vin number on block

garymcgowan_old · December 13, 2006 at 6:22 PM

RalphJr.... Where was your K assembled and do you have a picture of your transmission VIN number? I wonder how many different places they put the VIN on the transmission and if it is possible some VIN's on the block were put in a place other than the right front?

Thanks,

Gary

Edited by - garymcgowan on 12/13/2006 18:24:03

RalphJr · December 13, 2006 at 11:01 PM

My car is a mid April 5"F"09K.

My tranny is in a crate in the basement storage - so no VIN photo right now - but I know it is there.

I've heard of 3 places on the tranny being stamped - the bottom like mine, along the "ear" bolt flanges where the tranny meets the bell housing, and the small flat area near the tailshaft - like the photograph above.

I've never heard of a Mustang K block being stamped anywhere other than the passenger side front. The early Cobra and Fairlane K's were also stamped somewhere - but with a sequentail number not a VIN - indicating which engine in the series it was. I don't know when this started or stopped - maybe the Cobra or Fairlane experts out there can help. I know it has been discussed here before.

tater_51_old · December 14, 2006 at 10:53 AM

63-64 Hipo Fairlane blocks (5 bolt) were stamped with a serialized number. The stamping is located on the protruding ear just above the clutch pivot on the block. Some of the numbers were found to be slightly out of sequence (stamp vs. assembly date) leading one to believe that the blocks may have been pulled from stock, not in any particular order, during assembly. The dates, although, are very close to the sequential numbers, which would also indicate that the blocks were probably produced in batches. I believe this numbering system was discountinued when the 6 bolt hipo block went into production. I also think that this numbering system has been found on the early cobra blocks.

round2K_old · December 14, 2006 at 11:37 AM

In addition to the VIN I have found date codes on the block in three places: in the casting of the part number, on the pan surface, and on the cylinder head deck on the left front corner. Note the casting date of 4M4 and the machining date of 4M17 B. The car has a build date of 12/30/64, the block was cast on 12/4/64 and machined on 12/17/64. I believe Bob Mannell would refer to the B as second shift.

For those of you that asked, the double roller replaced the narrow stock HiPo chain assembly when it was owned by a PO. This is a fairly common practice and requires adjustments to be made during balancing of other components.

It is important to avoid machining the deck or pan surfaces unless absolutely necessary to preserve the date codes.

[Blocked Image: http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/482/dsc3204rn0.jpg][/URL]

[Blocked Image: http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/7915/dsc3201oe9.jpg][/URL]

CharlesTurner · December 14, 2006 at 1:38 PM

That's interesting that your block was cast and built so close together. The hi-po 'vert I'm restoring had something like a 4L30 casting date and a 5A12 assembly date. Same stampings in the same locations.

round2K_old · December 14, 2006 at 3:41 PM

Would yours be a November 30 foundry date assembled January 12th? That's about five weeks after casting and mine was about two weeks after casting. I don't know that there is anything odd about either of these given the robust sales that Ford was enjoying at the time. Mannel has similar examples in his book. It is good to hear that the markings are consistent for San Jose. With the various plants involved where would the engine assembly have taken place? You have the foundry, the machining and the assembly, three different processes.

Edited by - round2K on 12/14/2006 20:52:12

pony65k · December 14, 2006 at 5:20 PM

Hi all.

I have noticed with all this VIN on the block talk that no one has mentioned cars from the Metuchen plant. I assume that this plant would also have stamped K blocks. I have been told by an expert (so called maybe) that cars from the Metuchen plant didn't have the blocks stamped with the VIN, surely this can't be right? I've had a look on the block just above the oil pan/below the alternator on the passenger side off the car and haven't found anything. There doesn't seem to be any gunk on the block. I'm praying that the number is under the paint.

Here in OZ the engine has to have a number for the car to be able to be registered. If that's the case and I don't find the VIN, I'm in series trouble.

Thoughts please.

RP

SixT5HiPo · December 14, 2006 at 5:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

With the various plants involved where would the engine assembly have taken place? You have the foundry, the machining and the assembly. Three different places, and certainly not all in San Jose.

According to a retired Cleveland engineer that I spoke to, casting, machining, assembly, and testing all happened at Cleveland...finished 289 engines were crated and shipped by rail to the assembly plants for final installation. Some completed engines were randomly pulled right off the shipping docks at Cleveland for a trip to the dyno room for quality testing. Any engines that failed were torn down for fault analysis by the engineering staff.

SixT5HiPo · December 14, 2006 at 10:38 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

I have noticed with all this VIN on the block talk that no one has mentioned cars from the Metuchen plant. I assume that this plant would also have stamped K blocks. I have been told by an expert (so called maybe) that cars from the Metuchen plant didn't have the blocks stamped with the VIN, surely this can't be right? <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

289 High Performance cars from Metuchen do indeed have VIN stamped engines, and some have the transmission stamped as well. We still don't have full evidence that every K code engine was stamped, but we do know that all three Mustang assembly plants did put VIN stamps on 289 High Performance engines and transmissions.

Rohan_old · December 15, 2006 at 3:16 AM

Hi Rene,

Worse case scenario, if you dont find a VIN on your block use the assembly date code on the front of the block as your engine number - for rego purposes.

I'm sure it would be the same in any state in Australia where main roads dept just want a set of numbers as an identifer for the block.

Rohan

Edited by - Rohan on 12/15/2006 03:21:21

pony65k · December 23, 2006 at 1:36 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

Hi Rene,

Worse case scenario, if you dont find a VIN on your block use the assembly date code on the front of the block as your engine number - for rego purposes.

I'm sure it would be the same in any state in Australia where main roads dept just want a set of numbers as an identifer for the block.

Rohan

Hi Rohan.

That worked a treat, thanks for the idea.

To all.

If you find a VIN on the transmission, doesn't it stand to reason that the engine block should also have a VIN on it? I find it hard to believe that they would stamp one, but not the other.

My 2 cents worth.

RP

Psandri_old · March 21, 2007 at 11:37 PM

Hi-

I have a '65 K fastback. But the serial number on my block (5R07K197940)does not match the serial number on the inner fender & door (5R09K142341). Also, the serial number on the fender has a "star" after it.

I'm wondering if there was a plant foul up because the chances of replacing a "K" motor with another one from the same plant seems remote. Could this be the reason for the "star"?

Also, I see the Registry does not list a vehicle for 5R07K197940.

Any theories?

Thanks.

-Phil

zray · March 22, 2007 at 12:09 PM

the star is normal. sounds like the motor was replaced at some point. Hopefully your title VIN matches the number on the fender.

Z. Ray

'66 GT-350

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

Hi-

I have a '65 K fastback. But the serial number on my block (5R07K197940)does not match the serial number on the inner fender & door (5R09K142341). Also, the serial number on the fender has a "star" after it.

I'm wondering if there was a plant foul up because the chances of replacing a "K" motor with another one from the same plant seems remote. Could this be the reason for the "star"?

Also, I see the Registry does not list a vehicle for 5R07K197940.

Any theories?

Thanks.

-Phil

Psandri_old · March 22, 2007 at 4:46 PM

Z-

Yes, the title matches the VIN. I've had the car for probably 15 years and knew it was a K-code when I bought it. But I was not aware that the engines typically had the VIN stamped on the block.

I'm wondering if "K" engines were avalaible as replacements. But based on the block stamp it seems the engine came from a donor car. That may be why 5R07K197940 does not appear in the registry.

I also did not realize the "star" after the VIN was normal.

-Phil

Participate now!