Topic: Part number question

[Mstang]

What’s the last letter in the part  number designate say like 5CZF-F or C5OEA-8505-B what’s the f and b designate and is there a list of the designations

[67gta289]

It is typical in the engineering environment to track versions (changes or variations), and in this case the trailing letter is used to do just that.

The attached picture "MPC change" refers to this as "change in finish, trim or design"

The actual letter has no meaning.

Some example scenarios might help:

1. During the design of a new model, let's say the final design of the package tray is complete.  The first four characters represent the model year, vehicle the part is designed for (which might cross over to other vehicle lines), and the department responsible for the design.  In the case of service it is typical to change the department is "Z".  The next group of letters and numbers is the basic part number.  The suffix represents the "change in finish, trim, or design".  Refer to picture MPC 1.  In this case we have the same package tray in multiple colors.  Each color was assigned a unique suffix. 

2.  During the model year, a problem was uncovered that is resolved by a revision (change) to a part.  Refer to picture MPC 2. In this case the part is changed, and the suffix is indexed.  In this particular example you will notice that only revisions A and D are listed for service.  Makes me wonder about revisions B and C.  Just for fun, speculating what might have occurred, here is one potential scenario.  Revision A was found to be a problem early in the model year.  The problem identification and resolution, including part revision, was in place by mid November.  Let's say that revision B was issued.  After a bit of time, perhaps someone figured out a way to reduce cost of revision B, since it was rushed, and revision C was issued.  Then later on it was found that revision C caused an unforeseen problem, and revision D was the eventual winner.   Now the change from revision A to B might have involved other components, so from a service perspective they still need to make revision A available.  But the B to C to D changes were only to the one part, so they did not need to service B and C.  Again that is total speculation, but based on 33 years of engineering experience.

3. This time you are responsible for a design change of a part for a new model year.  Refer to MPC 3. In this case, the second character in the prefix is changed from a 4 to a 5.  Because that makes the overall part number unique, there is no reason to change the trailing version letter.

Hopefully this helps.

The short answer is that it represents what Ford said: "change in finish, trim or design"
 

[Mstang]

John thanks, had to go through that a couple of times, how do you find out when the reversions took place, my 65 a code automatic  5F07A794906 with a build date of July 19 has three carb numbers a C5ZF-D , C5ZF-F, and C5ZF-K does the date the reversion took place dictate what carb would belong to this engine since there’s three different numbers or does something else decide that thanks gary

[J_Speegle]

John thanks, had to go through that a couple of times, how do you find out when the reversions took place, my 65 a code automatic  5F07A794906 with a build date of July 19 has three carb numbers a C5ZF-D , C5ZF-F, and C5ZF-K does the date the reversion took place dictate what carb would belong to this engine since there’s three different numbers or does something else decide that thanks gary

Documented date coding from specific cars can help with that also or more correctly those carb dates compared to engine build date

[jwc66k]

. . my 65 a code automatic  5F07A794906 with a build date of July 19 has three carb numbers a C5ZF-D , C5ZF-F, and C5ZF-K . .

Gary,
What source are you using for those part numbers? C5ZF-K is a road draft tube type, possibly DSO dependent.
According to the 60-68 Ford Car Parts (aka MPC), SEC 95.12, page 2, col G, C5ZF-D, -F, -K & -M used booster CF (C5ZZ-9A523-A) from 4/21/65. That's the only date I could find that seemed close. There are other differences but that is in repair parts for the choke, etc. If the carburetors are accessible, what are the casting numbers on the underside, the mounting surface to the spacer? It may be that Ford had two different castings and were using them interchangeably.
Jim

[196667Bob]

Gary : Before getting too deep in your discussion, there is a semantic issue you need to address. In John's excellent explanation of suffix letters, you apparently read his wording incorrectly. In his discussion, he talked about "revisions", or changes, not "reversions", or going back to something previous as you have noted.

That being "out of the way" now, I, like Jim, have a question as to what your source was for the identification numbers. I have looked at the "1965 only" MPC, the "1960-68" MPC, and the "1968-72" MPC, and found the following "C5ZF"carburetor identification numbers specified for 1965 A code Mustangs ;

1) 1965 Only - C5ZF-C & D

2) 1960-68 - C5ZF-C, D, E, F, J, K, L, & M

3) 1965-72 - C5ZF-C, D, E, F, J, K, L, & M.

Since the 1965 Only MPC was printed January 1965, it is possible, and in this case highly probable, that additional revisions took place prior to your build date, Unfortunately, it is not known exactly when the "E, F, J, K, L, & M" revisions actually occurred. This is why it is always bes5t to use a source closest to your build date, and that includes the time frame when your car was built. In this specific case, it appears that no additional revisions to the carburetors were made btween the printing of the 1960-68 MPC (1968), and the printing of the 1965-91 MPC (May 1975), but this is not usually the case.

Bob

[Mstang]

Bob good catch, definitely not the same word, as far as those numbers I just received the Mannel book and got those numbers on page C-5, now I’m looking at this again and it says ID number is that the same as part numbers question, you refer to Mpc is that a book or Manuel that can be obtained, I’ve had gm cars forever and this is my first ford and I really love this car, it’s going to take awhile to learn the car and ford system but I’ll make this car happen, thanks for your help gary

[carlite65]

MPC   master parts catalog. a search on this site will reveal lots more info. can be downloaded from here.   
 
 https://www.squarebirds.org/Manuals/1965/1965-72FordPartsTextCatalog/

[196667Bob]

Gary : To answer your question briefly, no, ID numbers are not the same as Part Numbers. I am currently working on a Ford documented thread for the existing Topic of "Part versus Engineering Number Discussion" in this Section. In the meantime, some quick definitions ; an "Engineering Number" is the number assigned to a part when it is first designed ; a "Part Number" is really a "Service Part Number" which you would ask for at the Parts Counter of a Dealership (this is usually also printed on the packaging of the Part) ; and finally, an "Identification Number" is a number that is either stamped on, cast into, ink stamped on, or tagged on the actual Part itself.Many times, although not always, the Engineering Numbers are used as Identification Numbers. Unless specified as otherwise, when people use the term "Part Number", they are referring to "Service Part Number". This is the number you would usually look for on packaging at a Swap Meet, or online.

As far as the MPC's, for most parts, only the Service Part Numbers are shown. Carburetors are one of the exceptions, where both the Service Part Number and Identification Numbers ate both shown. There are others, but generally, the Identification Numbers are not listed. I have attached a few copies from the 1960-68 MPC Carburetor Section including a page that includes your car for your information. Note that it shows 8 different Carburetors applicable to your car. This tells me that Bob Mannel had access to some "in between" source that shows revisions other than those noted in the 1960-68 MPC. Just as information, the 1965 Only MPC only shows "C5ZF-C, D, E and F.

As far as availability of MPC's, yes, as carlite65 noted, the 1965-72 MPC is available as a "free" download. However, as I noted before, your best bet is to get an MPC that was printed as close to, and including, your car's build date. The problem with the 1965-72 MPC is that it was printed in 1975 ; that is 10 years after your car was built. By then, many of the original 1965 specific parts had been either obsoleted, or replaced by newer parts that "would serve the same function". Also as I noted before, the "1965 Only" MPC" is nice (at least for me) to have,being printed in January of 1965, it would not include any revisions between then and your build date. Thus, if I were you, I would purchase the 1960-68 MPC (printed in 1967 and 1968) in order to get the most accurate listing of parts available at the time for your car. This is available for about $30 as I remember.

Hope this helps.

Bob

[jwc66k]

A couple of points to consider:

I would purchase the 1960-98 MPC (printed in 1967 and 1968) in order to get the most accurate listing of parts available at the time for your car. This is available for about $30 as I remember.

This "copy" of Ford Car Parts (aka MPC) is available on e-bay (as a data disc, Adobe .pdf format). (Correct the years to 60-68) The e-bay listing say "three downloads included". That's not entirely true, you get only one - but an "inquiry" to the seller will get you satisfaction. What I've found in this edition is that it does not really address 68 part completely. The data is more accurate for 64-67 Mustangs. The "free" 75 edition is better for 68 thru 72 Mustangs. (Both are useful for other Ford lines, except trucks.)

As far as the MPC's, for most parts, only the Service Part Numbers are shown.

Again, not always true nor false. Exceptions abound. In effect, a number is a number. You need to be able to interpret the number if only to identify it's meaning. Experience and time solve that.
Bob - nice write up. I started one several years back but (thanks to Ford), it gets "complicated".
Jim


 

[196667Bob]

Jim : Thanks. Typo fixed.

I tried to not make this "written in blood" definitive by using terms like "generally", "most", "usually", etc. to account for all of the "Fordism's" that seem to appear.

And yes, like most all publications that are printed in the same year as the car that they are investigating, the 68 items are not complete. Unfortunately, this is usually the case. I have all of the individual year MPC's from 1958 through 1967, and all are printed in January of that year. Thus, as I noted about the 1965 Only MPC, anything that changed after January until the end of the Model Year, would not show up.

Bob

[jwc66k]

I tried to not make this "written in blood" definitive by using terms like "generally", "most", "usually", etc. to account for all of the "Fordism's" that seem to appear.

Remember, "exceptions are normal - always".
Jim

[Mstang]

Gentlemen, I’ve been off site for a while so l want to thank all involved in this discussion with the technical information discussed,Very informative, thanks gary