Author Topic: '67 289 alternator harness connection  (Read 12173 times)

Offline socalgt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
'67 289 alternator harness connection
« on: June 10, 2015, 08:27:56 PM »
I'd like to know if the orientation(clocking)of this alternator is correct for my original wire harness...where the rubber coated 2 wire connector attaches to the BAT & FLD.

Offline socalgt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2015, 12:02:12 AM »
Original wiring harness is bent from age and appears to fit, so I'll assume the rear case is properly oriented.

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24173
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2015, 07:32:35 PM »
Looking at your picture the back half of the case appears to be correctly "clocked" when compared to other examples I've got on file
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3008
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2015, 07:39:15 PM »
Socalgt,

Can you post some pictures of your original alternator wiring harness?  Mine fried in 2004 or 5, I replaced it with one from NPD but that is modelled after a 68.  I have collected two what appear to be original 67 harnesses, but there are slight differences between the two.  I'm hoping that yours breaks the tie.

Thanks, John
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
7R02C156xxx
MCA 74660

Offline Bob Gaines

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8952
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2015, 07:46:36 PM »
I'd like to know if the orientation(clocking)of this alternator is correct for my original wire harness...where the rubber coated 2 wire connector attaches to the BAT & FLD.
That sounds like the 68 style. All the 67 harness  I have seen were the individual wires with the rubber boots on the end. Unless it was a very late 67 transition I think the wires encased in a block of rubber to secure to the alternator were 68 and up assemblies. Just my observation.
Bob Gaines,Shelby enthusiast, Shelby collector , Shelby concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby

Offline WT8095

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 940
  • Dave Z.
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2015, 09:02:43 AM »
That sounds like the 68 style. All the 67 harness  I have seen were the individual wires with the rubber boots on the end. Unless it was a very late 67 transition I think the wires encased in a block of rubber to secure to the alternator were 68 and up assemblies. Just my observation.

The 1-piece connector was announced in the '68 preliminary shop manual. I don't know if they were used earlier than that. The file attachment is an excerpt of that manual, not the entire thing.
Dave Z.

'68 fastback, S-code + C6. Special Paint (Rainbow promotion), DSO 710784. Actual build date 2/7/1968, San Jose.
'69 Cougar convertible, 351W-2V + FMX, Meadowlark Yellow.

Offline 196667Bob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1040
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #6 on: October 12, 2015, 03:08:29 PM »
John and I have been trying for several months now, to find out what is “correct”. This all started when disassembling everything from my 289 before pulling it. I noticed that my Alternator Harness was brittle, both wires and the boots, and began looking for a replacement(being very confident that mine was original, my Dad having been the second owner, and my having talked with the original owner). I looked at the Repo harnesses (figuring my chances of finding an NOS one were slim to none) offered by our “major suppliers”, and found that all were of the “rubber block” type (as Bob calls it; I call it the “rubber yoke type”), which was definitely not correct for mine. I then decided to “gamble” and started searching for an NOS one, using the Part # from my 1967 MPC (I felt that this would be the most accurate Part # for mine since it was printed in March of ’67, and mine was built on January 31, 1967. To my shock, I found one supplier that had 6 of them. I of course ordered one. When it arrived, in the correct “C7ZZ” package, I could hardly believe it. Then I opened it, and what did I find but a harness with the “rubber yoke type” connector, an orange wire, and a “C8” wire sticker on it. Obviously a Ford “Re-replacement” part.

At this point, I decided to contact John, as I knew that he also had an early ’67 (his being earlier than mine), to see what his harness was like. As John mentioned above, his original was “fried” in early 2000, and he did not have it; but he did have two “donor” harnesses that he thought were correct. After he sent me pictures of his two donors, I could see that they were not at all like mine. While mine had two rubber boots (one reddish brown and one, slightly smaller, white one), John’s “donors” have 3 rubber boots (one reddish brown, one white and one black). Mine has a large (12 or 14 gage) black wire, a white smaller gage (16 or 18 gage) wire, and a black wire with a red stripe (again a 16 or 18 gage), all 3 of which go to a 3 prong (2 male, 1 female) bullet connector. John’s, on the other hand, has a black with yellow stripe heavy (12 or 14 gage) wire, a white smaller gage (16 or 18) wire, and a white with black stripe wire, again of a smaller (16 or 18) gage. On John’s, his black with yellow stripe wire is not part of the same 3 prong connector, but goes to the starter solenoid.

Now it was time for me to do some research. Realizing that the Assembly Manuals and MPC’s are not always “correct”, I decided to look at them anyway. I used the 1967 Electrical Assembly Manual (appropriate page, E7-8601-2 dated 10-14-66), the 1967 MPC (copyright 1966, dated January 1967), the 1960-68 MPC (appropriate page dated February of 1967), and the 1967 Shop Manual (printed March of 1967). I did not use the 1965-72 MPC as by its printing (May of 1975), too many “Superceded’s” (replacement Part #’s) would have occurred. While the research was not extremely helpful, it did yield some information which is appropriate to both Bob’s and Dave’s comments in regard to the “rubber block/yoke’s” use of not being until late 1967 or 1968.
Here is what I found :

1)   The 1967 Electrical Assembly Manual (10-14-66) shows the Alternator with
the rubber yoke.
2)   The 1967 MPC has no Illustration of the Mustang Alternator Wiring.
However, it does have an Illustration for the Alternator Wiring for a 1967 Fairlane, which looks strikingly similar to John’s donors.
3)   The 1960-68 MPC (dated February of 1967) again shows the Alternator
Wiring with the rubber yoke.
4)   The Shop Manual (March, 1967, page 13-16) shows the Alternator Wiring to
be identical to mine, including the same colored wires being noted.

While, as we know, just because something is shown in one of the publication Illustrations, doesn’t mean it was used. However, in regard to the “rubber yoke”, it is interesting to note that it was at least considered as early as 10-14-66.

All of this “digging” along with some conflicting information, brings up several questions :

1)   Were there differences between “Early” and “Late” models Alternator Wiring ?

2)   Were their Plant differences ?

3)   Was their a difference between Convertibles (mine), Fastbacks (John’s) and Coupes (even though there are no differences noted in the Assembly Manual nor the MPC’s)?

4)   Was there a difference between Factory A/C and non A/C ?


While I am confident that my harness is original and correct for my particular car, questions remain for others (like John’s) as to what is correct ?
The only way that I know to resolve these questions is through feedback from owners who are reasonably confident that theirs is original, and note its configuration, Plant, build date, body type, with or without Factory A/C, etc.

So, let’s hear from people out there and see what we can come up with.

Bob
1966 Coupe, C Code, 3 Sp MT, 6T07C154XXX, Build Date 11/22/65
1967 Conv, C Code, C4, 7F03C154XXX, Actual Build Date 01/31/67
MCA 04909

Offline 67gtasanjose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5084
  • "Take the MUSTANG PLEDGE"
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #7 on: October 12, 2015, 03:21:59 PM »
Bob, possibly you neglected to consider "with Tachometer" or "w/o Tachometer". I believe the alternator harness is different  (two wires with boots on early non-tach) and has 3 wires with boots on early 67 small block, tach equipped cars .
Notice also that the alternator main feed to battery on this early style, non-tachometer applications is within the 3-wire connector to the headlamp harness and on the early tachometer equipped cars, the alternator main feed wire is separate from the 3-wire connector to the headlamp harness and that separate wire bolts onto the solenoid lug with the battery cable and other vehicle power feed wires.
I know we are talking small block here, but similar situations on the big-block though I don't believe the aftermarkets are making two versions on the big block cars (read as the 1-piece connector on BB cars not available reproduction for 67)

The two vendors I checked, both sell the small block, tachometer style harness with the individual boot type ends. The alternator feed harness being sold at those two locations non-tachometer cars is a two lug, block style connector for only the 67-68 289's.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2015, 04:51:59 PM by 67gtasanjose »
Richard Urch

1967 (11/2/66, S.J.) GTA Luxury Coupe, 289-4V w/Thermactor Emissions, C-4, Int./Ext. Decor +many options

2005 (04/05) GT Premium Convertible, Windveil Blue, Parchment Top w/Med. Parchment interior,  Roush Body Appointments

Offline Bob Gaines

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8952
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2015, 04:31:52 PM »
I have only seen the seperete terminal/boot type on the many servivor type cars I have examined . With that said the vast majority of those were early to late SJ built tach equipped cars (Shelby's) . I am skeptical if the rubber block type (with the plastic round terminal caps) were used in 67 unless very late in production. I have a high confidence level that they were not used during the time the Shelby's were being produced.
Bob Gaines,Shelby enthusiast, Shelby collector , Shelby concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby

Offline Bob Gaines

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8952
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2015, 05:22:38 PM »
I have only seen the separate terminal/boot type on the many survivor type cars I have examined . With that said the vast majority of those were early to late SJ built tach equipped cars (Shelby's) . I am skeptical if the rubber block type (with the plastic round terminal caps) were used in 67 unless very late in production. I have a high confidence level that they were not used during the time the Shelby's were being produced.
I checked the 67 shop manual and pre delivery manual and all of the illustrations of Mustang related alternators are of the individual terminal type. When checking the assemblyline manual I did see illustrations for the two wire system only in the rubber block listed for 289,390 and 6 cyl . These are no tach base option cars apparently.
Bob Gaines,Shelby enthusiast, Shelby collector , Shelby concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby

Offline krelboyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1190
    • West Coast Classic Cougars
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #10 on: October 12, 2015, 08:29:20 PM »
There is one supplier that has commissioned 1967 alternator wiring harnesses. He has reverse engineered NOS and excellent used Ford harnesses.

Two styles:
With 'half a dog bone' for the 1967 Mustang without tachometer or 1967 Cougar XR7. Ford service number C7ZZ-14305-B, wire harness marked C7ZB-14305-B or C8WB-14305-C.

With individual wires as described, for 1967 standard model Cougar, and 1967 Mustang with alternator warning light (without ammeter and with tachometer). C7ZZ-14305-E, wire harness marked C7ZB-14305-E.

I know the Ford MPC uses 'with tachometer' or 'without tachometer' for determining application. But it gets convoluted on the Cougar side, which use the same harnesses. From an engineering stand point, the harnesses should be determined 'with ammeter' or 'without ammeter'.

Not allowed to post links, but you all can probably figure it out.



Scott Behncke - Carcheaologist
West Coast Classic Cougars
503-463-1130
1968 GT/CS 302-4V San Jose 05B
1968 Cougar XR7 Dearborn 09A

Offline 196667Bob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1040
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #11 on: October 13, 2015, 01:18:53 AM »
Richard - I am remiss on not mentioning the non tach versus tach harness; I should have noted that as well as included it as # 5 in my ending list of questions. To answer your question, yes, I did consider it. Because the ones being offered by suppliers for the "non tach" application are only of the "rubber block/yoke" type, and definitely not like mine, I even ordered a "with tach" harness figuring I could remove the third black boot. But as you noted, the "with tach" harness has a separate wire that goes to the starter solenoid, so that was definitely not like mine. Then the "real killer", the connector plug at the "free end" (the end away from the Alternator), was backwards ; it has two female and one male bullet connectors instead of the needed two male and one female. In looking at the offerings by at least two of the major suppliers who offer Alternator Harnesses for 1967 Big Blocks w/o the tach option, it appears "correct" for the SB w/o tach except that one of the boots is gray instead of white, and possibly the heavy gage black wire may have a stripe on it (it may just be a reflection on the picture; hard to tell). In any case, since it wasn't exact, and no supplier apparently makes the correct 3 wire harness with the two rubber boots and correct connector for the SB, I sent my original to Oregon and had it reproduced. When I received it back, I also received an 8-1/2 x 11 drawing of the harness with wire colors noted, so I know that it is "on file" should others need this harness in the future.

Bob - I too am skeptical of the "rubber block type" of connector harness being correct for 1967, SB, w/o tach harnesses, yet I don't have a lot of verification in order to document, which is why I solicited input. My Dearborn car is just like the SJ ones you mentioned, as well as being a "pre February" build.
That being said, it seems strange to me that virtually all of the suppliers are selling a harness that is truly for 1968, as being correct for 1967. Yes it will work; yes it allows for less inventory; yes it shows as such in the Assembly Manual and MPC's; but, is it correct for 1967 ? Like you, I think not.
Based on what has been brought out here, it would seem to me that John's "donor" harnesses may be for "with tach".

John - Do I remember correctly that yours is a "non tach' application ? If I did remember incorrectly and yours has the tach option, then your "donor harnesses" may be correct.

Bob
1966 Coupe, C Code, 3 Sp MT, 6T07C154XXX, Build Date 11/22/65
1967 Conv, C Code, C4, 7F03C154XXX, Actual Build Date 01/31/67
MCA 04909

Offline 67gtasanjose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5084
  • "Take the MUSTANG PLEDGE"
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #12 on: October 13, 2015, 06:11:30 AM »
... mine had two rubber boots (one reddish brown and one, slightly smaller, white one), ...Mine has a large (12 or 14 gage) black wire, a white smaller gage (16 or 18 gage) wire, and a black wire with a red stripe (again a 16 or 18 gage), all 3 of which go to a 3 prong (2 male, 1 female) bullet connector.

Bob

Using your description, I did find a source in Maryland (on eBay) selling a very similar harness but does not look to be identical. It has a red boot for the larger, power feed and a gray boot on the white wire at the alternator. This reproduction also has a yellow stripe on the larger black alternator power feed (yours did not have a stripe? Yours was only BLACK with a red boot?) The third wire is as you described, black with red sripe and no boot (ground wire) and the three wire bullet is  also as you described.

This reproduction harness is $34.95 as of this date. No "I.D. tag"  but the way you have described your original, this one matches very closely except you claim your white wire has a white boot (this has a grey boot) and this reproduction has an extra yellow stripe (which can be removed) so maybe not a "home run" but at least you could consider it as a "base hit" or a "double".
« Last Edit: October 13, 2015, 06:15:03 AM by 67gtasanjose »
Richard Urch

1967 (11/2/66, S.J.) GTA Luxury Coupe, 289-4V w/Thermactor Emissions, C-4, Int./Ext. Decor +many options

2005 (04/05) GT Premium Convertible, Windveil Blue, Parchment Top w/Med. Parchment interior,  Roush Body Appointments

Offline 67gta289

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3008
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #13 on: October 13, 2015, 08:22:33 AM »
Bob M, yes my car is a non-tach application.

I've picked up two oldie but goodie used 67 harnesses, one from eBay, and one from a Craigslist purchase, both about a year ago.

Attached are some pictures.  Referring to the two harness in the "side by side" comparison, with a "top" and "bottom" harness:

1. The three post connector at the wire harness connection are different.  The top harness has a white with black stripe connected to the center post, with a white to the outer male post.  The bottom harness has those two same colors, but they are flipped.  In this case, the rubber boots MUST have been color coded to prevent any mistakes.  Very strange.

2. The large gauge wire that connects to the relay is black with a yellow stripe on the top harness, and black with no stripe (unless it has worn off) on the bottom harness.

3. The large gauge wire that does what I'll call the cross over is black with a violet stripe on the top harness, and black with orange stripe on the bottom harness.

4. Two of the three rubber boots on the bottom harness appear to be color coded, one red, one white, based on remnants inside the boots.  On the top harness is it hard to tell.

5. The overall lengths compare well.  But as you can see in the side by side picture, the "take off" point for the three post connector is a few inches different comparing the two.
John
67 289 GTA Dec 20 1966 San Jose
7R02C156xxx
MCA 74660

Offline ruppstang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3820
Re: '67 289 alternator harness connection
« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2015, 09:25:36 AM »
It is tough to get a good pic on the car but I believe this is original to this 11-04-66 SJ small block convertible.