lego_instructions/set/394/Instructions
So, funny thing...there are four sets in this series, and _two_ of them have been picked as RSotD, while this one got picked as VSotW. Does that mean the first two are eligible to be selected a second time?
@TheOtherMike said:
" @terfsten said:
"Woah, are those 1X1 tiles inserted between two studs on the front? I didn't think that was a legal Lego building technique."
The idea of legal and illegal techniques didn't really exist back then, but tiles are fine to insert between studs, as they're marginally thinner than plates."
The tiles also don't have studs that would intersect with the studs the tile is pinched between. The groove on the base also allows tiles to be held by clips and minifig hands, where plates will put too much stress on the fingers.
@namekuji said:
" @GSR_MataNui said:
" @mjduling said:
"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Glancing through the parts list, it would seem so, but Brickset doesn't have instructions linked for this one "
https://lego.brickinstructions.com/lego_instructions/set/394/Instructions
"
I had the same question. Thanks for the instructions (so different than recent ones). It is like mjduling wrote - I've never saw this before. This is a nice set for 1976.
@terfsten said:
"Woah, are those 1X1 tiles inserted between two studs on the front? I didn't think that was a legal Lego building technique."
There i nothing illegal about this.
Insering 1x1 bricks with the side between two studs was quite often used in the 80s era, expecially for headlights.
For example in 722 you can see this at the car puliing the trailer.
Yes, the 1x1 have studs.
Other times I remember 2x2 plates inserted with their long side between studs, however I can't find an example.
Another building technic people call "illegal" is, for example, insering a round 1x3 brick (a small cylinder) in the middle between a 2x2 space.
Works for other parts with a round base, too.
This also was a normal building technic, see 6627
@mjduling said:
"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Yes. Why not?
With a fit of finesse or some spacer you made it's easy to accomplish.
Back then sets demanded more from the builder.
Be it the building technics or the instructions.
For example see the instructon for 8865 which consists of
24 steps for the A model (car),
25 steps for the B model (buggy) and
4 steps for the motorization
on a total of 38 pages including the cover.
https://manuall.co.uk/lego-set-8865-technic-test-car/
The set was rated at 11-14 year old builders (real age) and indeed, building it I had no questions ever.
Is that really visible tape keeping the entire middle part attached to the rear?
@Auctorius said:
"Is that really visible tape keeping the entire middle part attached to the rear?"
No, of course not. It's a bad photo.
https://www.promobricks.de/lego-394-harley-davidson-1200-flh-1976-classic-review/
And of course with the “Harley Davidson” IP tax?
Cool set for the era! Though good luck finding one now with the STAMPs still intact....
(though if I find one at our new local Lego shop, I wouldn't hesitate buying it)
As for that stack of plates for the engine, looking at the instructions I can imagine that being hella confusing. Nowhere (well, except for the picture) does it even hint you shouldn't push them all together, but it's 5 plates vs. 2 bricks, so one plate short. As someone who is quite familiar with (and has often defended!) old instructions, this seems quite confusing. Oh, and obviously no brick separator back then, so good luck separating those plates after your mistake ;-)
The more I look at the photo the less sense the geometries seem to make, even with the instructions for context. It’s like it’s been put together by Escher
Looks like I missed the loose stack and simply added another plate last time I rebuilt this. https://flic.kr/p/xqsfuC
tsk, another licenced motor vehicle. Yawn! /s
We are witnesses here to an illegal construction technique on the chassis. But it is a police bike, so maybe it is allowed. :)
Yeah, this set is a lot. I dug through the instructions as well, and nevermind the tiles-between-plates, that block is just a few plates poorly stacked together, after which you're expected to presumably use black magic to add the bricks on top without compressing the engine-block. Then there's those wheels, which I've never seen used with those long-tooth cogs before. The whole set is home to a host of weird, rare and cool parts. Have a look for yourself:
https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=394-1
What a weird set. But you know - it's pretty cool. That end-result is held together with spit and prayer, but I like it all the same.
@ulibu said:
" @mjduling said:
"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Yes. Why not?
With a fit of finesse or some spacer you made it's easy to accomplish.
Back then sets demanded more from the builder.
Be it the building technics or the instructions.
For example see the instructon for 8865 which consists of
24 steps for the A model (car),
25 steps for the B model (buggy) and
4 steps for the motorization
on a total of 38 pages including the cover.
https://manuall.co.uk/lego-set-8865-technic-test-car/
The set was rated at 11-14 year old builders (real age) and indeed, building it I had no questions ever."
Exactly. Lego has made building instructions WAY to easy these days. I still build my modern sets without looking at the little box in the corner and I just "spot the difference" each step. I hate when there's just one piece per step too. I also hate the numbered bags thing. I like to dump them all out on a smaller set and just separate the pieces by color before I start building. Takes me back to the old days
@transamman6585 said:
" @ulibu said:
" @mjduling said:
"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Yes. Why not?
With a fit of finesse or some spacer you made it's easy to accomplish.
Back then sets demanded more from the builder.
Be it the building technics or the instructions.
For example see the instructon for 8865 which consists of
24 steps for the A model (car),
25 steps for the B model (buggy) and
4 steps for the motorization
on a total of 38 pages including the cover.
https://manuall.co.uk/lego-set-8865-technic-test-car/
The set was rated at 11-14 year old builders (real age) and indeed, building it I had no questions ever."
Exactly. Lego has made building instructions WAY to easy these days. I still build my modern sets without looking at the little box in the corner and I just "spot the difference" each step. I hate when there's just one piece per step too. I also hate the numbered bags thing. I like to dump them all out on a smaller set and just separate the pieces by color before I start building. Takes me back to the old days"
I too don't like numbered bags, I sort of understood when old modular buildings had multiple bags 1,2 and 3.
When I get anew set other than a modular I empty all bags then sort, it's all part of the fun. On modulars I look at instructions and then separate bags by floors, then empty all bags for ground floor, sort, build, then repeat for other floors. The main reason for this is lack of space if I emptied and sorted all bags first.
@ulibu said:
"Another building technic people call "illegal" is, for example, insering a round 1x3 brick (a small cylinder) in the middle between a 2x2 space.
Works for other parts with a round base, too.
This also was a normal building technic, see 6627"
That's never been considered illegal. Jamie Berard's Stressing the Elements (which he really needs to be updated, as at least two element have had their designs changed to make the connections shown legal) makes no mention of it.
@transamman6585 said:" @ulibu said:" @mjduling said:"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Yes. Why not?
With a fit of finesse or some spacer you made it's easy to accomplish.
Back then sets demanded more from the builder.
Be it the building technics or the instructions.
For example see the instructon for 8865 which consists of
24 steps for the A model (car),
25 steps for the B model (buggy) and
4 steps for the motorization
on a total of 38 pages including the cover.
https://manuall.co.uk/lego-set-8865-technic-test-car/
The set was rated at 11-14 year old builders (real age) and indeed, building it I had no questions ever."
Exactly. Lego has made building instructions WAY to easy these days. I still build my modern sets without looking at the little box in the corner and I just "spot the difference" each step. I hate when there's just one piece per step too. I also hate the numbered bags thing. I like to dump them all out on a smaller set and just separate the pieces by color before I start building. Takes me back to the old days"
Yes, Lego caters too much to people who haven't been building sets for decades and people who actually want the building experience to go smoothly. /sarcasm I've been building since the Eighties, and I, for one, much prefer the way they do things now. The old "spot the difference" instructions were a pain, and the more pieces added in a single step, the more painful they were.
@GSR_MataNui said:
" @mjduling said:
"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Glancing through the parts list, it would seem so, but Brickset doesn't have instructions linked for this one "
Yes, it was - I had the Norton bike mentioned in another comment. Was mildly concerned at the time (8 years old and already up-tight!).
@TheOtherMike said:
" @ulibu said:
"Another building technic people call "illegal" is, for example, insering a round 1x3 brick (a small cylinder) in the middle between a 2x2 space.
Works for other parts with a round base, too.
This also was a normal building technic, see 6627 "
That's never been considered illegal. Jamie Berard's Stressing the Elements (which he really needs to be updated, as at least two element have had their designs changed to make the connections shown legal) makes no mention of it.
@transamman6585 said:" @ulibu said:" @mjduling said:"I'd like to know what's going on with that engine block... Is it really a stack of plates that are only partially pushed together? "
Yes. Why not?
With a fit of finesse or some spacer you made it's easy to accomplish.
Back then sets demanded more from the builder.
Be it the building technics or the instructions.
For example see the instructon for 8865 which consists of
24 steps for the A model (car),
25 steps for the B model (buggy) and
4 steps for the motorization
on a total of 38 pages including the cover.
https://manuall.co.uk/lego-set-8865-technic-test-car/
The set was rated at 11-14 year old builders (real age) and indeed, building it I had no questions ever."
Exactly. Lego has made building instructions WAY to easy these days. I still build my modern sets without looking at the little box in the corner and I just "spot the difference" each step. I hate when there's just one piece per step too. I also hate the numbered bags thing. I like to dump them all out on a smaller set and just separate the pieces by color before I start building. Takes me back to the old days"
Yes, Lego caters too much to people who haven't been building sets for decades and people who actually want the building experience to go smoothly. /sarcasm I've been building since the Eighties, and I, for one, much prefer the way they do things now. The old "spot the difference" instructions were a pain, and the more pieces added in a single step, the more painful they were."
It is at times harrowing to go back to older instructions. I recently joined a friend in rebuilding his 2008 Death Star, which very quickly devolved from
"This'll be fun, we'll have this set built in a day!"
To
"Are you missing some pieces? I can't find these in dark grey anywhere."
To
"They're supposed to be black? These instructions are wrong! This reads as dark grey! Black pieces should have white outlines in the instructions!"
To
"THEN WHY DOES -THESE- STEPS MARK -THESE- BLACK PIECES WITH WHITE OUTLINES, AND NOT THE OTHERS?!"
To
"YOU'RE A WHITE OUTLINE! NEVER DARKEN MY DOORSTEP AGAIN!"
To
"Oh, I guess... I guess we broke the Death Star again. So - same time next week?"
@Crux said:"YOU'RE A WHITE OUTLINE! NEVER DARKEN MY DOORSTEP AGAIN!"
Or, as Groucho Marx put it:"Go, and never darken my towels again!"
@TheOtherMike said:
"I wonder if this was actually licensed.
@terfsten said:
"Woah, are those 1X1 tiles inserted between two studs on the front? I didn't think that was a legal Lego building technique."
The idea of legal and illegal techniques didn't really exist back then, but tiles are fine to insert between studs, as they're marginally thinner than plates."
Guess that's just showing my age then. I'm 28 so I had never seen that technique in any of the official sets I've owned.
This set makes for a neat look into Lego history for me then. :)
@ulibu said:
" @terfsten said:
"Woah, are those 1X1 tiles inserted between two studs on the front? I didn't think that was a legal Lego building technique."
There i nothing illegal about this.
Insering 1x1 bricks with the side between two studs was quite often used in the 80s era, expecially for headlights.
For example in 722 you can see this at the car puliing the trailer.
Yes, the 1x1 have studs.
Other times I remember 2x2 plates inserted with their long side between studs, however I can't find an example."
Prior to 1359, there was no consideration for illegal techniques, as they had not even started to define them. Now they have an entire department devoted to ensuring that no set that gets released incorporates them. Tiles between studs is fine and still used on occasion (as recently as the moon flag in 21309/92176), but plates inserted between studs has been expressly forbidden for nearly a quarter century.
wow, first time to see this. interesting parts.
Yellow castle 375 / 6075 also had tiles put in sideways for the horse ears.
@brick_r said:
"TV Ad announcer: Ponch and Jon NOT sold at all...:)"
Also for @Crux being put in the Sarkina 5 work prison building the Death Star.
Officer Francis Llewellyn 'Ponch' Poncherello:
Sometimes, with everything that's happened, I wonder if he really likes me.
Officer Jon Baker:
Who, Getraer?
Officer Francis Llewellyn 'Ponch' Poncherello:
No - God! I know Getraer doesn't like me!
@Maxbricks14 said:
"393-1 looks so much better and it came out in the same year too."
And it can scan your computer for viruses!
@Andrusi said:
" @Maxbricks14 said:
"393-1 looks so much better and it came out in the same year too."
And it can scan your computer for viruses!"
Don't fall for snake oil
@Auctorius said:
"Is that really visible tape keeping the entire middle part attached to the rear?"
That was my assumption as well … talk about illegal building techniques!
@Prairiebricker said:
" @Auctorius said:
"Is that really visible tape keeping the entire middle part attached to the rear?"
That was my assumption as well … talk about illegal building techniques!"
Is that something that's on the model itself, or is that part of the source of the image? I don't think they would have been using polybags that early, but such a reflection is common when trying to photograph them for internet catalogs (vs just using the original 2D image that was used to create the bag art, if you can obtain it). I'd assume this was a cardboard box, but maybe the specific box that's featured in that image was covered in shrinkwrap, and the owner didn't want to cut it free just to take a picture.
@RUL said:
"We are witnesses here to an illegal construction technique on the chassis. But it is a police bike, so maybe it is allowed. :)"
Some police think they can get anything.
@PurpleDave said:
" @Prairiebricker said:
" @Auctorius said:
"Is that really visible tape keeping the entire middle part attached to the rear?"
That was my assumption as well … talk about illegal building techniques!"
Is that something that's on the model itself, or is that part of the source of the image? I don't think they would have been using polybags that early, but such a reflection is common when trying to photograph them for internet catalogs (vs just using the original 2D image that was used to create the bag art, if you can obtain it). I'd assume this was a cardboard box, but maybe the specific box that's featured in that image was covered in shrinkwrap, and the owner didn't want to cut it free just to take a picture."
Whatever the material, it looks to be gripped between 2 white plates, and wrapped around a 4 X 2 brick, like an errant piece of dental floss.
Is this an example of Lego Forensics?
@ulibu said:
" @terfsten said:
"Woah, are those 1X1 tiles inserted between two studs on the front? I didn't think that was a legal Lego building technique."
There i nothing illegal about this.
Insering 1x1 bricks with the side between two studs was quite often used in the 80s era, expecially for headlights.
For example in 722 you can see this at the car puliing the trailer.
Yes, the 1x1 have studs.
Other times I remember 2x2 plates inserted with their long side between studs, however I can't find an example."
372 Texas Ranger set uses this technique with 1x2 plates for the horse's ears.