Author Topic: C9OJ- spindles?  (Read 1544 times)

Offline Andrew@MagMustangs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
  • MagMustangs: Original Parts for 64 1/2-73 Mustangs
    • MagMustangs
C9OJ- spindles?
« on: September 14, 2018, 08:23:24 PM »
Anyone ever seen C9OJ- marked spindles? Big bearing shaft like KKX or D0ZA- spindles but these are for Drum Brakes. Was competition suspension available with front drums? Just wondering what cars would have used these? Never seen one before...
MagMustangs: Vintage Mustang Enthusiasts. We have Original Factory Parts for 1964 1/2-1973 Ford Mustang.   Like Us On Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/MagMustangs

Offline 7Lscjracer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #1 on: September 14, 2018, 11:19:21 PM »
That's weird because the big bearing and tie rod taper size increase was for 70 production other than the Boss cars which got them early.
I'd get in touch with Dan at Chockostang, he's the guru, and according to him, 69 drum spindles are the same as 67-68 drum spindles.
Therefore it follows that they shouldn't accept the big bearing or have the larger tie rod taper.
Do your spindles have the larger tie rod taper though?
I didn't run the number, so without doing so, my guess is what you have is for full size Ford.
69 Mach 1 San Jose Nov. 68 build
Bought May '81, sold Sept '20

9TO2Hknot4cell

  • Guest
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2018, 09:56:02 PM »
Anyone ever seen C9OJ- marked spindles? Big bearing shaft like KKX or D0ZA- spindles but these are for Drum Brakes. Was competition suspension available with front drums? Just wondering what cars would have used these? Never seen one before...
Yep, my 69 mach1 351W has front drum brakes with the standard for the 69 mach1 competition suspension.

Offline Andrew@MagMustangs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
  • MagMustangs: Original Parts for 64 1/2-73 Mustangs
    • MagMustangs
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2018, 09:49:33 PM »
Yep, my 69 mach1 351W has front drum brakes with the standard for the 69 mach1 competition suspension.
The standard Mach 1 suspension is not Competition Suspension. Yes, Mach 1 did indeed come standard with front drum brakes. That arrangement would have the regular 67-69 drum brake spindles with standard sized (for 69) spindle shafts.
MagMustangs: Vintage Mustang Enthusiasts. We have Original Factory Parts for 1964 1/2-1973 Ford Mustang.   Like Us On Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/MagMustangs

Offline Andrew@MagMustangs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
  • MagMustangs: Original Parts for 64 1/2-73 Mustangs
    • MagMustangs
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2018, 09:54:43 PM »
That's weird because the big bearing and tie rod taper size increase was for 70 production other than the Boss cars which got them early.
I'd get in touch with Dan at Chockostang, he's the guru, and according to him, 69 drum spindles are the same as 67-68 drum spindles.
Therefore it follows that they shouldn't accept the big bearing or have the larger tie rod taper.
Do your spindles have the larger tie rod taper though?
I didn't run the number, so without doing so, my guess is what you have is for full size Ford.
Yes, standard 67-69 drum brake spindles are all the same C6OA- cast spindles. These look to have the smaller tie rod holes. Definitely not for full-size Ford which had completely different spindles. The Parts and Service Engineering number suggests that they might have been designed as a replacement spindle for something, but what?....

Would definitely be great for 67-69 without having to go with later tie rods.
MagMustangs: Vintage Mustang Enthusiasts. We have Original Factory Parts for 1964 1/2-1973 Ford Mustang.   Like Us On Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/MagMustangs

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24627
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2018, 11:22:21 PM »
...........The Parts and Service Engineering number suggests that they might have been designed as a replacement spindle for something, but what?....

If so then it should be listed in one of the MPC and one of the OSY books. Not listed in the last printed version of the MOC but I guess you already checked there
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7346
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2018, 12:06:24 AM »
The "J" in the fourth position is for "Autolite". What or why is unknown.
Jim
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.

Offline Andrew@MagMustangs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 335
  • MagMustangs: Original Parts for 64 1/2-73 Mustangs
    • MagMustangs
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #7 on: September 25, 2018, 12:54:18 PM »
If so then it should be listed in one of the MPC and one of the OSY books. Not listed in the last printed version of the MOC but I guess you already checked there
Correct. They are not listed in the 1975 version MPC. That is the only one I have.

The "J" in the fourth position is for "Autolite". What or why is unknown.
Jim
Depending on the source, the 4th digit 'J' also signifies: Ford Parts and Service Division; Parts and Service Engineering office. Not necessarily specifying Autolite division, but that could be after 1972 when Motorcraft came around? I'm not sure on that one.
MagMustangs: Vintage Mustang Enthusiasts. We have Original Factory Parts for 1964 1/2-1973 Ford Mustang.   Like Us On Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/MagMustangs

Offline 7Lscjracer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #8 on: September 26, 2018, 01:46:58 AM »
Maybe your spindles are a transitional part with the thicker spindle but same old tie rod hole, and were superceded by the 70 type spindle which addressed the previous safety and performance shortcomings.
69 Mach 1 San Jose Nov. 68 build
Bought May '81, sold Sept '20

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24627
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #9 on: September 26, 2018, 07:17:41 PM »
Maybe your spindles are a transitional part with the thicker spindle but same old tie rod hole, and were superceded by the 70 type spindle which addressed the previous safety and performance shortcomings.

What would the need be for spending the tens of thousands of dollars it would have taken to get it into production?  IMHO there is another reason and application we have not uncovered yet.

Guess some might look at the late KKK and DOZZ spindles as a "transitional" part or just part of the evolution
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline 7Lscjracer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #10 on: September 26, 2018, 10:58:58 PM »
What would the need be for spending the tens of thousands of dollars it would have taken to get it into production? 

Safety and performance shortcomings that came to light could be one reason.
Oops, should have done it this way instead happens often enough, and can be the impetus for change with industry competition, gov't regs, litigation etc. also at play.
After etc. comes consumer lobby which is at the bottom of the totem pole.
That seems like a universal constant.
69 Mach 1 San Jose Nov. 68 build
Bought May '81, sold Sept '20

9TO2Hknot4cell

  • Guest
Re: C9OJ- spindles?
« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2018, 11:00:11 PM »
The standard Mach 1 suspension is not Competition Suspension. Yes, Mach 1 did indeed come standard with front drum brakes. That arrangement would have the regular 67-69 drum brake spindles with standard sized (for 69) spindle shafts.
I stand corrected, had something else on my mind. All 351 and 390 Mach 1's came with the "GT handling" suspension package. The 428 Mach 1's are the ones that came with the "competition HD" package.

Manual 10-inch four-wheel drums were standard on the Mach 1, regardless of the engine ordered; 11.3-inch power front disc brakes with single-piston floating calipers were offered as an option.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2018, 11:02:14 PM by 9TO2Hknot4cell »