What tail light for 69 WC 350 scrambler?

[Ducati350ontario]

Hi guys. I'm finally getting my 69 WC 350 SCR ready for paint after 4 years or so

I recently came across (and bought) what I think is a correct rear fender from ebay. I have another fender on my bike that I'm going to continue to use for now,.... but I want to fix and paint this fender while I'm at it so I can swap it later to be more original.

-Now that I've been looking into it more.... I'm not too sure which taillight bracket and light assembly would likely be the "most correct" for my bike.

When I bought the bike it had no registration and the guy seemed pretty convinced it was likely a 69 so I went with that.

The frame has this serial number stamped into it: DM 350 03234, and the engine serial number is 07211.

The upper rear engine mounting holes in the fame were 8mm holes (if this helps).

Ducati 350 WC Scrambler correct rear taillight assembly.jpg

I was thinking the rectangular (vs round), light with the single hole bracket bolted onto the frame would be most correct?

Would this look right?

cev-aprilia-tail-light-bracket.jpg

Appreciate any suggestions.

thanks
Jeff

[Duccout]

Finally enough, Eldert pointed out recently that early wide case engines had the 8mm top bolt.

[Ducati350ontario]

Finally enough, Eldert pointed out recently that early wide case engines had the 8mm top bolt.

I read that, .. and that entire post. If you feel I shouldn't have started a separate post because someone else answered this in someone else post just say so.

No reason be snarky.

[Duccout]

I wasn't being snarky! I was pointing out that Eldert might be able to answer your question.

[Ventodue]

Hi Jeff,

When I bought the bike it had no registration and the guy seemed pretty convinced it was likely a 69 so I went with that. The frame has this serial number stamped into it: DM 350 03234, and the engine serial number is 07211.

Your numbers certainly fit well with the numbers that Ian Falloon proposes for a 1969 bike, supported by the data on the BevelHeaven/Robert Miller's register:

350 1968-69 numbers.jpg

P.s Don't forget to send Robert your data, please. The frame number is particularity interesting because the US bikes didn't have them.

I was thinking the rectangular (vs round), light with the single hole bracket bolted onto the frame would be most correct?

From what I read, US-market models got a round light, the (relatively few -? ) European market bikes got a rectangular light. Which of the two for Canada? I dunno ... . But the model you picture superficially looks similar to what you see on contemporary photos of Mark 3s, for example.

P.s I don't think Colin was being in the least bit 'snarky'. If you've followed any of his posts, you'd know it is not in the least his style. He was just trying to help, that's all ...

[Duccout]

Thanks Craig, I think that it was lost in translation.

Colin

[Ducati350ontario]

Hi Jeff,

When I bought the bike it had no registration and the guy seemed pretty convinced it was likely a 69 so I went with that. The frame has this serial number stamped into it: DM 350 03234, and the engine serial number is 07211.

Your numbers certainly fit well with the numbers that Ian Falloon proposes for a 1969 bike, supported by the data on the BevelHeaven/Robert Miller's register:

350 1968-69 numbers.jpg
P.s Don't forget to send Robert your data, please. The frame number is particularity interesting because the US bikes didn't have them.

Thanks for that. Its done, I just emailed it to Robert.

I was thinking the rectangular (vs round), light with the single hole bracket bolted onto the frame would be most correct?

From what I read, US-market models got a round light, the (relatively few -? ) European market bikes got a rectangular light. Which of the two for Canada? I dunno ... . But the model you picture superficially looks similar to what you see on contemporary photos of Mark 3s, for example.

That would explain my constant confusion between the round and square light for this thing.

P.s I don't think Colin was being in the least bit 'snarky'. If you've followed any of his posts, you'd know it is not in the least his style. He was just trying to help, that's all ...

I truly appreciate this site and all the kind help people offer each other all the time.
Again, thankyou
-jeff