I getting ready to send out parts for rebuild and I noticed 1969 Casting Numbers on my KR water pump.
I believe the pump is original to the car, as are most items, other what has been replaced due to accidents...
The date code seems correct/possible for my car.
The question I have is, was the updated 1969 water pump design used on late builds of the 1968 GT500KRs?
Has anyone else observed this on a late build KR?
See attached photo for the casting number and build date.
Thank you for all comments!
Fran
Quote from: Craner on October 09, 2021, 01:28:49 PM
I getting ready to send out parts for rebuild and I noticed 1969 Casting Numbers on my KR water pump.
I believe the pump is original to the car, as are most items, other what has been replaced due to accidents...
The date code seems correct/possible for my car.
The question I have is, was the updated 1969 water pump design used on late builds of the 1968 GT500KRs?
Has anyone else observed this on a late build KR?
See attached photo for the casting number and build date.
Thank you for all comments!
Fran
Unlike many things water pumps commonly get replaced.Most likely the pump was changed by a PO. I haven't seen or even heard of anecdotal evidence for finding a C9AE water pump on 68 a undisturbed survivor car. A C8AE casting is what would be expected.
The CJ site has some info.
https://www.428cobrajet.org/id-waterpump
Thank you both!
The reason for my question was based on the build date on my engine tag aligning with the casting date on the pump. Same month. (June)
The car had the original PN hoses and belts on the car when I bought it. The belts were actually locked on the pulleys when I bought the car. The car had sat in that same spot for 20+ years
15k on the odometer. I believe that mileage to be true.. based on the condition of the internals of the engine when that was rebuilt last fall. (Matching serial number.)
The pump casting marking is a 6, guessing this is the an earlier casting revision to what is shown on the 428cj site.
Attached are a couple photos for you to understand why I asked the question.
Engine tag, couple more photos of the pump.
I think "8G10" is July 10, 1968
Was you car built after that date?
Since the engine tag is dated for the same month as the water pump would be interested in other casting and production dates of the other parts of the engine though many of the cast items I would predict will be prior to July
Tag does appear to be the original
Agree that the real completion date at NJ would be of help to the discussion
They made water pumps in large batches because they were not specific to the 428CJ - that same pump could have come on any 360 pickup, 390 Galaxie / Mustang / Comet / Fairlane / Marauder etc. I would look at the stamped build date of the engine (not the car) and the logistics of it being ready for installation on the engine at DEP on the same day it was cast.
Thanks Royce..
Dump question.
- Where would I find the stamped build date on the engine?
I think I know where to look...
Guidance would be greatly appreciated.
Fran
This is one of mine. It's the boss located just forward of where the transmission is attached on the driver side. This car was assembled (actual date) May 13, 1968. Engine assembly was dated 8E3 so about 10 days before the car's build date.
Quote from: Royce Peterson on October 11, 2021, 07:10:10 PM
This is one of mine. It's the boss located just forward of where the transmission is attached on the driver side. This car was assembled (actual date) May 13, 1968. Engine assembly was dated 8E3 so about 10 days before the car's build date.
I wanted to add that if you the OP didn't find the metal stamp on the rear boss because another location that is used is in the same location but in the front of the block (above oil filter adapter) is also used as a engine assembly build date stamp location.
Thank you!
I was able to locate stamp marks on the motor as advised (drivers side back tab location).
I believe the stamping is "23" possibly. There looks like another marking or markings before that, but I can't quite pick that out.
I could use some help on your thoughts about that, as I really don't know what to expect.
The build date for the car as per the build sheet is 29 U (see photo of build sheet)
Quote from: Craner on October 12, 2021, 02:27:45 PM
The build date for the car as per the build sheet is 29 U (see photo of build sheet)
That is not the real build date of your car. Just an estimate/guess made by an employee possibly months earlier. Just like the date that you will find on a door/warranty tag on the drivers door. You would have to get the real date (and you should IMHO) from Kevin Marti by purchasing one of his reports that will include that info and much more
+1 on the Marti.
Looks like 8 _ _ 23 __
So not very decisive since the month is illegible.
Quote from: Craner on October 12, 2021, 02:27:45 PM
Thank you!
I was able to locate stamp marks on the motor as advised (drivers side back tab location).
I believe the stamping is "23" possibly. There looks like another marking or markings before that, but I can't quite pick that out.
I could use some help on your thoughts about that, as I really don't know what to expect.
The build date for the car as per the build sheet is 29 U (see photo of build sheet)
Royce,
Makes sense.. thank you for your experienced eye and comment.
so my best guess..
- based on the motor tag date of July (small aluminum tag, yes it's original) & my limited understanding that motors would be built a week or two before the car is actually built, the motor build date would be July 23rd.
I will contact Kevin Marti (Report) for the actual NJ build date of the car, and see what he has on this car.
I do have a copy of the IBM punch card for this car build, and a copy of a hand written shipping ledger.
I also have all the documents that Lois Eminger provided years ago.
God bless her for keeping all those documents safe long before people tracked these cars to this level.
Fran
Since the car was assembled at Metuchen, and the engine assembled at Dearborn Engine Plant, the assembly date on the block would likely be at least a month prior to the car's assembly date. Engines and other parts were shipped by rail to New Jersey where they had to be unloaded and staged before the car could be assembled.
Quote from: Craner on October 12, 2021, 08:55:40 PM
Royce,
Makes sense.. thank you for your experienced eye and comment.
so my best guess..
- based on the motor tag date of July (small aluminum tag, yes it's original) & my limited understanding that motors would be built a week or two before the car is actually built, the motor build date would be July 23rd.
I will contact Kevin Marti (Report) for the actual NJ build date of the car, and see what he has on this car.
I do have a copy of the IBM punch card for this car build, and a copy of a hand written shipping ledger.
I also have all the documents that Lois Eminger provided years ago.
God bless her for keeping all those documents safe long before people tracked these cars to this level.
Fran
The time between when the block was cast and the scheduled build date of the car could be as short as a week. The average length was longer, but it depends on your specific set of dates.
At some periods during production the times were extended. There are no hard fast guidelines
Block assembly date isnt a clear stamp and water pump and bypass hose looks to be original blue paint and reman or nos water pumps were bare steel when installed so they would have to be painted before or after being installed and if the fan snout had any blue paint as that are was kept bare to install fan bolt holes to not have any paint in that area and all hardware would be blue paint also. One way of knowing if the pump was replaced is seeing how the 4 bolts were installed as most people dont notice the rh bottom bolt is short without lockwasher (wet application) as that bolt screws into block wall coolant and thats why it dont have a split lockwasher to keep water from seeping out the split washer. This is a FE thing and many people installed all 4 split lock washer bolts thinking they should all be the same and the old AMK kits came with all 4 bolts the same till i corrected him on that but problem is there should be installation instructions explaining this so people understand. So craner did u document where or how these 4 bolts were installed before removal as the lockwashers will leave a witness mark when torqued down?
I did take photos of the motor when I first pulled the engine ,and then again when I took the motor to the machine shop for the rebuild last fall. I have all of the water pump bolts that I removed in zip locked bag and labeled. I'll also look for witness marks on the pump ( the pump is uncleaned other that what I did to see the casting # & dates.
I'll need a few days before I can respond back.
Thank you.
- I love the wealth of knowledge from everyone on this forum.
It just amazes me ..
Fran
I have a few photos to share.
Engine casting date codes and bolts that where used to fasten the water pump(this is a photo right after the water pump plus a few other items were removed). I know for sure that I put the hardware back in the locations where they were originally installed. (I believe I have complete engine photos before any tear down too. )
It is interesting that 1 of the water pump fastening bolts was different and didn't have a washer.
Thank you for any feedback.
Fran
It is not too much of a stretch to think that upon replacement the same water pump fasteners were used in the same locations. We are only talking about 4 bolts after all. Of course there is a possibility that it was not changed but given the evidence or lack of and others first hand study of similar engines what is more likely ? The water pump was replaced like so many have or it is a one of few or none anomaly? Occam's razor basically says "The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations ". I think it will be difficult to convince most knowledgeable Ford enthusiasts of the possible anomaly. At the end of the day it is your car so do what you think is right for you. Best of luck regardless.
Disagree completely. No way a 428 from DEP could be assembled and shipped to Metuchen and installed in a week.
Quote from: Tired Sheep on October 13, 2021, 09:34:07 AM
The time between when the block was cast and the scheduled build date of the car could be as short as a week. The average length was longer, but it depends on your specific set of dates.
At some periods during production the times were extended. There are no hard fast guidelines
Quote from: Royce Peterson on October 18, 2021, 09:50:22 PM
Disagree completely. No way a 428 from DEP could be assembled and shipped to Metuchen and installed in a week.
Oh there be a way. Many documented case show otherwise. I have one example of Jan 6 head casting dates, Jan 10 engine assembly and Jan 17 metuchen build date. And yes head has VIN stamp
Replacement engine.
Quote from: TLea on October 20, 2021, 08:20:07 PM
Quote from: Royce Peterson on October 18, 2021, 09:50:22 PM
Disagree completely. No way a 428 from DEP could be assembled and shipped to Metuchen and installed in a week.
Oh there be a way. Many documented case show otherwise. I have one example of Jan 6 head casting dates, Jan 10 engine assembly and Jan 17 metuchen build date. And yes head has VIN stamp
Quote from: Royce Peterson on October 20, 2021, 09:04:55 PM
Replacement engine.
Uh huh sure. Nice try You may want to go back and reread the post about the heads that had the VIN stamped in them. Pretty sure they weren't doing that on replacement engines