Announcement

**simplyconnected** · June 21, 2014, 04:26 PM

Let's break down your casting number, C2AE9425C.

Remember, this scheme was done before computers and Ford needed a system that is easily deciphered.

The Basic Number is 9425. All Ford heads are 9425.
YOUR head starts with C2. C is the decade (1960) and 2 is the year. So, 1962.

AE denotes the car line this part was originally used in, even though other car lines used the same part. A=Ford Cars, E=the engineering code.

So, C2AE9425C is recognized as a 1962 HEAD, first made for Ford cars. The C on the end is the revision change, so yours is the third revision. If everything remained the same, this part could have been used for many years and on many car lines including Edsel, trucks, etc.

If your car is a 1960 for example, the engine was certainly changed to a newer model because 1962 parts didn't exist yet in 1960. If your car was a 1965, it's quite possible Ford carried over this part if there were no HEAD changes.

Transmission tags are riveted to the side of the trans (as shown in your Shop Manual). - Dave

**DaveSouthampton** · June 21, 2014, 05:08 PM

Thanks for that Dave.

In my ignorance the number C2AE9425C was on the inlet manifold... shows how much I know lol

I found this page that listed it, http://www.mustangtek.com/FordIntake.html

And I found this
http://www.squarebirds.org/vbulletin...ight=c1ae6015c
which matches the number on the engine.

struggling with the OJ6:4 on the block and the 1914: on the manifold.

**simplyconnected** · June 21, 2014, 09:31 PM

You know... That wasn't your mistake, it was mine. Intake manifolds are 9425, not heads. Thanks for knocking the cob webs away in my head.

All blocks are 6015.

Your block is: C1AE6015C
Your date of manufacture code is : OJ6:4

For casting numbers, use this site... CLICK HERE
Using your casting decade then use your date code: 0J6:4, which is:
196(0), J=Sept., and :4 is the date, so it's Sept. 04 of 1960.

Exhaust manifolds are 9430-1 RH parts are always even numbers.
1960 Squarebird exhaust manifolds are: B8S 9430-A, B8S 9431-A
So, 1958, S=T-bird, 9430 (basic part number), A=1st revision.

**DaveSouthampton** · June 22, 2014, 04:08 AM

Sooo...

The C1 bit which is 1961 on the C1AE6015C is that it was a '1961 part' which was actually cast in Sept 1960. Which I guess is why its the part number lol. Which means I do have a 390 in it.

Thanks for your help Dave, just need to sort out the trans and the dipstick.

**simplyconnected** · June 22, 2014, 05:21 AM

I would put the car on a hoist, drop the pan, inspect the bands and if ok then adjust them slightly tighter. You can tell how much play is in a band. There needs to be some slack but not a lot. Replace with fresh trans fluid and a new filter. Done.

Loose bands make your shifting very sluggish (or not at all if too loose). If they need relining (like brake shoes), transmission shops send them out for that. Relined bands are as good as new.

There is another explanation for the goofy casting number and date. Suppose you're in a production run and something changes your castings for next year.

You build new molds but the first "good" one is the third revision, rev. C. This happened before new model is launched, but the new casting is backward compatible.

Let's further suppose you ran out of your old stock (possibly on purpose).

Remember in foundry work, it's the sand cores you run out of, not the iron parts. Sand cores are made in a mold that's carefully engineered to render a part that is much smaller than the sand core because iron shrinks one inch per linear foot when it cools.

Since the new sand cores are in a production pilot run, why not use them to balance out the old model engines and continue into the new model? it doesn't make sense to change molds to make old cores.

These sand cores are amazing. Ford molds and cures them, then dips them in a refractory 'paint' solution, then bakes them. The baked refractory keeps water from soaking into the sand core and allows a very long shelf life. If any water is in that sand core when iron is poured on it, the explosion is so tremendous it rocks the whole plant.

Steel melts at 2,600 degrees F. We pour molten iron at 3,000 degrees F. It's ok to pour water on molten iron but if steam gets trapped underneath, steam IS coming out.

Man has never reached the full potential of steam. Two factors make this dangerous. Molten iron is heavy and hot. Even a small piece flying through the air will knock you down then burn you up.

To mold engine blocks, foundry workers pour iron inches from their body, into moving mold boxes, from ladles hung from a monorail and think nothing of it. Once they start pouring they cannot stop until they get to the end of the pour or a parting line will form in the part.

**Joe Johnston** · June 22, 2014, 08:22 AM

I retired from a foundry's Pattern Shop after 31 years as a Wood and Metal Pattern Maker. EVERYONE should have the opportunity to tour a large auatomotive foundry! It is an awesome sight. However all the gov rules and regulations prevent non-employees from really seeing the neat things that go on in the pouring loops.

We had cupulos that held many tons of molten iron and at the bottom was a very small inspection window. What a scary feeling to think you were under all these tons of molten iron looking at it run out the bottom!!! I never could get over that scared feeling but could also never resist taking a look!!!

**yellow98cobra** · June 22, 2014, 08:49 AM

I dont think you can safely say that it is a 390, as Ford made and used the 352 for many years I had A 65 Galaxie that had a 352 in it. As Dave Dare has said you need to measure your bore & stroke.

FE/FT engine displacements

Displacement

Bore

Stroke

330 cu in (5.4 L)

3.875 in (98.4 mm)

3.500 in (88.9 mm)

332 cu in (5.4 L)

4.000 in (101.6 mm)

3.300 in (83.8 mm)

352 cu in (5.8 L)

4.002 in (101.7 mm)

3.500 in (88.9 mm)

360 cu in (5.9 L)

4.052 in (102.9 mm)

3.500 in (88.9 mm)

361 cu in (5.9 L)

4.047 in (102.8 mm)

3.500 in (88.9 mm)

390 cu in (6.4 L)

4.052 in (102.9 mm)

3.784 in (96.1 mm)

391 cu in (6.4 L)

4.052 in (102.9 mm)

3.784 in (96.1 mm)

406 cu in (6.7 L)

4.130 in (104.9 mm)

3.784 in (96.1 mm)

410 cu in (6.7 L)

4.054 in (103.0 mm)

3.980 in (101.1 mm)

427 cu in (7.0 L)

4.232 in (107.5 mm)

3.784 in (96.1 mm)

428 cu in (7.0 L)

4.132 in (105.0 mm)

3.980 in (101.1 mm)

Originally posted by DaveSouthampton

Sooo...

The C1 bit which is 1961 on the C1AE6015C is that it was a '1961 part' which was actually cast in Sept 1960. Which I guess is why its the part number lol. Which means I do have a 390 in it.

Thanks for your help Dave, just need to sort out the trans and the dipstick.

**simplyconnected** · June 22, 2014, 02:16 PM

Eric is right. You cannot see the bore, but you can certainly measure the stroke.

The difference in stroke between a 352 and 390 is about 1/4". That is a lot.

Put your timing marks on TDC. Pull #1 & #4 spark plugs. (When 1 is up, 4 is down.) Stick a long rod down #1 spark plug hole until it stops and mark it at the valve cover flange. Pull it out and put it down #4. Mark it the same way you marked #1.

Now measure between your marks.
Is it 3-1/2" or 3-3/4"?
Let's make this easier yet, if you don't have at least 3-3/4", it cannot be a 390. - Dave

**DKheld** · June 22, 2014, 07:27 PM

Dave,

My '60 has the original cruise-o-matic transmission and dipstick (as far as I know). Measuring from the tip that goes into the transmission......

5/8 to the L mark

2 1/8 to F mark

17 to the center of the first bend (rivet?)

22 5/8 to where the dipstick tube hits the rubber seal in the dipstick cap

27 1/2 over all

My dipstick does not have a rivet in it - maybe the bend is what you are referring to as the rivet? Mine has 2 bends - no rivets - didn't measure to the second one - figured it didn't matter.

Hope that helps,
Eric

**DaveSouthampton** · June 23, 2014, 04:53 AM

Success.... I've now found my trans dipstick

http://www.thunderbirdparts.com/ford...2-22-1962.html

So its from a later COM from the look of it. The good thing is that it shows me where the cap and grommet go so I can have more confidence in my level. Just need to get the trans number now

Thanks again for the help guys

**DKheld** · June 23, 2014, 06:26 AM

I see what you mean about the rivet now.
The one in my '60 looks like the other type they have listed.

Oh well - the pic didn't transfer very to my post but here is the link. Click "more views" and the second picture is better......

http://www.thunderbirdparts.com/ford-thunderbird-transmission-dipstick-before-6-15-1959.html

Eric

**DaveSouthampton** · June 24, 2014, 05:39 PM

trans

Got her jacked up today and managed to find some numbers on the trans
DIF 24
3H19: 24
C1AP7006B

Unfortunately I didnt get the service identification tag number

However I've figured out, mainly from some old posts from Anders that its a 1963 trans, probably from August.

Wish I'd got that dang tag number now lol

The other thing I did was put the grommet at the right place on the dipstick as per the photos of new ones. With the engine running the level was pretty much on the F. The fluid was red but very thin looking... guess the mechanic will figure that one along with the weak reversing once warmed up I hope.

Announcement

Help with numbers and trans dipstick length

Help with numbers and trans dipstick length

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment