ConcoursMustang Forums
1st Generation 1964 1/2 - 1973 - Questions & general discussions that apply to a specific year => 1970 Mustang => Topic started by: Angela on December 30, 2020, 01:55:19 PM
-
I'm embarrassed to admit I'm not sure if strut rods are identical from 67-70... so that's my question.
One of my strut rods from my '70 Dearborn car is bent and I'd like to know if all strut rods are identical from 67 through 70 (or later) before I try to buy a replacement.
anghelrestorations.com has a very nice suspension details pdf, outlining differences from year to year for most suspension components. Unfortunately, it does not cover strut rods.
Feel free to move this if the question spans multiple production years.
Thanks!
-
To get a clue, you might consider reviewing the Ford Car Parts (aka MPC) files in the Library.
Jim
-
I'm embarrassed to admit I'm not sure if strut rods are identical from 67-70... so that's my question.
One of my strut rods from my '70 Dearborn car is bent and I'd like to know if all strut rods are identical from 67 through 70 (or later) before I try to buy a replacement.
anghelrestorations.com has a very nice suspension details pdf, outlining differences from year to year for most suspension components. Unfortunately, it does not cover strut rods.
Feel free to move this if the question spans multiple production years.
Thanks!
67 will not work on a 70 . 68-70 will interchange however there or subtle nuance differences between them.
-
To get a clue, you might consider reviewing the Ford Car Parts (aka MPC) files in the Library.
Jim
I agree - especially since it is available for free ;) The MPC will provide the basic information you are looking for (67 is different than 68/69 is different than 70 - for the RH one anyway) If you look at the 68/69 being serviced by a C8 part for the RH, except for 69 Boss, but the 68/69 (all) is serviced by a C9 part, and then 70 being serviced by C9 parts, these things provide clues that the strut rod situation was fluid - not straight forward.
Bob provided confirmation that there were changes along the way.
The MPC is usually mum about changes that don't affect function, and we need good information from Bob and others. In this case, the MPC is actually pretty good IMO.
-
Take a look at the West Coast Classic Cougar site. Great photos of each showing the differences.
I'm embarrassed to admit I'm not sure if strut rods are identical from 67-70... so that's my question.
One of my strut rods from my '70 Dearborn car is bent and I'd like to know if all strut rods are identical from 67 through 70 (or later) before I try to buy a replacement.
anghelrestorations.com has a very nice suspension details pdf, outlining differences from year to year for most suspension components. Unfortunately, it does not cover strut rods.
Feel free to move this if the question spans multiple production years.
Thanks!
-
I agree about WCCC. I had some spare strut rods and used the site to verify year.
And, I buy from them too.
-
Why not just straighten the ' bent ' one you have ?
-
Why not just straighten the ' bent ' one you have ?
That generally is not recommended for suspension components. The metal has now been permanently deformed. Working it back deforms the metal even more, making it less strong due to it being deformed (twice) beyond its elastic limits. That makes the piece prone to fatigue cracking and breaking.
Not a problem for non-structural components, such as sheet metal. I wouldn't want to stake my life on a re-bent suspension component.
-
That generally is not recommended for suspension components. The metal has now been permanently deformed. Working it back deforms the metal even more, making it less strong due to it being deformed (twice) beyond its elastic limits. That makes the piece prone to fatigue cracking and breaking.
Not a problem for non-structural components, such as sheet metal. I wouldn't want to stake my life on a re-bent suspension component.
+1 . There are too many alternatives from original to repro to consider compromising your safety by trying to bend the part straight. It is not like embargoed Cuba where they have to make due with what they have.
-
Thanks to all whom responded.
I will take a closer look at WCC's site for pictures
jwc66k: I now have the MPC on USB and did look there prior to posting my question here. I noticed PNs changed, yet I wasn't sure whether or not a part like this was interchangeable across multiple years. In short, after looking at the MPC, I was uncertain of what changed which would prohibit strut rods from working in different applications. I should have worded my original post and not used the word "identical".
Many thanks to Bob for clarifying that 68-70 will interchange even though subtle differences exist.
Thank you. I will post a wanted add. I had thought about straightening mine, yet I agree that doing so seems like a last resort.
-
Expand your search to include 1970-73 Mustang / Cougar, they all use the same strut rods without the stepped down threaded ends.
-
I now have the MPC on USB and did look there prior to posting my question here. I noticed PNs changed, yet I wasn't sure whether or not a part like this was interchangeable across multiple years. In short, after looking at the MPC, I was uncertain of what changed which would prohibit strut rods from working in different applications. I should have worded my original post and not used the word "identical".
Ford Car Parts (aka MPC) references part numbers that will work for a service replacement. They may or may not be the same as originally installed. Once you understand that, you can "read between the lines". Example: If a different part number is used for for different years - it will not work.
Jim
-
I included the pertinent MPC picture in reply #3. Since there was some confusion on the matter, it might help if we "read between the lines" as Jim refers to, right here and right now.
Focusing on the Mustang (F) and ignoring other car lines for years 67 through 70:
1967
There is a single entry for 67 (67 only, there is no "/" behind the number representing subsequent years). Both left and right are C60Z-3468-A. This strut rod is shared with 66/67 "B" (Fairlane)
1968
There is an entry for 68/69 (excepting Boss) with a RH part number of C8OZ-3468-A and a LH part number of C9ZZ-3468-D. Once again these are shared with the 68/69 "B" (Fairlane/Torino) cars.
1969
The 1969 non-Boss car is discussed above. There is another entry specifically for the Boss, with the RH part number of C9ZZ-3468-C and LH part number of C9ZZ-3468-D. It is interesting here to note that the LH part number for the Boss is the same one specified (in the 1975 version of the MPC) for the non-Boss 68/69 Mustangs. We would need to look at other data points (individual year MPCs, the OSI (Obsolete, Superceded, Interchange) books and so on) to figure out how this went down. I suspect that they had plenty of RH C8OZ-3468-A parts on hand but ran out of the LH C8 versions, and substituted those with the C9 variant for the standard (non-Boss) 69 cars.
1970
Actually the line item is for 70/ which would in the case of the 1965-1972 MPC that the parts are the same for 1970 through 1972. The parts are the same as the previous paragraph, with the RH part number of C9ZZ-3468-C and LH part number of C9ZZ-3468-D.
-------------------------------
A couple of general notes:
1. As has been stated multiple times, the MPC is a good reference in general, but not necessarily accurate for what was done at the factory.
2. The change from C8 to C9 parts, which the MPC associates with the "Boss", might apply to the Shelbys also. I don't see any "before/after" dates in the MPC, so I don't know if the different parts were in play on Job 1 or if they came later such as with the "big bearing" design. This is where input from experts on a site like this are very important.
3. I don't see why you would need to "settle" for a C8 part, especially since the C9 parts that the MPC calls out are used from at least 69 through 72. I did not check the 73 MPC, but suspect it would extend to that year also.
4. I have the 65-72 Mercury MPC but did not check it. I recall that the Cougar had a strange 2-piece job in 67.
-
Cougar and Mustang are identical with regards to the strut rods for 1968 - 70. As is typical, the WCCC website is 100% accurate in this regard.
I included the pertinent MPC picture in reply #3. Since there was some confusion on the matter, it might help if we "read between the lines" as Jim refers to, right here and right now.
Focusing on the Mustang (F) and ignoring other car lines for years 67 through 70:
1967
There is a single entry for 67 (67 only, there is no "/" behind the number representing subsequent years). Both left and right are C60Z-3468-A. This strut rod is shared with 66/67 "B" (Fairlane)
1968
There is an entry for 68/69 (excepting Boss) with a RH part number of C8OZ-3468-A and a LH part number of C9ZZ-3468-D. Once again these are shared with the 68/69 "B" (Fairlane/Torino) cars.
1969
The 1969 non-Boss car is discussed above. There is another entry specifically for the Boss, with the RH part number of C9ZZ-3468-C and LH part number of C9ZZ-3468-D. It is interesting here to note that the LH part number for the Boss is the same one specified (in the 1975 version of the MPC) for the non-Boss 68/69 Mustangs. We would need to look at other data points (individual year MPCs, the OSI (Obsolete, Superceded, Interchange) books and so on) to figure out how this went down. I suspect that they had plenty of RH C8OZ-3468-A parts on hand but ran out of the LH C8 versions, and substituted those with the C9 variant for the standard (non-Boss) 69 cars.
1970
Actually the line item is for 70/ which would in the case of the 1965-1972 MPC that the parts are the same for 1970 through 1972. The parts are the same as the previous paragraph, with the RH part number of C9ZZ-3468-C and LH part number of C9ZZ-3468-D.
-------------------------------
A couple of general notes:
1. As has been stated multiple times, the MPC is a good reference in general, but not necessarily accurate for what was done at the factory.
2. The change from C8 to C9 parts, which the MPC associates with the "Boss", might apply to the Shelbys also. I don't see any "before/after" dates in the MPC, so I don't know if the different parts were in play on Job 1 or if they came later such as with the "big bearing" design. This is where input from experts on a site like this are very important.
3. I don't see why you would need to "settle" for a C8 part, especially since the C9 parts that the MPC calls out are used from at least 69 through 72. I did not check the 73 MPC, but suspect it would extend to that year also.
4. I have the 65-72 Mercury MPC but did not check it. I recall that the Cougar had a strange 2-piece job in 67.
-
The different "except Boss" parts typically applied to the Shelby's as well starting at the same time mid year that the Boss 302 started rolling off the line until the end of production.The Shelby name was not mentioned in the exclusions for some reason most likely so as not to confuse the issue further given relative fewer Shelby's built in comparison to the Boss.
-
67 1 year only- 68-69 are both c8oz #s rh and lh Then all 69 b9s and starting around april 1 when 69 b2s came out and the F-60-15 XHD suspension shelby option started these 69 b2s and all shelbys built after april 1 or so used the new bigger wider F-60-15 tires and they used a unique 69 b9 strut rod that was never serviced by ford that i have ever found anyway. This unique strut rod was the c8oz type that had a wider metal hump by front strut rod bolt hole that made it stronger for the new big f-60-15 tires. Then in 70-71 ford used this same beefed up strut rod with wider metal by front bolt hole but stopped using the extra added castle nut and cotter pin in the end tip (that was more of a safety thing and served no real purpose). So all 70 and up cars used the new c9zz strut rods after that on assembly line.