Engine assembly date

tractionbar · January 15, 2009 at 2:48 PM

When was the engine assembly date stamped on the front of the engine with the inspector letter? Was this done in Dearborn or when the car was headed down the assembly line? Thanks for the help! TRACTIONBAR

Edited by - tractionbar on 01/21/2009 18:12:11

CharlesTurner · January 15, 2009 at 3:27 PM

I've always thought it was either the date the block was machined or the date the engine was assembled.

tractionbar · January 15, 2009 at 3:54 PM

Does this mean all engines that left Dearborn were complete and had a assembly date stamp?

J_Speegle_old · January 15, 2009 at 11:24 PM

Ford documents suggest the date and initial represented the date and person who assembled the engine.

These would have been placed on the block as the engine plant. Engines were shipped to the plant as pretty complete assembles

You can often find a date on the oil pan flange that is suppose to indicate the date the block was machined.

[Blocked Image: http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/firetrainer/engines.jpg]

Murf_old · January 15, 2009 at 11:56 PM

It is interesting that in this photo the engines seem to be without exhaust manifolds. Also the oil filters seem to be full sized and have some kind of a sticker or mark on the,, but naybe that something else. Difficult to really see details. Great picture! Any date give when this was taken? Thanks for posting this, Jeff!

SixT5HiPo · January 16, 2009 at 12:19 AM

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

Does this mean all engines that left Dearborn were complete and had a assembly date stamp?

The 289 engines didn't leave Dearborn at all. Rather, they left the Cleveland Engine Plant, assembled. They arrived at Dearborn, or the other appropriate Ford assembly plants throughout the USA, to be installed in cars, including Mustangs.

round2K_old · January 16, 2009 at 12:49 AM

Great photo Jeff! Thanks for posting it.

67KBob_old · January 16, 2009 at 2:49 AM

<img src=images/icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle> What a pic!...Illusions of Manhattan at 5000ft first came to mind...then reality...and a big WOW!

67KBob_old · January 16, 2009 at 3:03 AM

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

<img src=images/icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle> What a pic!...Illusions of Manhattan at 5000ft first came to mind...then reality...and a big WOW!

BTW...the same block assembly date was stamped on the machined oil pan rail surface near the oil pump on my 67K...though in much smaller size.

RalphJr · January 16, 2009 at 10:31 AM

AWESOME PICTURE!

Rohan_old · January 16, 2009 at 2:51 PM

Jeff, the information you have just amazes me!

J_Speegle_old · January 16, 2009 at 6:11 PM

Though that picture would get you all going.

A few things - First - can not be certain when article that the picture came from, was taken. Looking closely at the picture the engines are painted a different color when compare to the balancers so it's likely during 66 production

The article does not say where the picture was taken because of the subject of the article it could be a a number of places.

The tag on the oil filter is the paper engine ID tag that we have seen also on the water pump or the coil and mounting bracket on other cars/years

The engines do not appear to be the typical production engines (though I knew the picture would be a tease) as they are equipped with 4 barrel carbs, steel intakes, chrome valve covers, narrow balancers and some or all have a tach drive dist.

Some additional details include - the carbs are bagged, fuel pump mounting point is blocked off, thermostat and water pump hose attachment points are bare metal (as expected) and the exhaust ports are tape off with a single long piece of tape. Guess this would allow the plant to place the correct, for the application, manifold at the plant

Though these do not appear to be typical they do give us a little insight IMHO into some of the practices of the time

Edited by - J_Speegle on 01/16/2009 18:15:08

kar-nut_old · January 16, 2009 at 7:06 PM

They look like they may possibly be marine engines.

J_Speegle_old · January 16, 2009 at 10:59 PM

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

They look like they may possibly be marine engines.

Interesting - what would lead you to that?

This was part of a Holman and Moody article in the mid 60's - from one of the off brand magazines of the time

Participate now!