Topic: Fuel sending unit

[cob428]

 69 GT 500 Early June build. I have a question about fuel sending unit, it has a DOWF 9275 A unit could that be correct or should it have the C9WF ?

[Bob Gaines]

69 GT 500 Early June build. I have a question about fuel sending unit, it has a DOWF 9275 A unit could that be correct or should it have the C9WF ?

It did not come with a D0WF unit from the factory. FYI the D and the 0 decode as decade and year .In this case 1970 which is after production ceased on 69/70 Shelby's. It is more typical to see the C8 sender in 69/70 Shelby IMO but I suppose a June build could have a C9.

[J_Speegle]

Have removed the C9's from earlier cars built at other plants and even Dearborn

[RoyceP]

The gas tank was bigger in 1970. If you use the '70 sender in a '69 tank it won't read full. Maybe someone installed a '70 tank? It used to be a popular mod for drivers.

[cob428]

482686 1970 GT 500 at Carlisle was built 9 days prior to mine has a C9WF. So should I still look for a 68 sending unit?

[J_Speegle]

482686 1970 GT 500 at Carlisle was built 9 days prior to mine has a C9WF. So should I still look for a 68 sending unit?

I'ld be looking for a C9W one if you can get one. Just my experiences and observations as mentioned and shown above

[Scott302]

D0WF-9275-A is the engineering part number for the 1970 Mustang & Cougar 22 gallon fuel tank sending unit without low fuel level warning.  The "D0" is not a date code for when the sender was manufactured.
C9WF-9275-A is the engineering part number for the 1969 Mustang & Cougar 20 gallon fuel tank sending unit without low fuel level warning.  The "C9" is not a date code for when the sender was manufactured.
C8ZF-9275-A is the engineering part number for the 1968 Mustang 16 gallon fuel tank sending unit without low fuel level warning.

[Bob Gaines]

D0WF-9275-A is the engineering part number for the 1970 Mustang & Cougar 22 gallon fuel tank sending unit without low fuel level warning.  The "D0" is not a date code for when the sender was manufactured.
C9WF-9275-A is the engineering part number for the 1969 Mustang & Cougar 20 gallon fuel tank sending unit without low fuel level warning.  The "C9" is not a date code for when the sender was manufactured.
C8ZF-9275-A is the engineering part number for the 1968 Mustang 16 gallon fuel tank sending unit without low fuel level warning.

Scott the D0 in the engineering number is not a date code for assembling of the part (in this gas sender case that is stamped separately) but signify's the era in which the part was put into production . I am surprised you questioned that?

[J_Speegle]

Not unheard of that Ford released some parts early. For examples there are D0 parts listed on 69 buildsheets for example on some cars. Didn't happen often but it did

Unfortunately for this discussion the buildsheets do not list an engineering number for the sending unit


Unfortunately the Assembly manual page for this detail, if covered, is likely from earlier in the year

[cob428]

NOS 1969 Mustang Cougar Fuel Sending Unit Gauge C9WY-9275-A #165519821660

Ebay has one available for 375.00 states, doesn't have an engineering number on it, how would this be judged?

Pete

[J_Speegle]

NOS 1969 Mustang Cougar Fuel Sending Unit Gauge C9WY-9275-A #165519821660

Ebay has one available for 375.00 states, doesn't have an engineering number on it, how would this be judged?

Pete

Easy Depends on the class. In a Division I class there would be a deduction (not all the points) since its missing the engineering number. Part may be a reproduction or something else (real recent service part)  but lacks the identification that matches the parts found on cars off the assembly plant

In Division II there would not be a deduction since the standard is that the judges don't look at the engineering  while going through the sheets (once past the front pages) but a helpful team may make mention of it on the sheets with no deduction to help make the car closer to how the car was built

[Bob Gaines]

NOS 1969 Mustang Cougar Fuel Sending Unit Gauge C9WY-9275-A #165519821660

Ebay has one available for 375.00 states, doesn't have an engineering number on it, how would this be judged?

Pete

If it doesn't have a engineering number on the part I would wonder if it were original Ford because Ford typically marked factory and service units. It would be viewed in concours a Jeff outlined however.  It seems to be a excessive price if it is un marked as you say. 375.00 is within the range of prices typically seen for correct looking (including engineering number ) C9 senders.

[Bob Gaines]

I looked at the auction and unlike what you reported it is marked however instead of being stamped into the metal the engineering number is applied to a sticker fixed to the sender. That is a very late service part apparently. . If your patient I know you can do better. I would stay away from that version if it were me especially at that price.

[cob428]

He does have a C8ZF would that be accurate and it does have the engineering number stamped on the sending unit

Pete

[cob428]

Sorry forgot to post the picture