Topic: Harness Label Marking

[9F94M567042]

Ok, here is a question for the experts here. I have come across a wiring pig tail, for lack of a better word, that is clearly an original Ford part with a clearly marked label showing a part number of C9ZA-19949-A. I decided I would investigate and determine the correct application for this part. Mainly to see if it was correct for my car.
This particular number does NOT show up anywhere in any of my stash of documentation. MPC's, O.S.I Catalogs, Master Cross Reference Catalogs, nothing. What gives? I found a similar part listed as D!ZZ-19949-A, but not this part. Is this a common thing that Ford did???
It's no wonder the Ford Part Numbering system drives me nuts sometimes

[67gta289]

Did you look in the electrical assembly manual and shop manual, including the schematics where the basic part numbers are often identified?  I don't have 1969 versions so can't do that.  Also I don't have a 1969 parts catalog (one year only) to check - do you have that?

Most of the Ford documentations available outside of the engineering environment pertain to vehicle service.  The fourth character of the C9ZA prefix, "A", represents the group responsible for the design.  The fourth character of the D1ZZ prefix, "Z", represents a service part number.  I'm seeing what you found, and at least according to the 1975 Ford and L-M versions of the 1965-1972 Master Parts Catalog, there was no 1969 Mustang "air conditioner blower motor feed wiring assembly" serviced; no C9ZZ part, and the D1ZZ application is for 71 & 72, and does not cover previous model years.

In the grand scheme of things, if you consider volume, the need for front and rear bumpers due to accidents, compared to the need for this part, is a million to one.  This wire assembly is simple enough that, if there is a problem, it could have been repaired...improvised.

Lastly, I did see the following 19949 service (Z) parts in the 1977 version of the OSI.  Alas there is no C9ZZ part listed, only a 69 Bronco (C9UZ) part.  The fact that even the 1976 D6DZ part was NR (not replaced) in 1977 kind of confirms that these parts were not high volume.

[Coralsnake]

Its likely an engineering number which is not the same as a part number

[RoyceP]

Ok, here is a question for the experts here. I have come across a wiring pig tail, for lack of a better word, that is clearly an original Ford part with a clearly marked label showing a part number of C9ZA-19949-A. I decided I would investigate and determine the correct application for this part. Mainly to see if it was correct for my car.
This particular number does NOT show up anywhere in any of my stash of documentation. MPC's, O.S.I Catalogs, Master Cross Reference Catalogs, nothing. What gives? I found a similar part listed as D!ZZ-19949-A, but not this part. Is this a common thing that Ford did???
It's no wonder the Ford Part Numbering system drives me nuts sometimes

The MPC only lists parts that were offered for sale as service parts. If the part was never offered for sale it would not be in the catalog. I have a 1969 L-M catalog. That part was not offered. There is no listing for it as a separate part. Likely it is offered as part of some higher assembly like the A/C blower motor for example. A photo of the part would help a lot.


The OSI catalogs only list parts that were discontinued or superseded. If the part was never in any MPC then it wouldn't make the OSI either.

[KevinK]

If I'm following the discussion correctly, maybe it was part of a dealer installed ac kit?

[jwc66k]

Its likely an engineering number which is not the same as a part number

This is not true and is misleading. Most of the items we order from Ford are by "service number" and are identified as such by the fourth character of the Ford identifying number system, that being a "Z", for Ford Motor Company controlled items, as opposed to Mercury, Truck and others (the letter "Y" is Mercury).
If you follow the document trail starting with Ford Car Parts (aka MPC) back to the part's origin, the trail will be something like this: a "service" number that cross-references, via a book or now a computer entry, to an "engineering" drawing number (or defined by many end item users, a "design disclosure document"). An "engineering" drawing number specifies: materials, finishes, processes, specification, testing, marking and/or source(s) for components. That "engineering drawing number", by definition, is the part number.
The service number says none of those, but usually specifies service part marking (label, a tag, box or bag ID), shipping and storage requirements, etc.
This type of system is used by almost all major retailers. Home Depot, for example, a retail business that makes nothing, uses a six character identification number (called by them a SKU - Stock Keeping Unit) for all the items they stock and sell. It is the same for all Home Depot stores.
Jim

[9F94M567042]

Ok,
Here are some pictures of said part. This is an April 69 Deaborn built Cougar by the way. This was plugged into the AC/Heater box above the blower motor. A real PIA to get to.
I'm thinking maybe the AC box was removed sometime in its 50yr history and this was added to aid in the reinstallation of the same. The original feed off the main 14401 harness is plenty long enough to plug directly into the AC box (without the need for this pigtail)
I still don't understand however why this number is not listed anywhere. How else would you have found and purchased it?? Maybe a kit, but that doesn't really make any sense to me.

[midlife]

Ahhhh...what I call the heater extension harness!  I run across these all the time (well, some of the time).  I have a couple in stock.
My take on it is that this was a fix instituted because somewhere along the line, the standard heater box lines were too short due to a change of heater box, manufacturer error, etc.  I'll wager that this was a fix when the heater box changed from non-AC to AC.
I see similar extenders for brake switch wiring, mostly 68-70 kind of a time frame.

[Coralsnake]

The extension on the brake light switches is commonly used on power brake cars. The brake light switch faces a different direction, thus the need for the extension. The non power brake cars have no need for the extension.

I think the discussion has gotten a little off target. The numbers on the actual part are Ford drawing/engineering numbers. You can call them "part" numbers if you like, however, most people understand part numbers (ie "service" numbers) are in the Master Parts Catalogs. This is common on many wiring harnesses and it has nothing to do with kits or serviceability.

I can easily demonstrate that by showing you wiring harnesses that are in the MPC by the "service numbers" and have tags with their "part numbers" that are different. I have drawings of several of those tags and they do match up to the base numbers of the harness. It is true in some places, Ford references them in different manners.

Instead of changing or trying to clarify the definitions, I think we should say, that most people call the numbers in the Master Parts Catalogs the "part numbers".

Im sure there is a logical reason for this extension, perhaps some other option like a clock that reroutes the wiring?
I dont know the answer, Im just making a suggestion. I am going to say its not a random thing.

[RoyceP]

I still don't understand however why this number is not listed anywhere. How else would you have found and purchased it?? Maybe a kit, but that doesn't really make any sense to me.

Since it wasn't offered for sale it would never have made the catalogs. You wouldn't be able to buy it or order it.

[9F94M567042]

Since it wasn't offered for sale it would never have made the catalogs. You wouldn't be able to buy it or order it.

So this part just materialized out of nowhere?

[Bob Gaines]

So this part just materialized out of nowhere?

You apparently do not understand given that statement. Royce is saying that not all individual parts are serviced for replacement. Some parts are sold as part of a assembly and not all of the parts that make up that assembly are sold individually. In that case there would be no reason to list the part in the MPC since Ford would not be selling it separately. I hope this help explain.

[J_Speegle]

So this part just materialized out of nowhere?

There are plenty of examples of parts that were made and installed on our cars but were never available at the parts counter for one reason or another. Because if this they are not listed in an MPC and in turn available at the parts counter. The part or parts could still be found in drawings. Not a mystery just something you don't run across everyday - normally

[Coralsnake]

This part is listed in the Lincoln Mercury Master Parts Catalog and the 1975 Ford MPC under the number C9AZ-19945-A / "Wiring AC blower feed". It is listed for full sized Ford, Maverick, Mustang and Cougar with hang on AC. There is also a note "improvise if needed"

The number on your tag is the engineering number. This is confirmed by the information you found indicating the part was replaced by the D1ZZ-19949-A according to the 1975 Ford MPC.

Both numbers are correct for the part. Additionally, just because a part is not in the MPC does not mean it was not serviced. I have seen parts that went obsolete early on and not included when it came time to print the catalog.

[9F94M567042]

Wow, I thought this would be a relatively easy question to answer.
Thanks to all who took time to post/contribute to my inquiry.