Topic: FoMoCo P/S belt number interpretation.

[newmexicogt]

How does one decipher the FoMoCo P/S belt number in order to know its length? I am using a NAPA 25-9480 belt on my 1967 GT 390 and I know the length is 48" The catalogs indicate I should be using a C5AE-8620-L but it is way to short. Obviously it is not 62" Maybe a better question is what FoMoCo P/S belt is 48" long.

[WT8095]

How does one decipher the FoMoCo P/S belt number in order to know its length? I am using a NAPA 25-9480 belt on my 1967 GT 390 and I know the length is 48" The catalogs indicate I should be using a C5AE-8620-L but it is way to short. Obviously it is not 62" Maybe a better question is what FoMoCo P/S belt is 48" long.

There are three different PS belts for 67 390, the correct one depends on your combination of thermactor & a/c. If you know the application, the MPC lists the size. For the first one listed in my example images, you have a ps belt, service part C9PZ-BY. The size is listed as 1/2 x 44-5/8. There is also a code, JC-445. In the second pic you will see how to decode this number. It's simple - J=v-belt, C=1/2 wide, 445=44-5/8 circumference.

If you have a pn, you can look up the service part number. In the third pic, C2AE-AA is serviced by C9PZ-AE. You then scan through the first portion of the chart to find the J code equivalent for C9PZ-AE, which is JB-456. This translates to 15/32 x 45-3/4.

This is how the MPC is set up. Oc course, it was not intended for historical representation of what rolled off the assembly line. No telling if Ford made "close enough" substitutions on service part lengths. After all, is 1/8 inch really going to matter when you've got an adjustable bracket?

BTW, the NAPA belt you listed is a 48 as you stated. None of the three belts listed in the '75 MPC for a 67 Mustang 390 are 48 inches.

[J_Speegle]

The Ford belts can't be "decoded" directly like your other example. The part number just identifies a particular belt - doesn't not include (in the part number) any specifications

In belts you have length as well as width of the belt

Looking at a Aug 67 MPC I see no 48" belts used originally Closest I have is for 390 with factory PS  (With and Without AC or Thermactor) at 47 1/2" long and 19/32" wide


Marked C6OE-8620-A

Part number C6OZ-8620-A

Of course you would want a belt with an appropriate date code also



What WT8095is showing is much later part numbering codes and parts system. Replacement parts - so Napa parts might be just as correct

[WT8095]

The Ford belts can't be "decoded" directly like your other example. The part number just identifies a particular belt - doesn't not include (in the part number) any specifications

In belts you have length as well as width of the belt

Looking at a Aug 67 MPC I see no 48" belts used originally Closest I have is for 390 with factory PS  (With and Without AC or Thermactor) at 47 1/2" long and 19/32" wide


Marked C6OE-8620-A

Part number C6OZ-8620-A

Of course you would want a belt with an appropriate date code also



What WT8095is showing is much later part numbering codes and parts system. Replacement parts - so Napa parts might be just as correct

To emphasize your point about Napa being just as correct: using the '75 MPC, take C6OE-A that you found. MPC lists C9PZ-AL as a replacement (in 1975, of course). Reverse lookup C9PZ-AL = JB 480, which equals 1/2 x 48. 1/2 inch different length and even a slightly different width than the original part per your MPC. "Close enough" for a replacement part, as far as Ford was concerned. And the same length as the NAPA part number mentioned. So as far as belts are concerned, I think the MPC can lead a person to one that will function mechanically, but not help locate an assembly line pn. It sounds like the older MPCs may have somewhat better info, though. I would really like to get my hands on a '68 edition!

[rodster]

Original with a date code. 

From http://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=3092.0

From my 39,000 mile 1967 390 non-GT, no AC, Dearborn car.

Could this be an original belt and is the 466 a build date?  Where is the best place to look for a build sheet. I checked under the front seats but haven't looked under the backseat yet.

[Bob Gaines]

To emphasize your point about Napa being just as correct: using the '75 MPC, take C6OE-A that you found. MPC lists C9PZ-AL as a replacement (in 1975, of course). Reverse lookup C9PZ-AL = JB 480, which equals 1/2 x 48. 1/2 inch different length and even a slightly different width than the original part per your MPC. "Close enough" for a replacement part, as far as Ford was concerned. And the same length as the NAPA part number mentioned. So as far as belts are concerned, I think the MPC can lead a person to one that will function mechanically, but not help locate an assembly line pn. It sounds like the older MPCs may have somewhat better info, though. I would really like to get my hands on a '68 edition!

There used to be a guy who sold a 68 MPC CD version on ebay from time to time.

[Anghelrestorations]

I believe the 466 is interpreted as 4th quarter of 1966. 

I have a 1968 MPC....I could never get those CD's to work correctly on my PC or laptop. 

[outlawincorporated]

+1 to Marcus comments.

Early correct dated/stamped belts are getting hard to find now a days.

regards.

PHILL BERESFORD.
MELBOURNE.
AUSTRALIA.

[WT8095]

I have a 1968 MPC....I could never get those CD's to work correctly on my PC or laptop.

If you ever decide to sell it, I would be eager to give it a good home 

[Anghelrestorations]

Sell the MPC?  No, I use these now for research and have a few different years now.  They are impossible to find outside of the 1975 final edition.  I had to sell my left ear to get what I have today...

[WT8095]

Sell the MPC?  No, I use these now for research and have a few different years now.  They are impossible to find outside of the 1975 final edition.  I had to sell my left ear to get what I have today...

Can't blame you. I had to ask, though 

[WT8095]

One thing I'm very thankful for this Thanksgiving is that I was fortunate to obtain a partial (~66%) copy of the '60-'68 MPC! 

Here are the belt specs for '67 & '68 390s. The title of the second column is "Thermactor" - with or without. The '67 page is revised August 6'7, the '68 page revised December '67.

I really need to scan the whole MPC so I don't have to keep taking photos...