Author Topic: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion  (Read 7128 times)

Offline ruger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« on: March 02, 2015, 05:01:19 PM »
Moderator Note: This post and the following two were split from another thread so time and focus would be given to this specific topic

The Mustang "E" is more like a rumour.  Only one person remember seeing one and he says it was many years ago and forgot all about them until I started asking.  I found and odd buck tag on my radiator.  1969 Sportsroof   9F02L........   On the buck tag you will see a 63D .  63ABC are well known but no one can decipher the 63D.  I am posting a picture of the Marti report for you to see.  I emailed Marti Auto for an explanation but haven't heard back.   Some are saying it's a bench seat but the buck tag and the Marti report say "Black Vinyl Bucket Seats".  Hopefully there will be someone here who can help.  I have all of the small amount of info from Google searching but I am really hoping for someones pictures of an actual "E" car. Only the Ford promotional pictures are available online.  There is a youtube video stating that he has one for sale but it clearly isn't.  Wrong gears, A/C and a picture of the Marti report that does not support the claims. 



Maybe take this as a challenge to find the answer to 63D and finding an actual car picture.

My 69 is from Dearborn.   Notice the 63D code.  Nobody knows for sure the meaning of it.  Some think because the Mustang is a Mustang "E".



« Last Edit: March 02, 2015, 10:45:23 PM by J_Speegle »
1969 Sportsroof Mustang E'
63D
250 six cyl.
C4 trans.
Dearborn build Nov. 1968

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24232
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #1 on: March 02, 2015, 09:58:35 PM »
My 69 is from Dearborn.   Notice the 63D code.  Nobody knows for sure the meaning of it.  Some think because the Mustang is a Mustang "E".

Don't know why the interior package or body type would be related to mostly a drivetrain option. Maybe we need to start a new thread to discuss these in a deeper level and you can provide pictures of the interior and maybe a scan of your build sheet.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2015, 10:31:19 PM by J_Speegle »
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline WT8095

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 940
  • Dave Z.
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2015, 10:16:18 PM »
My 69 is from Dearborn.   Notice the 63D code.  Nobody knows for sure the meaning of it.  Some think because the Mustang is a Mustang "E".

Found this reference in a list of 1969 TSB articles:

http://www.fordification.com/tsb/viewtopic.php?t=337

Article 1666 - 1969 Mustang "E" Features and Specifications - (1969 Mustang - Model 63D (2-Dr. Fastback))
« Last Edit: March 02, 2015, 10:31:29 PM by J_Speegle »
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 J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24232
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #3 on: March 02, 2015, 10:32:01 PM »
As for figuring out what 63D "means" it appears that it is simply an identification for that package the same way that 65E identifies the Grande.

Found this reference in a list of 1969 TSB articles:

Article 1666 - 1969 Mustang "E" Features and Specifications - (1969 Mustang - Model 63D (2-Dr. Fastback))

Thanks - Here is a scan of that TSB article. Should help our newest member though not allot of new information on the package/option




Think I've only seen one of these identified over the years.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2020, 06:30:06 PM by J_Speegle »
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline ruger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2015, 10:59:23 PM »
Wow,  thanks for the info.  You guys are fast.  I've looked all week and have seen more here in 10 minutes.  Thanks guys. 
1969 Sportsroof Mustang E'
63D
250 six cyl.
C4 trans.
Dearborn build Nov. 1968

Offline 69RavenConv

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
  • Owner since '74
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #5 on: March 02, 2015, 11:46:55 PM »
The 17", 6-blade fan may have been unique to the Mustang E, but was it used on any other Ford products (it would seem likely*), and what is a "thermo-modulated" fan drive?
Phil
'69 Convertible - Dearborn June 4, 1969 - Raven Black & Red - 302-2V

Offline Mike_B_SVT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 385
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2015, 01:48:17 AM »
The 17", 6-blade fan may have been unique to the Mustang E, but was it used on any other Ford products (it would seem likely*), and what is a "thermo-modulated" fan drive?

Google says that a "thermo-modulated" fan is basically a viscous drive fan ~ like most of our classic "clutch fans", it would seem.
Possibly it has a version specific to the "E" though, wiht some super secret calibration for maximum fuel efficiency!
Mike B.

2003 Mustang Cobra Convertible
1 of 354 in Sonic Blue

1970 Cougar Eliminator (Competition Gold / Black Decor Interior), 428SCJ, Ram-Air, 4-speed w/ Hurst shifter
Built: Dearborn, Oct 6th, 1969
Cat Bites Man!

Offline ruger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #7 on: March 04, 2015, 08:53:15 PM »
UPDATE:     Kevin Marti sent me an updated report.  He informed me that this was the first and only Mustang E that he has ever processed for a report and did not know how to treat it. After research he has changed the body code from 63A to the correct 63D. Also named it: Mustang E 2-Door Sportsroof.  He also pulled the original invoice to back up the Mustang E claim and said that Mustang E is at the top of the invoice. 
So, I am very happy to know that I own a rare mustang but I am now feeling obligated to return it to as close as possible to it's beginnings as possible.  I may give up my plans but will also come out with a very cool rare car anyways.  I am interested in the history of this car so it helps appease me.  I am adding a picture of the revised Marti report.  Thanks for all of your opinions and advice.
   Old report.

   New report.
1969 Sportsroof Mustang E'
63D
250 six cyl.
C4 trans.
Dearborn build Nov. 1968

Offline WT8095

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 940
  • Dave Z.
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #8 on: March 04, 2015, 10:11:35 PM »
UPDATE:     Kevin Marti sent me an updated report.  He informed me that this was the first and only Mustang E that he has ever processed for a report and did not know how to treat it. After research he has changed the body code from 63A to the correct 63D. Also named it: Mustang E 2-Door Sportsroof.  He also pulled the original invoice to back up the Mustang E claim and said that Mustang E is at the top of the invoice. 
So, I am very happy to know that I own a rare mustang but I am now feeling obligated to return it to as close as possible to it's beginnings as possible.  I may give up my plans but will also come out with a very cool rare car anyways.  I am interested in the history of this car so it helps appease me.  I am adding a picture of the revised Marti report.  Thanks for all of your opinions and advice.

Does your door tag show 63D as on the revised Marti report?

Congratulations on your decision. I think you'll do just fine and have a lot of fun with your unique Sportsroof. See if you can get a vanity plate with "63D" and see how many people can figure out what it means  ;D
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 ruger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #9 on: March 04, 2015, 10:22:17 PM »
Yes, it does show 63D   He revised a few sections.  I think I will be happy also.  Just gotta refocus.   :)
1969 Sportsroof Mustang E'
63D
250 six cyl.
C4 trans.
Dearborn build Nov. 1968

Offline krelboyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1193
    • West Coast Classic Cougars
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #10 on: March 04, 2015, 10:37:34 PM »
Kevin is pretty good about making those Marti Reports right.
Did some digging in the MPC and Tag Book.

The C-4 transmission tag ID Number should be PEE-AA.
The starter ring gear also has 164 teeth.
Engine tag number, for the 250 cubic inch engine on the "Economy E model", was 50.
Scott Behncke - Carcheaologist
West Coast Classic Cougars
503-463-1130
1968 GT/CS 302-4V San Jose 05B
1968 Cougar XR7 Dearborn 09A

priceless

  • Guest
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #11 on: March 04, 2015, 10:38:36 PM »
A few weeks ago, I was telling you over on VMF that I thought the 314 stood for the 314th day of the year the Mustang E was built. That was before the Marti report. Now, I see the Mustang was built on Nov. 21st, 68, thats the 314th day of the year! So, It'd be safe to say the 314 on the buck tag stands for that.

Great findings, ruger 8)

Offline ruger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #12 on: March 04, 2015, 10:51:08 PM »
Thanks all for your info.  You were right all along Priceless. 
krelboyne,   what is the mpc and tag book?   thanks
1969 Sportsroof Mustang E'
63D
250 six cyl.
C4 trans.
Dearborn build Nov. 1968

Offline ruger

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #13 on: March 04, 2015, 11:00:09 PM »
Can anyone tell me the correct block code for the 69 250ci?
1969 Sportsroof Mustang E'
63D
250 six cyl.
C4 trans.
Dearborn build Nov. 1968

Offline sportyworty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
Re: 69 Mustang "E" - 63D body style Discussion
« Reply #14 on: March 04, 2015, 11:12:49 PM »
I hope you purchased that invoice after Kevin pulled it out of the file box. You need that for your documentation. They are ridiculously inexpensive considering what they represent.