Author Topic: Distributor Critique  (Read 659 times)

Offline AJ

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Distributor Critique
« on: February 28, 2023, 07:25:10 AM »
Do these marks / stamping look legit ?  And any other comments about authenticity ?
TIA
« Last Edit: February 28, 2023, 06:32:53 PM by AJ »
Adrian Jacobs
70 Boss 302  Dearborn, 11/22/69, original calypso paint,  original family ownership.
70 GT500 , 02/26/69, a/c auto, candy red

Offline jwc66k

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7135
Re: Distributor Critique
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2023, 01:01:41 PM »
Outside of being well worn and almost unreadable, what is the Ford number stamped on the housing? All I can make out is "D0**-12127-G" on the first two apparently identical pictures.
Jim
I promise to be politically correct in all my posts to keep the BBBB from vociferating.

Offline aaatp

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: Distributor Critique
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2023, 04:13:27 PM »
Looks like D0ZF-12127-G.

Offline Countrysquire

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
    • Houston Vapor Blasting
Re: Distributor Critique
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2023, 05:02:07 PM »
Adrian, I see my share of distributor housings and the stamping on that one looks very typical to me. Not unusual to see them double stamped.
Bobby Crumpley
MCA#20316
www.houstonvaporblasting.com/

64.5 Dearborn Coupe
5F07D173***
65A M 86 20F 62 1 5

Offline AJ

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: Distributor Critique
« Reply #4 on: February 28, 2023, 06:42:25 PM »
Oops i did originally post duplicate photos.  So i corrected that by posting another photo of the casting numbers that more clearly shows the D0ZF.   I saw a similar dizzy that had a different font for the numeric ?1? thats in the date code.  So was looking for opinions by folks with keen eye on this sort of thing
Adrian Jacobs
70 Boss 302  Dearborn, 11/22/69, original calypso paint,  original family ownership.
70 GT500 , 02/26/69, a/c auto, candy red

Offline J_Speegle

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24232
Re: Distributor Critique
« Reply #5 on: February 28, 2023, 08:32:32 PM »
Oops i did originally post duplicate photos.  So i corrected that by posting another photo of the casting numbers that more clearly shows the D0ZF.   I saw a similar dizzy that had a different font for the numeric ?1? thats in the date code.  So was looking for opinions by folks with keen eye on this sort of thing

Quickly looked through some of the picture I have of date stamps on distributors from 67-70 and I do have pictures of what appears to be original stampings and I found both "1"s with the upper "arm" (for lack of a better term" and those with the upper arm and a cross line forming a base. Look like the supplier had different font stamps at different stations or different suppliers had slightly different font sets as far as I can tell from a quick look at the subject and that specific letter font
Jeff Speegle

Anything worth doing is worth doing concours ;)

Offline Bob Gaines

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8998
Re: Distributor Critique
« Reply #6 on: February 28, 2023, 11:08:17 PM »
Typically if the distributor is re stamped the surface in that area is milled down to take away the numbers prior to re stamping. When that ID stamped surface area is compared to the surrounding material you can typically tell a slight variation of height between the two. Sometimes it is not much. If you can't tell most likely you are in the clear.   
Bob Gaines,Shelby enthusiast, Shelby collector , Shelby concours judge SAAC,MCA,Mid America Shelby