Why "motocycle"?

[HarleyCreation]

I have a question that maybe you Indian experts can help me with.

On October 26, 1923, the Hendee Manufacturing Co. changed its name to the Indian Motocycle Co. The word "motocycle" was used (no "r") instead of the usual spelling of motorcycle (with the "r").

Everyone knows that is true, but did Indian ever explain why they spelled it that way? You'd think that at the time the change was made, an explanation would have been given, but was there?

Is the reason known or is it something of a mystery? How do you guys explain it?

Thanks!

[rwm]

so they could be placed first in phone listings and advertising.when you opened up a phone book you came to motocycle first. your eyes never noticed the R was missing but your eyes noticed INDIAN dealers phone #'s

[rwm]

herb your mail box is full

[exeric]

I've read the reasoning behind that spelling somewhere. Off-hand, I think Jerry Hatfield explained it in one of his books. I'll start looking.

[fillibuster]

I looked it up in Sucher's Iron Redskin. It reads as follows:

"According to company records of the board's action, this was done simply to avoid any possible legal actions arising from patent suits, which had been a continuing problem within both the motorcycle and automotive industries since the earliest days of organized manufacture." ... page 143

Now I'm trying to recall the year of Pennington's death. Herb, hadn't you reported that Pennington was actively suing Indian and others for patent infringement?

[Chris Haynes]

Didn't Indian return to motorcycle after WWII?

[HarleyCreation]

Didn't Indian return to motorcycle after WWII?

Yes, I think I've seen that too, somewhere. Makes sense. The spelling "motocycle" would have looked odd to people by that time. Everyone spelled it motorcycle.

[c.o.]

I would be interested to know why it would take them so long to make it legal. Here's a page from the Canadian Motor Cycle from 1913 showing the new Toronto factory. I call it a factory but I believe it was more of a distribution center.

[HarleyCreation]

I would be interested to know why it would take them so long to make it legal. Here's a page from the Canadian Motor Cycle from 1913 showing the new Toronto factory. I call it a factory but I believe it was more of a distribution center.

Cory,

Wow, that is beautiful!!!!

Do you have month of that issue so I can fully document it as a source?

This photo proves that Indian was using the spelling motocycle LONG before they made the name change in the company title in 1923. That strongly suggests me that it had nothing at all to do with possible "patent suits" like Mr. Sucher claimed. Rather it was just something that they had already been doing for years, a tradition you might say, and something that set them apart. This also makes sense with what Jerry said as the spelling without the "r" had been around for years and they just liked it better, it would seem.

Unless this being a Canadian source somehow fits into the picture. Are there any c1913 or earlier American Indian ads or literature that spell it as motocycle?

Either way, this does clarify the issue greatly for what I'm working on.

[HarleyCreation]

I looked it up in Sucher's Iron Redskin. It reads as follows:

"According to company records of the board's action, this was done simply to avoid any possible legal actions arising from patent suits, which had been a continuing problem within both the motorcycle and automotive industries since the earliest days of organized manufacture." ... page 143

Now I'm trying to recall the year of Pennington's death. Herb, hadn't you reported that Pennington was actively suing Indian and others for patent infringement?

Phil,

Thanks for the page # and the exact quote. I looked in Sucher's book, but missed that.

Yes, Pennington was trying to sue Indian just before his death, but that was in early 1911. He was dead over 10 years before Indian officially made the name change.

No disrespect to Mr. Sucher, but I find his work to be wildly unreliable. Yes, he says "according to company records" and "board's action" but did he actually see those records? Just because he says it, it's not certain to be true. Too many other cases of untrue claims in his work to risk believing it without some other source to verify it.

Besides, the logic of that action escapes me. By the 1920s "motorcycle" and "motor cycle" were used universally as a general term for two-wheeled motor vehicles. Plus the word itself would have nothing to do with "patent suits." As far as I know, you can't patent a word!

Again, no disrespect to Mr. Sucher, but this does not strike me as being the real reason unless we can document it with actual records or something that Indian actually said that backs it up.

So far my hunch that it's a mystery still holds. Very interesting in light of something that I'm working on right now.