Topic: '67 & '68 289 power steering hose routing and rear pump brackets - differences

[J_Speegle]

The thread is becoming a good example of why we try not to get off thread and into other years and models 

Don't even see a way to split the 68 comments out at this point but maybe I'll see if I can .

Just saying

[67gtasanjose]

The thread is becoming a good example of why we try not to get off thread and into other years and models 

Don't even see a way to split the 68 comments out at this point but maybe I'll see if I can .

Just saying

I think it has been helpful (educational) to see and recognize some of the differences in the parts used for these two years on ONLY the small blocks. Certain aspects like this are not very clear when you look at the two years (67-68). These two years share so many parts as the same and then they have nothing the same in other areas. Just look at the list of potential small block pressure hoses alone that can be seen for the small blocks.  SURE, it could be (split or) cleaned up and condensed a WHOLE LOT. This is just another one of the many, many issues between the 67-68 Mustangs that so many people know little to nothing about. My vote: Leave it alone or rename the thread.


Richard

[socalgt]

Here are some pics with the "infamous" bracket installed.

[mhubert89]

I think it has been helpful (educational) to see and recognize some of the differences in the parts used for these two years on ONLY the small blocks. Certain aspects like this are not very clear when you look at the two years (67-68). These two years share so many parts as the same and then they have nothing the same in other areas. Just look at the list of potential small block pressure hoses alone that can be seen for the small blocks.  SURE, it could be (split or) cleaned up and condensed a WHOLE LOT. This is just another one of the many, many issues between the 67-68 Mustangs that so many people know little to nothing about. My vote: Leave it alone or rename the thread.


Richard

+1
that help a lot of people, like a beginner like me that i was thinking all parts 67 - 68 was identical !! so you gonna have a lot of new topic with me !! lol

[67gtasanjose]

... so you gonna have a lot of new topic with me !! lol

Many topics have aready been discussed, so it is always better to do a "SEARCH" before beginning a new thread.

[socalgt]

pictures of brace(bracket)

[krelboyne]

.... and to further muddy the water, mhubert posted a picture (from my website) of what I call the alternate bracket for 1968 289/302 engines. Yes, I have found 2 different styles of the rear indexing brackets on 1968 small block engines. It will be until next week before I can get a side by side comparison picture.

[gimpystoy]

This posting comes at the perfect time for me. I'm struggling with this installation right now.
Gimpy

[67gtasanjose]

.... and to further muddy the water, mhubert posted a picture (from my website) of what I call the alternate bracket for 1968 289/302 engines. Yes, I have found 2 different styles of the rear indexing brackets on 1968 small block engines. It will be until next week before I can get a side by side comparison picture.

Great SCOTT! Now you've done it! Now it's Clear as MUD agian! Yes, WCCC had a 67 ONLY, "ALL V-8 engines" version available, answering my need and I placed an order yesterday. (fits all V8 engines for 1967, per their website)

Let me stir the mud again also: Could maybe Jeff or Mr. Gaines add any wisdom as to if the 67 ONLY small block rear bracket is the same as the big block rear bracket.   

I'll link WCCC's current catalog page here for easy referrence:

http://www2.cougarpartscatalog.com/c7az-3c511-b.html

[Bob Gaines]

Great SCOTT! Now you've done it! Now it's Clear as MUD agian! Yes, WCCC had a 67 ONLY, "ALL V-8 engines" version available, answering my need and I placed an order yesterday. (fits all V8 engines for 1967, per their website)

Let me stir the mud again also: Could maybe Jeff or Mr. Gaines add any wisdom as to if the 67 ONLY small block rear bracket is the same as the big block rear bracket.   

I'll link WCCC's current catalog page here for easy referrence:

http://www2.cougarpartscatalog.com/c7az-3c511-b.html

67 SB+BB same same.

[J_Speegle]

.... and to further muddy the water, mhubert posted a picture (from my website) of what I call the alternate bracket for 1968 289/302 engines. Yes, I have found 2 different styles of the rear indexing brackets on 1968 small block engines. .....

Since we're chasing this rabbit - could the "alternate" bracket be a plant specific thing? Seeing that it appears that engines were not shipped with PS engine parts attached they would have been added at the car plants, making it which bracket or supplier to use based on that supply. Reason for this comment is that I'm not seeing the "67" style on 68's out of San Jose in my collection.

Just a possibility I wanted to throw out there.

[krelboyne]

Since we're chasing this rabbit - could the "alternate" bracket be a plant specific thing? Seeing that it appears that engines were not shipped with PS engine parts attached they would have been added at the car plants, making it which bracket or supplier to use based on that supply. Reason for this comment is that I'm not seeing the "67" style on 68's out of San Jose in my collection.

Just a possibility I wanted to throw out there.

That is the path that I am going to explore. Most of the 1968 cars (Cougars) coming through my wrecking yard are from San Jose, very few Dearborn in 1968. I will form some thoughts and start a fresh thread.

[tim_morrison82]

The thread is becoming a good example of why we try not to get off thread and into other years and models 

Don't even see a way to split the 68 comments out at this point but maybe I'll see if I can .

Just saying

I think these sorts of things could be split out as a document rather than cutting the thread out into 2. Maybe you can convince the guy who started the research to put something together...

[J_Speegle]

I think these sorts of things could be split out as a document rather than cutting the thread out into 2. Maybe you can convince the guy who started the research to put something together...

Once we reach some sort of conclusion or end that might be a good way to wrap this all up in an easier to read format. Might take the group to get there but should not be a big task once we collect as much as possible

[WT8095]

I'll link WCCC's current catalog page here for easy referrence:

http://www2.cougarpartscatalog.com/c7az-3c511-b.html

Your post led me to something I hadn't noticed before: the illustration section of the '75 MPC shows 3C511 as the basic P/N for three different brackets! For 8 cyl cars it shows the front adjuster and the hose bracket with that number, and for 6 cyl there is another cast bracket that bolts to the engine (not the swinging one the pump is attached to) that shows the same number! Per the text portion of the MPC, the basic part numbers are as follows:

3C510 - hose bracket. I've not seen any with numbers marked.
3C511 - front, stamped. Does not always have a P/N marked. (The photo shown from Mustangtek is from a '70, just to illustrate which bracket I'm referring to).
3A732 - rear, cast. Part number cast into front surface.

I only bring this up because the WCCC link you provided lists the wrong basic P/N for the bracket. It should be 3C510.

----- UNLESS -----

Did the front bracket and the hose bracket really share the same basic P/N in '67-'68? Did the "3C5xx" numbers come later, for service part usage?

My October 1968 Master Cross Reference List does not have any entries for "3C510" or "3C511". It also does not list "3A732", which clearly existed as that number is actually marked on assembly line parts. The MCRL states: "This is a numerical listing of all items assigned Parts and Accessories Part Numbers from April 1, 1966 to date." So it doesn't prove that "3C510", "3C511" and "3A732" were not in use as engineering numbers, it only indicates that no service part numbers had been assigned for those basics between April 1 of 1966 and October of 1968. (Prior to April 1, 1966 woud be in an earier volume, which I do not have)

Sorry for the diversion, this does not help sort out actual bracket usage. I'm just curious if the illustration is an "oops" or if there is more to the story regarding the part numbers. Any clarification would be appreciated.