Somewhat strange SF on Ebay UK

A

ambrosia

Guest
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Laverda-750SFC-Replica-Matching-Numbers-Classic-Freetax-/120617073893?pt=UK_Motorcycles&hash=item1c15567ce5#ht_533wt_930

This is a slightly strange one. Looks somewhat neglected, and with some signs of bodging. For all intents and purposes, it looks like an SF1 but with some iffy fixtures and fittings, but it comes up in the listing as a 1969 bike.........which it simply can't be. Headlamp, Lucas batwings, MkII drum brakes, fuel tank, side panel badges (easily stuck on I know), ND clocks........all wrong for 69.........besides which, SFs didn't exist then. Not had a good look at the carbs though.
A good few nuts and bolts don't look right, and a little peep of the wiring you see between the side panels doesn't look too clever. I guess the indicators have gone walk about too.
Historic vehicle, so free road tax, but I guess plenty of SF1's would have sneaked in under the pre 7th of January 1973 barrier. I guess a private plate is fine, but that still shouldn't bring up a bike as being a 1969 model (unless the frame and engine are from an earlier bike, but I'm not sure when the twin re-inforcing spars came in to play, and this bike has them).
 
It is a bit strange, caus it looks all the world like an SF1.
However looking at the lhs engine photo, the engine number appears to be only 4 digits, with what appears to be *15.. which would make it quite early, but not with two strengthening ribs.  Our 69 GT and S both have a single rib, and they are around the 2000 engine number range.
However, at the right price it will make somebody very happy and should turn into a another nice 750 with a bit of TLC.
 
I have pointed out all those points to the seller, plus the carbs are 36mm and the frame has curvy drops by the gearbox (1973) and not straight drops (1969)
SFC replica ? yeah corse it is (not)
more likely a '73 bike which should be around the 13,000 mark
CLEM
 
Yep, I think you've called it exactly right. An older engine (or crankcases) have managed somehow to get the bike classified as being manufactured in 1969, when to all intents and purposes, most of it is a 73 bike. I guess what it gains in road tax savings, it loses in provenance. Having said all that, if the price is right, then it'll make it a prospect to restore, or use as decent runaround. I can only imagine that the engine is a collection of bits from perhaps two engines.
 
Back
Top