ConcoursMustang Forums

Restoring - General discussions that span across many different groups of years and models => Suspension => Topic started by: astat1 on April 22, 2010, 01:13:48 AM

Title: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: astat1 on April 22, 2010, 01:13:48 AM
Do all original FoMoCo (factory/replacement) idlers have a CxZx stamping? If yes were there C9/C8 idlers for a 69? All I have seen have a C7Z stamping. Thanks
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: TLea on April 22, 2010, 08:02:08 AM
Pretty sure the ones with the C7 cast in the arm were 67 only (maybe very early 68) The ones used in 68/69 had nothing other than paint mark id.
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: Bob Gaines on April 22, 2010, 02:31:07 PM
Pretty sure the ones with the C7 cast in the arm were 67 only (maybe very early 68) The ones used in 68/69 had nothing other than paint mark id.
Tim, I thought I would respond because I don't want to hear a certain grumbly southern Indiana hillbilly complain anymore (you know who). The C7 is cast into the idler arm on all the ones used on 67 -70 P/S Mustangs/Shelby's. It had a FOMOCO in block letters in a rectangle up until 1969 and changed to a FOMOCO in oval for 1970 or there abouts. The casting can be misleading with very faint markings to appear blank or a maybe a later service replacement since the idler arm was the weak link in the chain and wore out first.  This was info pounded into my head some years ago by the same mentioned hillbilly . I thought I would share this info with you so when you see him in June you don't get corrected by him "again" (as he always says to me) because he enjoys it too much.  :) Bob
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: TLea on April 22, 2010, 04:38:30 PM
I'll have to listen to him complain. I've got about 3 or 4 idlers I pulled off 68s that have no C7 cast in them. All have remnants of yellow paint stripe. To random to be just a service piece as I would suspect very few took cars back to dealer to replace idler. Could be a plant thing? You know what plant all mine are from. Hillbillys don't scare me. you just give them moonshine and they'll fall asleep  ;D
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: astat1 on April 24, 2010, 04:03:21 AM
Since we're on the topic, is the bracket that attaches to the frame the same finish as the arm itself (heated finish) or is it different? I saw an NOS one which looks like there may be a difference. Thanks
(http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w129/astat1/NOSidlerarm.jpg)



Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: Bob Gaines on April 24, 2010, 02:45:38 PM
Since we're on the topic, is the bracket that attaches to the frame the same finish as the arm itself (heated finish) or is it different? I saw an NOS one which looks like there may be a difference. Thanks
(http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w129/astat1/NOSidlerarm.jpg)
That looks pretty typical to me IMHO.  The chassis portion is steel and the arm is cast iron . Two different materials that normally have two different looks. There is a range from darker to lighter that each could be on both different materials IMHO. Bob
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: J_Speegle on April 24, 2010, 11:27:00 PM
Have to disagree a bit - even though both are forms differently they were both heat treated and would have had, originally, a very similar tone. Don't believe that 40 year old parts with surface rust are really representative of what they were originally.

The one pictured - is that suppose to be a NOS example (noticed the retaining nut)?
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: astat1 on April 25, 2010, 12:05:51 AM
It was sold as NOS.  Sold for $29.95, naturally a couple days after I started looking for one.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/NOS-1967-1971-Ford-Mustang-Mercury-Cougar-idler-arm-_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQhashZitem35a8895230QQitemZ230460838448QQptZMotorsQ5fCarQ5fTruckQ5fPartsQ5fAccessories#ht_1793wt_1165

Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: Bob Gaines on April 25, 2010, 01:04:49 AM
Jeff,your opinion is welcome as always since we often bounce ideas back and forth. I am not trying to be contrary on purpose but the bottom retaining nut doesn't look out of place to me IMHO. The threads are swedged down to lock the nut as normal too. I attached a picture of the Killian low mileage 67 GT350 idler arm shot with the same nut. It had the C7 engineering number (felt it but didn't see).The example ebay picture looks to be in very good shape with minimal oxidation that would change the look of a finish to any great extent IMHO. Logically even if the parts are not assemblyline they would have been made with the same manufacturing techniques with the same materials and turn out having a similar look (finish)to a assemblyline part of the same design. Just my viewpoint to add to the conversation.Bob
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: TLea on April 25, 2010, 02:15:20 AM
Well Bob, I am going to have to eat crow here. After your comment of felt but not seen I went and checked my idler arms and 2 of the 3 I can clearly feel some numbers or letters cast into them. Can't really read them but there is definately something there. The nuts looks exactly like the ones pictured
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: Bob Gaines on April 25, 2010, 02:08:06 PM
Well Bob, I am going to have to eat crow here. After your comment of felt but not seen I went and checked my idler arms and 2 of the 3 I can clearly feel some numbers or letters cast into them. Can't really read them but there is definately something there. The nuts looks exactly like the ones pictured
No worries . You as well as others have helped me see a different viewpoint on issues past. I know you are aware of this but to others reading we are all friends here sharing info to try and help each other get a better understanding . It will be my turn again to taste crow meat soon enough. Bob
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: TLea on April 25, 2010, 02:53:29 PM
I'm so used to eating crow that sometimes it tastes good  ;)
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: BillEBobb on June 30, 2010, 10:33:20 PM
It was sold as NOS.  Sold for $29.95, naturally a couple days after I started looking for one.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/NOS-1967-1971-Ford-Mustang-Mercury-Cougar-idler-arm-_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQhashZitem35a8895230QQitemZ230460838448QQptZMotorsQ5fCarQ5fTruckQ5fPartsQ5fAccessories#ht_1793wt_1165

I'm the one who bought it -- that and some NOS outer tie rods.  Tell me I didn't get screwed!!

Bill
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: J_Speegle on July 01, 2010, 01:45:43 AM
Thought there were different ones for PS and manual?:

Not unusual for sellers to mislabel stuff for sale
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: T Lea on July 01, 2010, 09:02:16 AM
Whats really unusual is the top picture is not the same idler arm as the bottom picture
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: Bob Gaines on July 01, 2010, 12:00:18 PM
I wasn't sure but was afraid to ask if maybe what he bid on and what he got were two different things. The original looking one appears to be a P/S one but maybe that is not what he got. Bob
Title: Re: 69 P/S idler arm
Post by: rockhouse66 on July 01, 2010, 01:15:16 PM
Whats really unusual is the top picture is not the same idler arm as the bottom picture

The one in the top picture of the eBay listing (in the Mustang marked box) is not correct.  Not sure what it is, but not original FoMoCo.  The one in the lower picture in this listing (in the Fairlane/Torino box) is a correct FoMoCo item, but if it is really a Fairlane part I don't think it will work on a Mustang.  If it is Mustang, not Fairlane, then it is a P/S arm assembly.  And yes, M/S and P/S idler arm assemblies for Mustangs are definitely different.