Possible Book Changes Under Investigation

    The beauty of this website is that we can continue to learn about K-Codes and in some cases, may find discrepancies between what Ford said in it's documentation and what actually hit the streets. In these rare cases, we will have to very prudent to make sure that the anomalies are in fact anomalies from the factory and not individuals. On this thread, we will post anomalies that we are currently investigating and when they are resolved, the resolution as well.

    • Did the early cars without Dual Exhaust not have the reinforcement plates in the rear frame rails?

      Under investigation


    • Did Ford use the HEH-T 4-speed Transmission beyond the published date of 10/01/64?

      Under investigation?

    <BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[*] Did Ford use the HEH-T 4-speed Transmission beyond the published date of 10/01/64?

    Under investigation?

    <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana" size=2 id=quote>


    My April the 4th, 1965 K has the HEH-T 4 speed transmission. It has the correct VIN stamped on it which matches the fender and data plate.


    Hope this is of use.


    Regards,


    René

    I think we need to identify what type of documentation or statistics you want to collect for an item so everyone can contribute.


    My mid-April K has the original HEH-T tranny - VIN stamped along the bottom - plus I have the original VIN stamped block.


    I'd be happy to document this for the book authors, but posting everything here might not be the best - from a size and security standpoint - IMHO.

    My car is similar to Ralph's. I have a 4/21/65 San Jose Koupe. It is a 76K mile car. It has the HEH-T transmission with the correct VIN stamp. My motor is VIN stamped as well, and matches the trans and fender stamps. Based on what I have seen of the rest of the drivetrain (heads, intake, rear end), I have no doubt this is the original transmission.

    My March 22nd fastback GTK has the HEH T gearbox, matching numbers on the trans, engine and inner fender.


    cheers

    Steve <img src=images/icon_smile_cool.gif border=0 align=middle>

    Marv,


    Can you please share with us the method of investigation? Are you polling the registry members to verify both issues?


    I can offer the following on both topics:


    There is no doubt about the lack of frame rail reinforcements on early cars. I personally checked 18 K codes last year at the Mustangs Plus K day, and another 8 at the MCA National in Concord, CA and can verify that there was not an early car that had the rail reinforcements. I spent months on a goose chase under my 12/30/64 car trying to find frame rail reinforcements based on the book, so I had a vested interest in getting to the bottom of the issue. The MPC clearly shows transverse dual up to 10/15/64 and Arvinode systems from 10/15/64 up until 3/22/65, both with hangers that fasten in the forward bolt holes. It is not until the introduction of the GT duals.


    My car has a VIN stamped HEH-T. I know the provenance of the car and have frequent conversations with owner #1. It is the box that came in the car.


    Edited by - round2K on 04/17/2008 22:31:28

    Marv, my Mar.27 F/B has a HEH-T trans. with the matching serial numbers stamped on the bottom and date codes matching the engine and fender stampings. All other date codes on engine parts also correspond. I also believe that this car came equiped with the arvinode system as it has two hole in the side of the frame foward of were the GT duals would mount. Also no reinforcment in the rails..

    For the newer members here, it is highly recommended to select "Show All Topics" on your browser preference for this site. This thread goes back a while, and might be missed otherwise.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login