Topic: rear shock plate details

[67gta289]

Been searching for nice rear shock plates and am getting closer, but these are tough to find in the rust belt.  I've noticed an "H" stamping in 5 sets of originals.  The "H" is inside a stamped hexagon shape.

Looking at the pictures included below, my observations are:

1. Both the driver's side parts have the stamp on the "top" surface
2. Both the pass side parts have the stamp on the "bottom" surface
3. However, on neither side are they in the same location

I was trying to figure out if the identification mark (probably the supplier) was stamped as part of the overall stamping process, or if the steel plates were stamped and the marking ended up wherever (like gas tank Nitern marks).

Both of the sets in the picture are from 67 SJ cars, but I've seen the "H" in at least two Dearborn and one Metuchen cars also.  Certainly 5 out of a lot does not make a rule or even a general rule.

Any other observations out there?  (and yes, the "H" could be an "I")

[Bob Gaines]

Been searching for nice rear shock plates and am getting closer, but these are tough to find in the rust belt.  I've noticed an "H" stamping in 5 sets of originals.  The "H" is inside a stamped hexagon shape.

Looking at the pictures included below, my observations are:

1. Both the driver's side parts have the stamp on the "top" surface
2. Both the pass side parts have the stamp on the "bottom" surface
3. However, on neither side are they in the same location

I was trying to figure out if the identification mark (probably the supplier) was stamped as part of the overall stamping process, or if the steel plates were stamped and the marking ended up wherever (like gas tank Nitern marks).

Both of the sets in the picture are from 67 SJ cars, but I've seen the "H" in at least two Dearborn and one Metuchen cars also.  Certainly 5 out of a lot does not make a rule or even a general rule.

Any other observations out there?  (and yes, the "H" could be an "I")

That is a makers mark. I don't remember the name off hand . I will try and remember to look it up tomorrow in my MFG book (books at the Bat cave) unless someone gets the info first.

[67gta289]

Thanks Bob

[67gtasanjose]

i'm not sure I understand what you are asking for. Do you wish to know if the ones you have already are correct? If they are the same regardless where they are built? Are they different by production date? You have 5 sets and wish to identify the best choice from those 5 sets? You wish to build a list of patterns found based upon build info?

Mine is apart now (for the first time since it was built), and NOT from the rust belt and can rather easily be viewed to see whatever marks you ask about. I am just not sure what best answers your question.

Richard

[67gta289]

Sorry for any confusion.  I'm confident based on what I've seen that for the car I'm doing right now I have the correct parts, and they are in great condition, so I'm "all set".

The intent of the email was to document my observations to help others. I did a thorough search of the site and did not find this topic discussed, so felt that this might be a good thing to discuss.

Since I've only seen a few sand pebbles of the Mustang beach, it would be foolish to claim something like "All...67/68 Mustangs...had..."

With that said, I would appreciate if you could look for any stampings on your parts, and report back on what you find.

With a large enough sample size, we might be able to answer these questions:

1. Was there a difference between assembly plants?
2. Was there more than one supplier?
3. Were all parts stamped with the manufacturer stamp?

Ultimately would be a guide to identify original parts.

I'm very interested to see what Bob's documents reveal.

[67gtasanjose]

Mine is apart now (for the first time since it was built)

Correction to detail about my earlier post.

I forgot, my axle and springs are out of the car, but not yet taken apart so U bolts are around the axle tube and the plates have not actually been removed yet from the assembly. I will try and look again for this post when I get it the rest of the way apart. It isn't the focus of where I am working at this stage so I will wait because there is no urgency. If you were looking for info to move ahead on assembling yours, then I would have probably just split them this evening.

Richard

 

Ultimately would be a guide to identify original parts.

I'm very interested to see what Bob's documents reveal.

[67gta289]

No rush, thanks.

[Bob Gaines]

Been searching for nice rear shock plates and am getting closer, but these are tough to find in the rust belt.  I've noticed an "H" stamping in 5 sets of originals.  The "H" is inside a stamped hexagon shape.

Looking at the pictures included below, my observations are:

1. Both the driver's side parts have the stamp on the "top" surface
2. Both the pass side parts have the stamp on the "bottom" surface
3. However, on neither side are they in the same location

I was trying to figure out if the identification mark (probably the supplier) was stamped as part of the overall stamping process, or if the steel plates were stamped and the marking ended up wherever (like gas tank Nitern marks).

Both of the sets in the picture are from 67 SJ cars, but I've seen the "H" in at least two Dearborn and one Metuchen cars also.  Certainly 5 out of a lot does not make a rule or even a general rule.

Any other observations out there?  (and yes, the "H" could be an "I")

I have looked through my Ward product guide to Automotive equipment which has been helpful in the past and don't see the "H" in the hex logo although I know I have seen it in print on someplace .  Hawthorne Metal products (can't find a trademark to confirm) was found in the MFG directory as the only metal related company with a "H" in the name. Sorry I couldn't have been more help.

[67gta289]

No problem, thanks for looking. 

[krelboyne]

I found the same mark on at least one of my original brackets too. Feb 1968 San Jose California Special.

[67gta289]

I picked up these plates (among other things that I actually needed  ) from what was reported to be an original 50K mile San Jose 68 coupe that someone turned into an Eleanor  

The original 67 stuff I have seen does not have "MUS" stamped on them.  Did original 68 versions have this?  Was this to distinguish between the Cougar which joined the Mustang on the San Jose assembly line for 68?

Thanks, John

[J_Speegle]

The original 67 stuff I have seen does not have "MUS" stamped on them.  Did original 68 versions have this?  Was this to distinguish between the Cougar which joined the Mustang on the San Jose assembly line for 68?

Never seen anything like that before - except on reproduction parts made in the 80's. Had a passenger side inner fender panel that was on a car I inspected a while back that had the part number stamped into the panel from visible from the engine compartment side. Thing it included the MUSTANG also in the stamping. Odd and of course not like original

[ruppstang]

I would also side on the reproduction.

[67gta289]

Thanks for the info

[Bob Gaines]

I picked up these plates (among other things that I actually needed  ) from what was reported to be an original 50K mile San Jose 68 coupe that someone turned into an Eleanor  

The original 67 stuff I have seen does not have "MUS" stamped on them.  Did original 68 versions have this?  Was this to distinguish between the Cougar which joined the Mustang on the San Jose assembly line for 68?

Thanks, John

Service parts were marked like that. I have some still in the Ford boxes with those markings . The repros from the 90's were terrible in comparison. it has been just within the last 6 or 7 years that the repro plates have the appearance of the genuine ones except that they are typically powdercoated black.