Topic: Engine Tag Picture

[dkknab]

I am looking for an engine tag picture of a 1968 289 2V engine.  The engine code from my build sheet is K 236 J.

[J_Speegle]

Are you interested or looking for the format and design to base a reproduction from?  If so maybe one from another small block from the same engine plant will help also.

Just a thought. So far have come up with 67 examples and 68 J codes but still looking

[dkknab]

I found and bought an engine tag on ebay.  Here's the info from the tag.

289.  E.  68.  16
B28.  K.  236.  J

It fits my engine and is before my build date but it's not the format I've seen on other parts as well as in the Mustang Restoration book.  So I'm wondering what really should have my tag looked like.

[J_Speegle]

Never seen one with the dots/periods in the design


About a third way through a search of my pictures. Guess you've already checked all of Ebay at this point

Do I understand the one you purchased was suppose to be an original and not a repo. Had a transmission tag created by a guy that sells them on Ebay and the finished product was not like the original pattern but he didn't seem interested in correcting it. Another $70 plus down the hole 

[dkknab]

My apologies.  The dots or periods were added automatically when I posted.  They should not be there.

The listing was for a  1968 FORD TORINO RANCHERO FAIRLANE 289 2V ENGINE. Item number is 234549897019

They don't mention Mustang but the K136J is exactly what is listed on my build sheet so I was thinking it could be accurate though the format is definitely different.

[J_Speegle]

Can't bring up an old auction but an engine built with that exact code would have been the same no matter what car model it would be dressed for at the car plant and installed in

[dkknab]

I guess I should have realized that. Here is a picture of the tag and bolt. Looks like the upper right is bent some and it doesn't have a FOMOCO logo anywhere which is what I was expecting from other engine tag examples.

[krelboyne]

Another

[J_Speegle]

I guess I should have realized that. Here is a picture of the tag and bolt. Looks like the upper right is bent some and it doesn't have a FOMOCO logo anywhere which is what I was expecting from other engine tag examples.

Appears that the 67 was the last year (within our classic year focus) to use the FoMoCO in the oval on these for C codes while other engines and engine plant tags continued including them June is the latest one I could find so far that had the oval

 

[ruppstang]

For the class you are in that tag will work just fine. Once it is mounted it is tough to read anyway. BTW not all engine tags had the FOMOCO label on them.

[dkknab]

Thank you.

According to this thread, https://www.concoursmustang.com/forum/index.php?topic=4055.msg22365#msg22365, the engine tag should be behind the bolt holding the oil dipstick to the block.  I'm assuming that's still correct.

It also looks like the bolt is not painted blue.  Is that too correct?

[J_Speegle]

Got through a fair amount of my pictures and I found a 68 C code that shows location and the engine ID aluminum tag to add to the conversation.

Interesting that we now have with and without the oval examples and two different formats. Can't see the date on the one below but its from 8T01C1975xx so not an early (in the production year) car. Late April scheduled build. In Kevin's "Tag book " he writes that he found the change from the oval style to the other one was during Nov 67. Book shows two versions both dated in Nov 67. Must say that it is a bit odd to find a Nov built engine sitting around to be later installed in a possibly April built car. Picture below is from a very nice unrestored car owned by one of our members but I don't have the Marti Report data available





Does show the location of the tag and supports the other pictures of the unpainted bolt that holds it and the dip stick tube apparently added after the engine was painted

[dkknab]

My car is an early April build date,  vin 8T01C193682 and built in Metuchen
 I wonder where the one was built you pictured and if the location of the build made a difference on the format and style of the tag.

[J_Speegle]

My car is an early April build date,  vin 8T01C193682 and built in Metuchen

Well looks to be real close considering to example in the picture as far as sequential number and possible build date. 8T01C1975xx
Its within that range of possible being even completed on the same day though not likely, given that group of 20 some cars all in build order, we have buildsheets from in 68

I wonder where the one was built you pictured and if the location of the build made a difference on the format and style of the tag.

Unless the engines were both built at different engine plants or if there were more than one machine making the engine metal tags - or one had not been updated think things would all be the same. Does seem to go against what Kevin wrote but we learn new things all the time as we document more examples 

[RoyceP]

The engine tag was installed at the engine plant. Engines were the same regardless of which assembly plant they were shipped to, and that includes the engine tag.