This was not intended as any sort of attack on you personally.
I have viewed the images of your bikes and they are very well done and a credit to you for which you should be justly proud.
The point I was trying to make is with such a large manufacturer as BSA, "original" is a some what ellusive term
To use an example many would be aware of, most early , porley researched publications such as "Gold Stars & Other Unit Singles" for example , tell the reader the entire unit single range for 71 had ivory frames and the factory drawings and the catalogues all confirm this. However only a few pre production publicity production prototypes B50's had ivory frames , the rest left the factory black and the despatch books confirm this.
Similarly with the unit twins.
On this very forum 2 different dealer notices have been posted detailing how West Coast dealers would be recompensed for painting the frames black.
So what is "original " ?
How the bike left the factory or how it left the showrooms ?
I have a 1973 ( titled ) 1971 production year , factory or dealer reworked A65L, it is metallic green with a black frame and was that colour brand spanking new from the dealers here in Sydney as confirmed when I met the original owner.
We have another member with another A65L in exactly the same finish and he also bought his brand new off the BSA dealers showroom floor, prior to the winding up of BSA.
Also brand spanking new off the dealers showroom floor were A 65's in a similar finish painted Blue , Red & White.
All of these bikes had the 1972 cast iron oil pumps and a few other of the 1972 factory modifications.
We have yet to confirm weather these were modified locally or by the factory as one of them sported a German compliance plate.
Over the years I have come across riders from Melbourne & Adelaide with similar bikes and as BSA had different factory franchise agents in each state ( no national agent as in the USA ) as seen in the back pages of BSA parts books.
It would be most unlikely that all 3 states modified the bikes the same way , yes this is an assumption, but the original purchaser of my bike was told it was a "factory refurbishment" which could be true or could be salesman's hype.
These were sold in Australia as 1973 models and all of the lightnings had the Lightning petrol tank decal
used as side cover decals
Are these "original" bikes ?
So while I do respect your quest for geting your bikes "Exactly right", it is a moot point as this thread has already displayed with owners of original bikes fitted with different guards from new as far as they know.
Finally I do not consider myself a BSA expert in way shape or form, just a BSA nut with a reasonable library of original material sourced from all over the world and there is more than one contradiction in them
As a final note, I paid just under $ 1000 for a very rare 12 page 1916 BSA catalogue, resplendent in full colour , included was a letter to the customer with prices & delivery dates .
Now one would assume that this could be taken as primary proof, a factory catalogue, plus a dated and signed factory letter, but not one of the bikes so carefully painted and expensively printed in full colour were ever made as the only motorcycle BSA made in 1916 was the model K in military specifiaction painted drab.
A perfect example of pre production catalogues listing what BSA had planned to make next season, but never eventuated .
And we also have BSA factory Despatch Records, incomplete as they are, full of contradictions as the -Y thread has so carefully brought to light.
At the time of Mr Bacons writing these books were available for him ( or his ghost writers ) to peruse which obviously they did not bother to do.
As to the models in question and in particular to the mudguards, one of the differences that appears in several catalogues between East Coast & West Coast bikes was the rear guards.
It appears that blade type guards were favoured by the West and full valanced guards sold in the East and Canada for that matter.
Export parts Catalogue number 00- 5118 lists 2 different guards for 1965 Lightening Rockets 68-6818 ( East Coast ) and 68-6819 ( West Coast ) which would agree with the statment above.
The 1964 parts book 00-5116 also list both a valanced & blade ( Americarno ) guards for rockets being 68-6526 ( valanced ) and 68-6527 Tipo Americano ( assumed to be blade )
The 1965 All USA ( printed in the UK ) catalogue shows the same , new for 1965 semi-valanced guard on L/R's.
The 1665 BSA factory accessory book lists "Sports type " guards as part of an accessory pack but did not list the guard number or the seat number individually.
The painting in the catalogue ( because BSA had not made the bikes when the catalogue was printed ) shows the guards without the support rail.
The general export 1965 catalogue shows the same as the USA while the home market catalogue makes no mention of the "new for 65" semi-valanced guards and shows all A65's with full valanced guards except the Lightning Clubmans which has a thin blade and that is a photo.
In general the USA printed catalogues have mostly photos while the UK printed ones tend to be mostly paintings so I would tend to put more faith in the USA printed ones.
Al of the adverts I have for 65 show a narrow blade , not the semi valanced guard depicted in the catalogue .
Some of my parts books are out on loan at the moment and others are PDF's , the ones listed above are original hard copies cause it is a tad difficult typing a reply while flipping through a pile of PDF's but if it will add to the confusion I can go through them all and see what other part nubers are listed against them.
I think your response is a bit vacant, I am only pursuing photos of a rear mud guard for the 1964 Lightning Rocket range or perhaps a 1964 Lightning Rocket Clubman for historic prevalence. Yes I am a very brave man, my awarded winning restorations for customers and myself, speak for themselves, and you Trevor what do you bring to the table? I find your statements cowardly, open ended and with no substance. Do you have some sort of evidence to which I pursue, or is your agenda egotistical/opinionated which does not factually contribute to this tread
From what I glean by your condescending response either you have some sort of extra scholarly knowledge of BSA History or your just huffing in the wind using your jaundiced opinion without contributing to the threads query .
Basically if you have something relevant to offer, great, otherwise .............
My only goal is to shed light on this unique machine many of us appreciate. After all this was BSA's first attempt to challenge the newly introduce 1963Triumph Bonneville which in itself is significant and worthy of research.
Your expertise on Mr Bacon is profound as well as your knowledge of BSA Factory Parts Books you can shed some relevant information pursuit to this thread. Perhaps you have some sort of real photographic insight you would like to share. Otherwise I see your response as conjecture at best. worst case you are trying to exceed or mimic authority on the subject of Mr Bacon Research and my interest in the 1964 Lightning Rocket rear mud guard or generalizing your perception of documented history.
Its too easy to sit back and be a professed critic. What is difficult is to bring back a time worthy piece for all to appreciate
Judging from your M20 moniker perhaps you should stick with those old military war horses until you developed substantial education on those machines before you critic the topic of the BSA A65 Range.
It would behove you to realize we only have as history are the BSA factory parts books, and the thankful research and publications by Mr. Bacon, God rest his soul Plus the very few original machines that turn up.