SFC

Is this the bike that was owned by former forum member Spub? I recall his US spec SFC having similar stamping anomalies.

Edit. A bit of research reveals it is Spubs old bike. He was having trouble getting it off the line with a 37 tooth rear sprocket.
 
Last edited:
The cops have ways to check if these have been tampered with, I was once sent to The Scientific Cops at Chatswood when trying to get a blue slip on an old trail bike as they didn't like the way the numbers looked. The cops looked for 30 seconds and give the thumbs up, nobody cared about a $500 old bike. They defiantly would get more technical on a big dollar machine. if there was a fraud possible.
 
Hmm could be a factory fuckup clearly stamped 17148 on the engine and frame and restamped 17188.
I wonder if Marnix has bike 17148 in the SFC register.
This bike may have tripled in value a bit like a mis stamped coin????
 
MarnixSFC said:
That’s a statement that asks for substantiation. Always eager to learn.

Marnix
Click to expand...
Ok, put it like this: I've never seen a stamping that bad but I've seen a few SFCs with badly restamped numbers.
But I re-read the 2014 thread on this bike and apparently, the history of the machine is known from the start.

Paul
 
Better buy a replica then you will be sure it isn't the real deal, and less expensive as well..or buy a Jota 😁 sorry, happy end of 2021 and an excellent 2022 everyone!
 
Hi:
Now I do not want to make myself an expert with SFC 750. But regarding: stamping to frame, it looks completely wrong, it looks like standard tools one has used, see DGM. Yes I do not know how this bike can be sold as genuine

Br
Peder
 

Attachments

  • 1640270077139.png
    1640270077139.png
    312 bytes · Views: 19
sfc vintage said:
Hi:
Now I do not want to make myself an expert with SFC 750. But regarding: stamping to frame, it looks completely wrong, it looks like standard tools one has used, see DGM. Yes I do not know how this bike can be sold as genuine

Br
Peder
Click to expand...
That's another rather bold statement.
I'm trying my best but I don't see anything wrong with the DGM stamping.
It seems I am overlooking something evident.
As I said to Paul, I'm always eager to learn, so please elaborate.

Marnix
 
Beucars said:
Better buy a replica then you will be sure it isn't the real deal, and less expensive as well..or buy a Jota 😁 sorry, happy end of 2021 and an excellent 2022 everyone!
Click to expand...
On the same website there is an ad for a nice looking Palmelli SFC that is due to be auctioned in the spring. A real deal replica 🙂
Nollick Ghennal as blein vie noa everyone.
 
"I'm trying my best but I don't see anything wrong with the DGM stamping." I am (sort of) with you there Marnix, but I am not (like you) very knowledgable on the SFC

misaligned "M" (happens a lot ex factory)
a single space after the first . (dot) and two spaces after the second. (dot) seen that a few times as well but not common
the above refers to the DGM number only

overstamped 4 with an 8? on Swiss market Mk11 Atlas's the whole DGM number was overstamped ex factory as the Swiss importer could not afford to pay for a second Swiss homologation, due to a diffferent number, so the factory are "capable"

the whole SFC number does look a bit vague and odd to me, but for a reason that I will not disclose, (making it too easy for crooks if I do) I believe it to have been stamped by the factory, probably as a "one off" by Moto Laverda, perhaps a very early chassis change? and the original number re-used? and stamped as requested by the customer at that time.

CLEM
 
Paul Marx said:
So 17148 and 17188 are both on the register?
Whatever, were I in the market for that bike, I'd refer to you.
Paul
Click to expand...
That’s correct, both are in the register. It’s a clear stamping error, surely they found out that they had produced 2 machines with the same number. I’ve seen more similar errors, but usually only one digit, or a letter.

Marnix
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top