ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1964 1/2 - 1965 => Topic started by: Pete Bush on October 06, 2012, 10:51:34 AM
-
I picked up a couple of good used original power steering hoses recently 3A714 and 3A717, and I have a number of questions:
1. One of the hoses is marked C3DA 3A714-A instead of C3DZ 3A714-A. I was told that the "A" in the prefix denotes a factory original part, and a "Z" denotes a service replacement. Is this correct?
2. Following the part number on the 3A714 hose is 281 6, and on the 3A717 hose is 028 7. What is the significance of these other numbers?
3. The rubber hose appears to be ribbed with a white stripe down one side and writing down the other 4749A SAE J191. Supposedly Scott Drake makes "exact reproductions" of these hoses. Do they, or anyone else, duplicate these rubber hose features?
4. Comparing the crimped fittings on either end to pictures of the repops, it appears that they have attempted to duplicate the crimp markings, but the proportion of crimp to smooth fitting looks different than the pair I have.
5. It looks like these part numbers would work for 1965 6 and 8 cylinder cars, and 1966 8 cylinders. But for my 1966 Sprint it looks like each hose is 1/2" longer at 9-1/2" and 10" respectively. Center links look like the same part number for 1965 and 1966 6 cylinders. The power steering cylinder looks the same. And the valve looks like the same part number, too. Why the difference in the hoses then?
-
In addition to the 1/2" difference in length of the two hoses attached is a picture of the difference in the way the ends bend.
3A714 on the left and 3A717 on the right.
-
You are correct, the 4th digit 'A' denotes a Factory Part, and 4th Digit 'Z' denotes a Service Replacement.
I believe the numbers after the Engineering number, ie. 281 6 and 028 7 are Date Codes, but not absolutely positive. I'm sure someone else will chime in with more info.
-
I picked up a couple of good used original power steering hoses recently 3A714 and 3A717, and I have a number of questions:
1. One of the hoses is marked C3DA 3A714-A instead of C3DZ 3A714-A. I was told that the "A" in the prefix denotes a factory original part, and a "Z" denotes a service replacement. Is this correct?
I use to work at a Ford dealer in the parts dept, the C3DA-3A714-A number is the engineering number
which is usually stamped or cast into the part. The C3DZ-3A714-A is the part number used by the dealer
to order the part from Ford and the number they use to sell it. It doesn't mean that it is a "service replacement"
or a different design than the original it's just the number that is used in the retail market.
-
Yep, I agree. I should have phrased my answer better.
The 4th digit Z denotes a 'Ford Master Part Number' which will be found on Service Replacement Part Packaging or sometimes stamped on a Service Part itself(usually in Ink). If for some reason you come across a part with an Actual Stamped Number with 4th digit 'Z' then it will be a Service Part, not an Assembly Line Part.
-
Yep, I agree. I should have phrased my answer better.
The 4th digit Z denotes a 'Ford Master Part Number' which will be found on Service Replacement Part Packaging or sometimes stamped on a Service Part itself(usually in Ink). If for some reason you come across a part with an Actual Stamped Number with 4th digit 'Z' then it will be a Service Part, not an Assembly Line Part.
I think our definition of "service replacement" part is different. When I worked in the Ford dealer parts
dept we would refer to a service replacement part as one that was different from what was originally
designed for the car like in the case of a service replacement part that was improved due to a design
flaw on assembly line parts. We sold "service parts" over the counter.
The part number that we would use to order and sell the part by which had a Z in the fourth digit was either
on the outside of the box or was on a label or ink stamped/painted on, not cast into it.
-
I think our definition of "service replacement" part is different. When I worked in the Ford dealer parts
dept we would refer to a service replacement part as one that was different from what was originally
designed for the car like in the case of a service replacement part that was improved due to a design
flaw on assembly line parts. We sold "service parts" over the counter.
The part number that we would use to order and sell the part by which had a Z in the fourth digit was either
on the outside of the box or was on a label or ink stamped/painted on, not cast into it.
Actually, it sounds like we are thinking along the same lines. A 'Service Part' is a part that was sold over the counter at a Ford Dealership, and it is a 'Replacement'. . It was not always a 'New and Improved' Part. I didn't mention service numbers being 'Cast In' I said they were usually on the label or ink stamped on the part itself. Basically anything that is 'NOS' whether redesigned or same as factory design is called a 'Service Part' and the Ford packaging will be labeled 'Ford Service Parts'. Whether you use the term 'Service Replacement Part' or just 'Service Part' they were over the counter Ford Parts, Not Factory Installed.
-
Is it "normal" then to see these numbers stamped into the fitting?
-
Is it "normal" then to see these numbers stamped into the fitting?
Generally the engineering numbers were stamped onto the crimp
on the hose, but there is always an exception to the rule.
Some aftermarket (repro) parts copy and stamp the "service part" part number
on the part such as C5ZZ but on a power steering hose Ford would have
used a label with the service part number.
-
In general, a service part number is an inventory number. It represents a part on a dealer's shelf; it has an associated price; it has a minimum and maximum stocking quantity; it should have a where used list; it is a cross-reference part number; it contains a source part number for re-supply. It's that last part that gets you what you need, not necessarily what you want, Ford maintained service part to keep cars running, not concours correct. The service part number, if it was propperly used, should list all the engineering part numbers it replaces. To further complicate the process, waivers may have been granted by Ford as to part marking (a label vs an indented stamp), tolerances, color, materials, manufacturing procedures (read government mandated "improvements"), packaging, substitutions, etc.
As to the part number itself, I cannot think of any instance where a part is permantly (not inked stamped) marked with a "Z" in the fourth position, (C5ZZ-xxxx-x), and is considered NOS, service or a factory part (or assembly). If you do find a permantly marked part with a "Z" in the fourth position, avoid it if possible. The part is a (poor) reproduction.
Jim
-
I too worked at a Ford dealership in the parts department... this was back in the early '80s. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you would EVER find a Z in the forth position in a number CAST into a part. You found the Z on the box or on a sticker on the part, but I don't think it was ever cast into a part.
-
I too worked at a Ford dealership in the parts department... this was back in the early '80s. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you would EVER find a Z in the forth position in a number CAST into a part. You found the Z on the box or on a sticker on the part, but I don't think it was ever cast into a part.
In my time working in the Ford parts dept I too never saw the fourth digit "Z" cast into a part it
was always as you mentioned either on a label, ink stamped or on the outside of the box.
-
Let me see if I understand what everyone is saying here:
A stamping on the crimped end of the hose is "normal".
The "A" in the fourth position is correct, but a "Z" is not - because "Z" parts were never stamped.
I'm looking at these two hoses, side by side, and the hoses, crimp sleeves, tubing and nuts have the same features. The patina of the metal is the same and the rubber hose is identical. There is no indication of tampering with a pre-existing stamp; the coloring and surface around the "Z" is the same as the rest of the metal.
The stamping is preceded by an "X" type of logo on both. And the font and size of the characters are identical. They both look like they came from the same supplier.
If the "Z" part was stamped at some time in the recent past and not 49 years ago when the "A" part was stamped, then they did one helluva job counterfeiting the stamp! :o
-
Pete, Your C3DZ Hose is a Ford Service Part. The number is 'Stamped', not 'Cast' into the hose end. It wasn't necessarily manufactured 49 years ago, but it is probably still old, and it is the Correct Ford Replacement Part. I can't say I have ever seen any parts with a 'Cast In' 4th digit Z, but I have seen some parts with a 'Stamped' 4th digit Z. Your hose is a good example. This thread might have become confusing because of the terminology that has been used. Ford Service Parts 'Typically' would have a label or an ink-paint stamp with the Ford Master Part Number which is what I have been trying to say, it is more usual to be that way instead of the stamping that is on your hose. It is Not very typical to have the 4th digit Z permanently numbered onto the part, but your hose is a good indicator that it did happen once in a while, at least. I hope the answers above have at least helped you a little in resolving your questions.
As far as the difference between the 3A714 and 3A717 hoses, they are different because they both have a specific way that they mount. 3A714 runs from a specific port in the Control Valve to a Specific Port in the Slave Cylinder and same with the 3A717, they have different angles on the ends and different lengths to fit correctly to their specific ports.
-
Thanks. But your opinion directly contradicts Jim's. Which kinda adds to my confusion. It'd be nice to have some sort of consensus to go by :(
My first step is to determine the legitimacy of the parts. For that I need the opinions of others with more expert knowledge.
The parts have a 4-digit number following the part number: 028-7 and 281-6. It doesn't look like a date code format that I'm familiar with. Do you have any suggestions on what the significance of the numbers might be?
-
I may have a few original hoses here that I'll take
a look at to see how they are stamped.
-
The MPC says that '66 hoses were 1/2" longer than '65 hoses on 6-cylinder cars. I believe that Ford was seeing failures and increased the length to reduce some of the stress. I have an idea why these hoses are different lengths for 1966 6-cylinders:
I found a reference that talked about the length of aftermarket hoses and the relationship of rubber to metal tubing. It seems that if the rubber portion is too short and it is forced into a helical steering movement it puts more stress on the rubber and crimp connection; possibly causing premature failure.
Here's my reasoning:
6-cylinder cars had a slightly smaller front wheel track than 8-cylinders, 55.4" to 56" respectively. Also when the inside wheel was turned to 20 degrees the outside wheel of a power steering 6-cylinder was at a sharper 20-1/8 degrees, while the 8-cylinder was at 18-3/4 degrees. I don't believe the turning radius of both models were the reported 38.90 feet. The 6-cylinder likely had a sharper turning radius given the above specifications, and Ford realized they had to lengthen the hose for the '66 model year to adjust for the stress being put on these hoses by the tighter turning radius.
Thoughts?
-
Interesting information!
I'm sure of course you know that the power steering control valve,
centerlink etc is much different on a 6 cyl car compared to a V8 version
for 65/66 so since it's a different design might be hard to compare?
I have a couple of 6 cyl power steering linkage assy's that I'll look at
and check the hoses for the different lengths, didn't realize that
they are different.
-
I'm sure of course you know that the power steering control valve,
centerlink etc is much different on a 6 cyl car compared to a V8 version
for 65/66 so since it's a different design might be hard to compare?
Yes, but I was comparing the '65 6-cylinders to the '66 6-cylinders. While the rest of the hardware seems to be the same, the hoses are longer. Just trying to account for the modification.
-
I took a look at my 6 cyl power steering linkage assys and all
the fittings (crimp area) is about half as long as the ones you
have pictured. They were rusted that I wasn't able to find a
part number on them but I feel they are the originals.
Maybe the ones you have are a newer version than what
was used at the factory originally.
-
I don't know if you're in a position to measure yours, but the crimp sleeve on my pair measure about 1-19/32". Maybe a different supplier?
-
I took a look at my 6 cyl power steering linkage assys and all the fittings (crimp area) is about half as long as the ones you have pictured.
One of the reasons I listed was "manufacturing procedures (read government mandated "improvements")" which in this case is the longer fillings on newer hose assemblies. The same "government mandate" applies to brake hoses.
Jim
-
In my first post I mentioned that the Scott Drake repop's of these hoses had crimp fittings that were shorter, but otherwise had the same tooling. I haven't been able to decipher the additional 4 digits in the stamping to understand whether it represents a date code.
Jim, do you have a date when the "government mandated changes" were implemented?
What about the rubber hose itself? Is it ribbed or smooth?
-
- do you have a date when the "government mandated changes" were implemented?
All I remember is that the requirement was to double crimp the hose to the fitting. I don't know when it became manditory but I think in the late 60's or early 70's. If you use the search feature here and enter "rear brake hose" you will get hints about the crimping.
Jim
-
I don't know if you're in a position to measure yours, but the crimp sleeve on my pair measure about 1-19/32". Maybe a different supplier?
The crimp sleeve on mine measures 29/32" with a single crimp that is 1/8" wide,
doesn't seem like much so I can sure see the reason for the change.
-
The Double Crimped Ends were instituted in 1970, IIRC
-
I've been making some progress with my research that I though I would share:
Attached is a picture of an original 1966 Dearborn 6-cylinder power steering rack I purchased recently.
Second is a picture comparison of three power steering hoses. The hose on the left is the original C5DZ 3A717-A hose from the above rack. It's single crimped and the rubber is smooth except for three ribs that run its length. This hose appears to be the same as one pictured that Steve sent me.
The hose in the middle is a NOS C5DZ 3A717-A hose I bought yesterday. It is the same as the original hose, except the rubber is ribbed completely around its circumference. And along with the paper wrapper around its middle identifying the part number, the part number is also stamped in very small characters about 1/16" high on the bottom fitting.
The hose on the right is the C3DZ 3A717-A I described earlier in this thread. I believe it to be a used NOS replacement. I'd like you to compare it to the Scott Drake replacements in the next picture. The fittings appear to be the same. And despite the size, the crimp is a single crimp.
The last picture is one of aftermarket hoses with double crimps.
-
Pete,
Great information, looks like the NOS C5DZ hose is a close match,
I'll have to keep an eye out for some myself.
For those that will use them the newer style hoses with the longer
crimp area may have a problem fitting well since it's not flexible in
that area compared to the original.
-
Steve,
There's a difference in the overall length of the hoses, too - with the C5DZ being longer than the C3DZ by about 1 inch. Really happy with the NOS find. I got a NOS pump to control valve pressure hose, too. And it looks exactly like the original.
Did you notice the paint markings on the center link?
-
Did you notice the paint markings on the center link?
Might be wrecking yard marks sometimes mistaken for factory ;)
-
Steve,
There's a difference in the overall length of the hoses, too - with the C5DZ being longer than the C3DZ by about 1 inch. Really happy with the NOS find. I got a NOS pump to control valve pressure hose, too. And it looks exactly like the original.
Did you notice the paint markings on the center link?
Pete,
Yes I did notice the paint markings, have seen the same thing on a clean centerlink
from a southern car that I had a while back, I would say they are factory markings
and not from a wrecking yard.
-
Pete,
Yes I did notice the paint markings, have seen the same thing on a clean centerlink
from a southern car that I had a while back, I would say they are factory markings
and not from a wrecking yard.
Well then lefts look at it this way. From what time period are the center links? If factory markings we should be able to find others from the same time period to support the idea ;) Don't think we see yellow used until later in the 60's on this application but we'll see
While we're discussing the center link in the picture - does that center link look bent to anyone else???
-
I bought all the power steering related parts from a fellow in Michigan that was parting out a donor car. I've emailed him to find out if he can provide the build date.
Attached is a picture of the center link. It has a different part # for the 6-cylinder (C5ZZ 3304-B) than that used on the 8-cylinder (C5ZZ 3304-D). The one pictured seems to match the illustration in the MPC.
And while we're at it, I've attached a picture of the steering box I purchased out of the same donor car. It too, has paint markings.
-
Well then lefts look at it this way. From what time period are the center links? If factory markings we should be able to find others from the same time period to support the idea ;) Don't think we see yellow used until later in the 60's on this application but we'll see
While we're discussing the center link in the picture - does that center link look bent to anyone else???
Jeff, the power steering centerlink, control valve, idler arm, pitman arm, tie rod ends
are all unique to 65/66 6 cyl cars, none of it interchanges with 65/66 V8.
It is a strange animal with the bend in the centerlink and the bolt on section that threads
onto the control valve. It's rare, not many 6 cyl cars had power steering in 65/66
The one I had was marked in the same area in a similar way, don't recall what colors were
used so that may vary as has been discussed before.
-
Thanks - forgot this was a 6 cylinder thing (and mark) rather than a V8) Center link still looks mighty strange ;)
-
The TRW pump that came with the rack is dated May 11, 1966.