Just another Ford Puzzle Piece!

[Stanglover]

[attachment=37743][attachment=37744][attachment=37745]Was it installed at the factory, or was it a replacement later in the car's life?? Who knows, but as we all know, Ford were infamous for using whatever was at hand as long as it was correct for the application.

I decided to paint my manifolds with Eastwood High Temp Manifold coating whilst the engine is disassembled. Nothing worse than a nicely painted engine and rusty manifolds!! However, I'm not too impressed with the so-called factory gray cast color, a bit too grey for my liking. Anyway, I thought I'd photograph the numbers for my records as I often do. The drivers side number is D1ZE-9431-BA while the passenger side is the correct D0AE-9430-G. MustangTek shows the correct drivers side number as D0AE-9431-B, but list both as 1970 351C 4V, no 71's listed!! Date codes are 1A7 and 0M9 if they're not readable.

Just thought some might find this interesting, just another Mustang mystery.

Geoff.

 

[Paul of MO]

Fred Jones was a company that had rebuilt FOMOCO stuff. They also had obsolete ford stuff and sold it to dealers at a big discount.

Back in the 80's We ordered a set of 351C heads from them but received new old stock Boss 351 heads still in the 1971 packaging. They were on pallets with fulcrums and rockers in boxes with them. Damn!

Called the depot and had them pull all that they had. Bought 12 sets for 89.00 per head. I recently sold off all of my stuff and I still had 2 sets left. Got a heck of a lot more than 89.00 each for them.

I am guessing that they were sent back under an obsolescence return and ended up with Fred Jones.

Ford makes no sense at times.

- Paul of MO

 

[mjlan]

Is there any difference between base 4v and Boss manifolds? I thought the head pipe or H-pipe was a larger diameter on the Boss, so the manifold would have to have a larger exit to match?

 

[Stanglover]

Fred Jones was a company that had rebuilt FOMOCO stuff. They also had obsolete ford stuff and sold it to dealers at a big discount.

Back in the 80's We ordered a set of 351C heads from them but received new old stock Boss 351 heads still in the 1971 packaging. They were on pallets with fulcrums and rockers in boxes with them. Damn!

Called the depot and had them pull all that they had. Bought 12 sets for 89.00 per head. I recently sold off all of my stuff and I still had 2 sets left. Got a heck of a lot more than 89.00 each for them.

I am guessing that they were sent back under an obsolescence return and ended up with Fred Jones.

Ford makes no sense at times.

- Paul of MO

You lucky son of a gun!! (to be polite on the forum!!)

Is there any difference between base 4v and Boss manifolds? I thought the head pipe or H-pipe was a larger diameter on the Boss, so the manifold would have to have a larger exit to match?

Looking in more detail at the listings on MusatngTek, I see two manifolds with the same number, D1ZE-9431-BA, but one shows a 2" "opening" and the other with a 2 1/4" "opening, which I assume means the exit diameter, so you could well be right, but why would Ford have two totally different manifolds with the same number. I guess with Ford, anything is possible, unless it's just a mistake on the website. Mine does measure approx. 2" diam. so in reality, I guess I just have a 351C 4V manifold.

Good call out my friend. I think you just solved the question.

Does anyone know of another source for casting info that may be more reliable? I looked, but did not come across anything useful.

Geoff.

 

[Paul of MO]

I think the size difference was in how it was measured not the actual opening. I have had them side by side and there is not a 1/4 of an inch difference between them.

If I had to bet it is actually a difference in the description and not the part. that would explain the fact that the part number is the same.

The 1971 351 4V and Boss 351 h pipe cross to the same number for what that is worth. The 1972 HO h pipe also crosses back to the same number.

- Paul of MO

 

[c9zx]

Fred Jones was a company that had rebuilt FOMOCO stuff. They also had obsolete ford stuff and sold it to dealers at a big discount.

Back in the 80's We ordered a set of 351C heads from them but received new old stock Boss 351 heads still in the 1971 packaging. They were on pallets with fulcrums and rockers in boxes with them. Damn!

Called the depot and had them pull all that they had. Bought 12 sets for 89.00 per head. I recently sold off all of my stuff and I still had 2 sets left. Got a heck of a lot more than 89.00 each for them.

I am guessing that they were sent back under an obsolescence return and ended up with Fred Jones.

Ford makes no sense at times.

- Paul of MO

You lucky son of a gun!! (to be polite on the forum!!)

Is there any difference between base 4v and Boss manifolds? I thought the head pipe or H-pipe was a larger diameter on the Boss, so the manifold would have to have a larger exit to match?

Looking in more detail at the listings on MusatngTek, I see two manifolds with the same number, D1ZE-9431-BA, but one shows a 2" "opening" and the other with a 2 1/4" "opening, which I assume means the exit diameter, so you could well be right, but why would Ford have two totally different manifolds with the same number. I guess with Ford, anything is possible, unless it's just a mistake on the website. Mine does measure approx. 2" diam. so in reality, I guess I just have a 351C 4V manifold.

Good call out my friend. I think you just solved the question.

Does anyone know of another source for casting info that may be more reliable? I looked, but did not come across anything useful.

Geoff.

IF I remember correctly, and I'm not saying I do, Ford cast/bored the outlet of the manifolds of the 4v larger for use on th Boss 351. Chuck

 

[Paul of MO]

Never heard that before. Also - I do not think there is enough material at the outlet to take a additional 1/4 of an inch out it.

We mixed and matched M, Q, and R 351C 4V quite a bit and never noticed a difference.

Wish I still had all the ones I scrapped over the years.

- Paul of MO

 

[rvrtrash]

There has been some discussion on the Boss 302 website, and the consensus is the part numbers are the same, but the outlet diameter is larger, the 2 1/4" instead of 2".

Steve

 

[Stanglover]

There has been some discussion on the Boss 302 website, and the consensus is the part numbers are the same, but the outlet diameter is larger, the 2 1/4" instead of 2".

Steve

Interesting can of worms here. I guess the opening could have been bored out as it is really .125" per side, .250" overall.

Does anyone know the pipe diameter for the 351C 4V and the Boss?

Geoff.

 

[mjlan]

Just wanted to throw out there that the number on the mani is a casting number, how it was machined afterwards would dictate what PN it was, so it's conceivable that two different finished parts would have the same number in the mold or die. But some other characteristic could cause them to wind up with different PN's.

Not sure if I explained that well or not...

 

[secluff]

I have a few notes on part and engineering numbers on the exhaust manifolds. And at times "chasing" these numbers can be confusing with changes made during production, at the dealer, and a lot of times in the backyard under the ole shade tree. I'll start with the 70 Mustang since it was the first 351C powered Mustang. These will be all 4bl listings.

R/H DOAZ-9430-B (DOAE-9430-B or G) 70 Mustang, Torino "M"

L/H DOAZ-9431-B (DOAE-9431-B)

R/H DOAZ-9430-B (DOAE-9430-B or G) 71-3 Mustang "M" & "Q" 72-74 Gran Torino "Q"

L/H D1ZZ-9431-B (D1ZE-9431-BA)

R/H D1ZZ-9430-B (ID # Missing) 71-72 "R" Boss and HO

L/H D1ZZ-9431-D (D1ZE-9131-D)

Ford used three different "H" pipes on the 71-3 Mustangs

D1ZZ-5246-F (D1ZA-5246-DA) 71 "M"

D1ZZ-5246-G (D1ZX-5246-AA) 71-72 "R"

D1ZZ-5246-H(D1ZA-5246-GA) 71-3 "Q"

Been along time ago, but I believe one of the shop techs told me the outlet on the Boss manifold was marginally larger, so it ran a different 'H" pipe. I know there is the possibility of someone's vehicle out there with numbers that may be different, but these are the numbers Ford said should be on them!! I hope this has helped some and not made things worse!!

 

[Stanglover]

Just wanted to throw out there that the number on the mani is a casting number, how it was machined afterwards would dictate what PN it was, so it's conceivable that two different finished parts would have the same number in the mold or die. But some other characteristic could cause them to wind up with different PN's.

Not sure if I explained that well or not...

Yes, I think it is obvious now that it IS a machining difference and would end up as a different PART NUMBER. I looked at my manifold and it is entirely possible to machine out the extra 1/4" as there is a step in the opening that would allow for it.

I think we have solved the question. Ford did weird things back in the day for sure.

Thanks to all,

Geoff.

I have a few notes on part and engineering numbers on the exhaust manifolds. And at times "chasing" these numbers can be confusing with changes made during production, at the dealer, and a lot of times in the backyard under the ole shade tree. I'll start with the 70 Mustang since it was the first 351C powered Mustang. These will be all 4bl listings.

R/H DOAZ-9430-B (DOAE-9430-B or G) 70 Mustang, Torino "M"

L/H DOAZ-9431-B (DOAE-9431-B)

R/H DOAZ-9430-B (DOAE-9430-B or G) 71-3 Mustang "M" & "Q" 72-74 Gran Torino "Q"

L/H D1ZZ-9431-B (D1ZE-9431-BA)

R/H D1ZZ-9430-B (ID # Missing) 71-72 "R" Boss and HO

L/H D1ZZ-9431-D (D1ZE-9131-D)

Ford used three different "H" pipes on the 71-3 Mustangs

D1ZZ-5246-F (D1ZA-5246-DA) 71 "M"

D1ZZ-5246-G (D1ZX-5246-AA) 71-72 "R"

D1ZZ-5246-H(D1ZA-5246-GA) 71-3 "Q"

Been along time ago, but I believe one of the shop techs told me the outlet on the Boss manifold was marginally larger, so it ran a different 'H" pipe. I know there is the possibility of someone's vehicle out there with numbers that may be different, but these are the numbers Ford said should be on them!! I hope this has helped some and not made things worse!!

Steve, Interesting info here. I note that the Boss is listed as D1ZZ, not ZE. The more I think about it, I am realizing that it is perhaps the MustangTek website info that is unreliable.

This post did cause quite reaction and I'm sure will be of help to others down the road.

I appreciate all the feed back.

Geoff.

 

[secluff]

In their defense I will say MustangTek does a pretty good job of trying to make some sense out of the hundreds of part and engineering numbers you deal with on these cars. I don't know how verified their info is, but that is a daunting task. Until early 71 there were three plants building Mustang's and when Ford made a change it didn't always get implemented at the same time. So you could have three January 71 built cars with a different number on the same part. A lot of my info comes from numbers on my cars that I know were original, my Ford racing buddies cars, Dealership experience and interaction with Ford engineers, and Ford printed material. And I will say that doesn't necessarily make me an expert or always right, but I hope sometimes I come up with something that is helpful!

 

[Stanglover]

In their defense I will say MustangTek does a pretty good job of trying to make some sense out of the hundreds of part and engineering numbers you deal with on these cars. I don't know how verified their info is, but that is a daunting task. Until early 71 there were three plants building Mustang's and when Ford made a change it didn't always get implemented at the same time. So you could have three January 71 built cars with a different number on the same part. A lot of my info comes from numbers on my cars that I know were original, my Ford racing buddies cars, Dealership experience and interaction with Ford engineers, and Ford printed material. And I will say that doesn't necessarily make me an expert or always right, but I hope sometimes I come up with something that is helpful!

Steve, you are quite correct and yes, I do think MustangTek has done a great job of complying as much information as is humanly possible. I understand that 100% accuracy is not always possible given the vast scope of the task, but all-in-all, generally excellent. Perhaps in future, my exuberance should be tempered until more research has been conducted.

I appreciate your feedback,

Geoff.