Topic: 1968 S code diff casing finish.

[mungus]

My searches haven't revealed the answer so I'm wondering if anyone knows what markings my now rather rusty differential / axle casing had from Metuchen?

My leaf springs had the correct numbers and light pink and creme daubs on them, that I've been told by Coral Snake, are correct for an S code, GT, non AC car, from Metuchen in 1968.

The mangled diff tag was still attached to the 3rd member, which is only missing the plant code, (anyone know what that would be BTW?), and given that it had the original springs, perhaps I have the original casing too.

Anyway I would love to know how to finish the casing correctly; daubs, circles, chalk marks, and where they should be, etc.

Its an S code GT 390 with the 3.25:1 Posi diff. Non AC, PS. Made early March 68'.

Help appreciated...

[J_Speegle]

My searches haven't revealed the answer so I'm wondering if anyone knows what markings my now rather rusty differential / axle casing had from Metuchen?

The center section/ 3rd member/ pig was originally painted prior to machining inside and out with a red oxide colored epoxy that was slightly glossy (not flat like open primer)

There will be natural machined metal on the pinion retainer and three sections on the bottom/sides of the main case

........................The mangled diff tag was still attached to the 3rd member, which is only missing the plant code, (anyone know what that would be BTW?),

Plant code?  Suggest you post what you have and what is illegible

I see Model code - Ratio - Date - Assembly code

and given that it had the original springs, perhaps I have the original casing too.

Anyway I would love to know how to finish the casing correctly; daubs, circles, chalk marks, and where they should be, etc.

Its an S code GT 390 with the 3.25:1 Posi diff. Non AC, PS. Made early March 68'.

Will send you a pm rather than post details here since they are so often borrowed or migrate to other years and models if posted   

[mungus]

Thanks Jeff,

Email sent. Much appreciated. Since mentioned in your post, my diff tag is away with a MOC member whose trying to create a replacement (good luck!), however what I could read was;

Top line         WED-A6
Bottom line    3L25   8B3  "XXX"

The "XXX" was the corner where the plant code was. It was half ripped off and the first digit was illegible. Would it by chance be the same as my engine tag?
Standing by...

[67gta289]

Would it by chance be the same as my engine tag?

All FE engines were built in the Dearborn Engine Plant in the Rouge complex.  Axles were not built at the engine plant.  There was a foundry on site, but I don't have any knowledge about the third member.  I do know that the main plant for axles was in Sterling Heights, Michigan (still making axle related parts the last I heard.)  Since there is no foundry at Sterling Axle, it would make sense that the third member was cast elsewhere.  Based on what I've heard from employees the machining and assembly was done there.  I'm certain that the tag would be applied at the assembly location.  All that to say that there may very well have been a second plant in the day that produced axles, so I can't say for certain that Sterling Axle was the plant that assembled yours, but I can answer the question "Would it by chance be the same as my engine tag?".

[mungus]

No problem, was just an idea.
I'll look up the Sterling plant code, sounds like the best guess so far.
Hopefully someone knows.

[J_Speegle]

Top line         WED-A6
Bottom line    3L25   8B3  "XXX"

The "XXX" was the corner where the plant code was. It was half ripped off and the first digit was illegible. Would it by chance be the same as my engine tag?
Standing by...

Ok now I understand  what your referring to

The design for the tags (according to Kevin Marti's book) changed in 69 and that lower right corner in 68 is shown as the axle plant manufacturing code or model code though Ford did show it in illustrations as "plant code"


Your not referring to the code identifying the plant but instead the ID code that was used on the buildsheet (under AXLE)  and other things to identify the completed unit

Now a 3L35 in a 390  4V in 68 as a WES-G (door tag code of G) so there is something else going on  (need to check a couple of other sources to confirm the code)

While a WED-A6 (in his book) is not listed as a Mustang application so it appears at this first look there is something else going on also

Don't see your specific one listed in this chart

http://www.fordification.com/tech/rearends_ford05.htm


Did find one buildsheet for a 68 with a G code rearend with the code of 4001

Kevin Marti does or did remake these rearend tags if your going to get a new one made up I suggest you contact his company

[mungus]

Aha. So perhaps my 3rd member is a transplant... It just happened to be the right date and gearset / spool, hence why I was fooled into thinking it was the original pumpkin. Door code is confirmed as G. However having done more searching last night I am even more confused!

The WES-G you mentioned shows up as a 1967 conventional diff in the "axle codes" attachment from the Mustang "S" website, not an LSD. However it does show that code as an LSD 3.25 in the Mustang TEK lists, (I know they are not perfect but anyway), which incidentally shows WES-R as the 1968 LSD 3.25 Mustang diff.
So there is some confusion there too!

But I imagine you were just mentioning that as an example re the manufacturing code anyway.  Thanks for explaining what they meant. I just assumed plant code.

For what its worth the code WED-A6 does show as a 9" LSD in 3.25 in the attached sheet "axle codes"from Mustang "S" dot com.
In fact its the only code that offers that combination in 1968 {according to them, whoever they are :-)}

I should have been more suspicious as the car came with a spare pumpkin, indicating possible diff changes going on.
I imagine eventually the truth will come out!

So MARTIs it is I guess? Unless you stumble upon some more info.

Thanks Jeff. Standing by for the daubs etc email whenever you get time.

[J_Speegle]

The WES-G you mentioned shows up as a 1967 conventional diff in the "axle codes" attachment from the Mustang "S" website, not an LSD.

For what its worth the code WED-A6 does show as a 9" LSD in 3.25 in the attached sheet "axle codes"from Mustang "S" dot com.
In fact its the only code that offers that combination in 1968 {according to them, whoever they are :-)}

As a reminder (for me and others) your tag shows WED-A6


Think you copied down the information incorrectly in one of these statements. The pdf/scan from the S code site shows the -G (third from the bottom of the page) as a 3.25 locking  rear gears. Maybe your quoting information you found elsewhere.

The WED-A6 is listed as a Comet or Fairlane application with the 3L25 gears

But I imagine you were just mentioning that as an example re the manufacturing code anyway.  Thanks for explaining what they meant. I just assumed plant code.

No problem that is what Ford called if for some reason (sure they had their reason)  in out world I think we need to use the terms that best describe and how they apply to what we're doing. Just me



As for what your car should have had

Did check again the fordification.com sheets and the WED-G is listed there and for your application.

Also using a April 1968 MPC and at the time of that printing WED-G wasn't identified yet as a rear end code being used. Its still lists the WES-G for the 3L25 (from 1967 it says)
We accept that Ford documents are not always reflective of what they did - an example is the lack of the "O" rearend code in many of their publications over the years in 67


Again would suggest that you call Kevin and get you a new one.

You may be able to use the third member (consider the date code if that is your direction) but sill need to confirm what case and pinion retainer is on it and what is original to the car to determine if, with a new correct tag it can fill in until you get the exact correct one.

[mungus]

Yes that's right, my tag says WED-A6. It is a 3.25:1 LSD but as I already said, I accept it could well be from something else.
Just a bit odd that its so close to what should be OEM. Config, ratio, age, spool etc.
The carrier and pinion support / shroud / rubber damper all appear to be correct.
Digressing to the subject of rear end finish wise a partial paint strip today revealed a 3" x 1" yellow daub on one side of the pinion flange.

No I didn't copy the information down incorrectly. I have just checked (twice) and the in Mustang S attachment WES-G is clearly shown as conventional not locking.
Its 12 up from the bottom of page 2 of the attachment. I have attached a close up to this post to make it easier to read. As I said, it contradicts the Mustang TEK listing...
As for the source of the WED-A6, its on the same page, 4 lines above WES-G.

As for the "other source", same document. If you look to the top of the full attachment it shows how the Mustang S website rear axle page works.You select the Mustang year, and it produces the list. WED-A6 was on that list, hence why I imagined it should be a Mustang fitment...

However as admirable and appreciated by me as they are, I never rely on such 3rd party websites to be the gospel anyway. That's why I post here to see what the MOC judges etc think was correct. :-)

I also found the Comet and Fairlane applications in Fordification. FORD's documentation, was it seems, not the most easily navigable or reliable!

Regardless I think Kevin will make up the correct tag and I'll go from there.

[mungus]

Well I finally got my new axle tag from MARTI's.
It is indeed a WES-G. So my 3rd member might have been swapped at some stage. Both it and a spare case set that came with the car are date correct G cases. So perhaps the other cases belong to my car...

Anyway I have completed my rear axle build now, using the other case set, dated late Jan 1968.
Just the daubs to apply. I have seen a few examples of Metuchen S code 1968 rear axles - all purporting to be correct.

Are there some basic markings that would be correct can I ask?
Like the yellow blob near the filler plug? Blue spray on the side of the yoke?
I don't need to get into mystical crayon marks unless someone absolutely / positively knows for sure.

While we are at it was the yoke's dust shield plain steel when new? ie turned to rust or oiled steel over time.
Or were they zinc plated like the new Currie replica 1330 long/wide yokes have these days?

Any help appreciated...

[Bob Gaines]

Well I finally got my new axle tag from MARTI's.
It is indeed a WES-G. So my 3rd member might have been swapped at some stage. Both it and a spare case set that came with the car are date correct G cases. So perhaps the other cases belong to my car...

Anyway I have completed my rear axle build now, using the other case set, dated late Jan 1968.
Just the daubs to apply. I have seen a few examples of Metuchen S code 1968 rear axles - all purporting to be correct.

Are there some basic markings that would be correct can I ask?
Like the yellow blob near the filler plug? Blue spray on the side of the yoke?
I don't need to get into mystical crayon marks unless someone absolutely / positively knows for sure.

While we are at it was the yoke's dust shield plain steel when new? ie turned to rust or oiled steel over time.
Or were they zinc plated like the new Currie replica 1330 long/wide yokes have these days?

Any help appreciated...

The yellow blob near or on the fill plug is the most consistent of the different center section markings seen IMO . The yoke dust shield was bare steel because it rusted so typically. I have had unused ones on NOS replacement yokes. That bare steel look is what you want . The best way to achieve and maintain that bare steel look may depend on the intended usage of the car.   

[J_Speegle]

...........Anyway I have completed my rear axle build now, using the other case set, dated late Jan 1968.
Just the daubs to apply. I have seen a few examples of Metuchen S code 1968 rear axles - all purporting to be correct.

Are there some basic markings that would be correct can I ask?
Like the yellow blob near the filler plug? Blue spray on the side of the yoke?
I don't need to get into mystical crayon marks unless someone absolutely / positively knows for sure.

Don't have any original 68 9" with a yellow daub near the filler  - just what I've got records and pictures of.   To the interior of that location do have one marked with a pink daub to the inside of the fill - could be that workers used multiple different colors like we find in the application of the inspector and assembler IDs. Have a few with yellow in the "casting rib box" (towards the inside center again) above that (with the fill point) "rib box" 

I've found more often for this year and application yellow on the yoke like we saw in 66  sometimes mixed (findings not certain it wasn't done on all) with the blue spray on the washer - often continuing a very little onto the pinion retainer.   Assembler and inspectors numbers on the passenger side and top upper "rib box"

Markings on the bottom of the third member are the most difficult as they are often damaged by running over things and jacks over time. Handful of different colors used and pattern IMHO hasn't been decoded as of yet

[mungus]

The yellow blob near or on the fill plug is the most consistent of the different center section markings seen IMO . The yoke dust shield was bare steel because it rusted so typically. I have had unused ones on NOS replacement yokes. That bare steel look is what you want . The best way to achieve and maintain that bare steel look may depend on the intended usage of the car.

Thanks Bob, I have fitted a new Currie yoke that seems pretty much identical to my old Ford 1330 long/wide yoke, with the exception that its not missing a big balance drilling. I thought that wise for a driver as the old yoke wont be paired with its old driveshaft (beyond repair). I'll mask and spray it in VHT chassis cast iron. That gives a reasonable bare steel look.

So it seems that either a blue spray or yellow blob was used on the factory yokes? And perhaps a yellow blob by the filler. Perhaps that will have to do.

There is plenty of detail for finishes on the web for Metuchen CJ rear ends, thanks to the like of the Coralsnake etc.
But sadly little on 390 GT cars of the same year and plant.
But I'd rather not draw all over mine unless I know it to be correct.
Thanks for the help. Both Bob & Jeff.

[Bob Gaines]

Thanks Bob, I have fitted a new Currie yoke that seems pretty much identical to my old Ford 1330 long/wide yoke, with the exception that its not missing a big balance drilling. I thought that wise for a driver as the old yoke wont be paired with its old driveshaft (beyond repair). I'll mask and spray it in VHT chassis cast iron. That gives a reasonable bare steel look.

So it seems that either a blue spray or yellow blob was used on the factory yokes? And perhaps a yellow blob by the filler. Perhaps that will have to do.

There is plenty of detail for finishes on the web for Metuchen CJ rear ends, thanks to the like of the Coralsnake etc.
But sadly little on 390 GT cars of the same year and plant.
But I'd rather not draw all over mine unless I know it to be correct.
Thanks for the help. Both Bob & Jeff.

I would use a stainless steel type paint rather then a cast iron type paint .Ether is readily available but stainless steel paint looks closer to bare steel relatively speaking IMO.

[J_Speegle]

So it seems that either a blue spray or yellow blob was used on the factory yokes? And perhaps a yellow blob by the filler. Perhaps that will have to do.

Would instead go with a yellow daub/spray dot on the yoke and a blue spray on yoke, washer and onto pinion retainer if your going to reproduce the original markings

But I'd rather not draw all over mine unless I know it to be correct.

Transmissions and rear ends IMHO were the most marked parts installed one the cars. Since they were subassembles that were attached to other sub assembles they tended to get marked by plenty of workers who built, attached or checked different stages. Agree that sometimes it best to leave marks off unless your certain and they originally came from that specific assembly. With that said its not uncommon to find around ten separate marks on a third member  Have about 800 examples of markings from 65-73 rearends so have been collecting and comparing for a fair amount of time