engine number . . . or serial number?

highbeams

highbeams

Well-known member
Was the identification number that is located at three locations on the frame AND (sometimes located on the transmission bell housing (as opposed to the motor number) termed 'serial number' by FoMoCo . . . OR . . .was the identification number that is located at three locations on the frame AND sometimes located on the transmission bell housing (as opposed to the motor number) termed 'motor number ' by FoMoCo?

(my '33 transmission bell housing has NO NUMBER!)

Thank you -
 
Last edited:
A set of numbers with a star at both ends. I have a transmission case that is blank, I understand that would be a replacement and not factory.
 
Here's a blank case with no VIN # from a 1940 to 48 Ford v8. I saved it from the garbage truck as it was lying next to the trash bin in 1973. Anyone need the case? I took it all apart. I was told such "blank" cases were replacements from dealers.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6877b.jpg
    IMG_6877b.jpg
    51.8 KB · Views: 62
  • IMG_6793b.jpg
    IMG_6793b.jpg
    54.6 KB · Views: 55
Last edited:
19Fordy said:
Here's a blank case with no VIN # from a 1940 to 48 Ford. I saved it from the gardage truck as it was lying next to the trash bin in 1973. Anyone need the case? I took it all apart. I was told such "blank" cases were replacements from dealers.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that probably SOME 1950 light-duty pick-ups, and '51-'52 pick-ups had optional COLUMN shift! Thet were OPEN DRIVE, but the guts would swap into that case. Coop


.
 
My Dad had a column shift, 6 banger 51 Ford pickup that my he let me drive (at 13 yo) to the dump with him riding shotgun. It was all two lane road. Scared crapless! You remember your first drive. When I turned 16, I tried to speed shift that old truck, not very successfully.
 
My father bought a new '52 Ford F1, V8 column shift w/OD... I loved that truck, it had about every accessory in the book.
 
Charlie Stephens said:
Four cylinder or V8?

Charlie Stephens
Click to expand...
V-8. Apologize for the lateness, Charlie. I posted"V-8" as opposed to quick reply by mistake.
My 'motor number' is within 1933 January 212,239 - 224,451 in the past EFV8 resto manuel, which I now understand is a taboo manuel and 'serial number' is a swear word/swear term.
 
highbeams said:
I now understand 'serial number' is a swear word/swear term.
Click to expand...


Like "tubman" said in the "DATED glass" thread....SEMANTICS! Ford referred to them as "ENGINE or MOTOR Numbers" in the old days. Most state DMV offices officially began calling these numbers "VIN"s from 1954 thru 1981, yet with no standardized sequence. Until the new (and current) format was introduced in '81, many folks and DMV offices used the term "SERIAL NUMBER". In '81, the numbers became a standardized 17-digit number always referred-to as a "VIN". Back in the '30s & '40s, nobody had ever heard of a VIN, and I remember them always being called serial numbers until (I believe it was) 1968 when the tags first appeared on the dash. Coop

.
 
V8COOPMAN said:
Like "tubman" said in the "DATED glass" thread....SEMANTICS! Ford referred to them as "ENGINE or MOTOR Numbers" in the old days. Most state DMV offices officially began calling these numbers "VIN"s from 1954 thru 1981, yet with no standardized sequence. Until the new (and current) format was introduced in '81, many folks and DMV offices used the term "SERIAL NUMBER". In '81, the numbers became a standardized 17-digit number always referred-to as a "VIN". Back in the '30s & '40s, nobody had ever heard of a VIN, and I remember them always being called serial numbers until (I believe it was) 1968 when the tags first appeared on the dash. Coop

.
Click to expand...
/// Thank you much, Coop. I never thought of the term serial number being correct or incorrect. I'm glad I got educated here! Thank you again, David, et. al.,

I understood that FoMoCo/Mr. Henry placed an identification motor number on the trans bell housing and only on the trans bell housing because the trans was so much less likely to be pulled during the car's road-life. Good thinking. We know why.

to wit; Engines become tuckered . . . pulled, and the NUMBER is gone w/the engine but remains on the title& reg, and later 'down the road' next owner (?. . . 'wha' the . . .')

I know for a fact that I did read an EFV-8 article(and it was a genuine EFV-8 article; not a news stand mag article) that on rare cases, the trans bell housing number AND the number on the frame match. But the common scenario = the trans bell housing number IS the engine number. The number on the frame (3 locations) has nothing to do with an engine number. It's on the frame! Why in the world would it be termed 'engine number'! The engine has its number on . . . the . . . trans bell housing because that . . . is . . . where . . . Henry wanted it. (as my prior comment(s).

Am I the last one living that read that?


*****
Wife: Why do you keep repeating a number in your sleep for the past few weeks!

Me: Oh, it must be your hips-stomach-bust number. That's what it is. . . yeah, that's gotta be it.

Wife: My measurements have no star on each end. Plus that's not even my . . . . .


. . .Are you seeing another woman?"

Me: In a way, yes, she's 87 years old, needs parts, and always an expensive date. Very demanding.
 
Last edited:
highbeams said:
/// Thank you much, Coop.

I know for a fact that I did read an EFV-8 article(and it was a genuine EFV-8 article; not a news stand mag article) that on rare cases, the trans bell housing number AND the number on the frame match. But the common scenario = the trans bell housing number IS the engine number. The number on the frame (3 locations) has nothing to do with an engine number. It's on the frame! Why in the world would it be termed 'engine number'! The engine has its number on . . . the . . . trans bell housing because that . . . is . . . where . . . Henry wanted it.
Click to expand...

"h'beams"....Please allow me to help you fully understand just a little bit mo-better about engine numbers, frame numbers & trans/bellhousing numbers.

Way back in the day....up through the 1931 Model "A", Ford actually did stamp the "Motor Number" on a smooth, blank pad that was cast on the drivers' side of the 4-cylinder blocks. When that engine/trans combination was lowered into a chassis on the assembly line, the chassis was also hand stamped with the SAME number stamped on the engine. On a Model A, that MOTOR Number was the easiest to see and be read on that engine pad, as the numbers stamped into the frame (on a Model A) cannot be seen without raising the body. Today, since many Model A engines have been swapped and replaced, it has become difficult to verify TITLE numbers without lifting the body from frame.

Now in 1932-1948, Ford began stamping sequential "Motor/Engine Numbers" (as they were STILL referred-to) on the transmission clutch housing pad at the time the transmission was bolted to the engine, creating a MOTOR/TRANS assembly. The term "Motor Number" was likely just carry-over from the Model A days as what it was referred-to in written manuals. That V8 engine/transmission assembly with stamped "Motor Number" on the trans pad was stored with thousands of other like assemblies, until they were shipped to automobile assembly plants all across the US. When each motor/trans assembly was lowered into a new chassis on the assembly line, the SAME "Motor Number" that was stamped into the trans pad in the engine assembly plant is now hand-stamped into the frame rail in the three usual locations. Clearly, the Motor Number (on transmission) has EVERYTHING to do with the three numbers located on the frame. Also note that it is much easier to verify the "Motor Number" stamped into the FRONT location of a frame rail, rather than having to remove the carpet/mat/padding material which is necessary to read the MOTOR Number on a '32-'48 transmission pad. Coop

.
 
Hi Everyone, I hope you'll tolerate a little topic-drift.

What do y'all feel about these thoughts which I'm not sure are correct?

Assembly plants did not prioritize producing sequentially numbered batches of vehicles.

They pulled an already-stamped engine/trans from a stockpile and earlier arriving assemblies may have been placed in the back of the stockpile feeding the assembly line.

(The only time things would have been in long stretches of sequential order would have been when they were transported from assembly to storage and before being loaded on rail cars. Probably not even then, as there would have been multiple workers stamping assemblies and sending their jobs to storage or the next stage, maybe even random testing which gets things out of sequential order too.)

First-in last-out could/would? have happened while they worked through their stock on hand until the next train-load arrived from The Rouge as well as when they were loaded in Dearborn. Keeping in mind that the plants weren't in the business of stockpiling parts, they were moving parts to the assembly lines.

Photo and enlargement/detail from Library of Congress collections, Long Beach Assembly Plant, April 1930, so the engines are for Model A's, but you can imagine the same happening for the V-8's.

487954


487953
 
Last edited:
VeryTangled said:
Hi Everyone, I hope you'll tolerate a little topic-drift.

What do y'all feel about these thoughts which I'm not sure are correct?

Assembly plants did not prioritize producing sequentially numbered batches of vehicles.

They pulled an already-stamped engine/trans from a stockpile and earlier arriving assemblies may have been placed in the back of the stockpile feeding the assembly line.

(The only time things would have been in long stretches of sequential order would have been when they were transported from assembly to storage and before being loaded on rail cars. Probably not even then, as there would have been multiple workers stamping assemblies and sending their jobs to storage or the next stage, maybe even random testing which gets things out of sequential order too.)

First-in last-out could/would? have happened while they worked through their stock on hand until the next train-load arrived from The Rouge as well as when they were loaded in Dearborn. Keeping in mind that the plants weren't in the business of stockpiling parts, they were moving parts to the assembly lines.

Photo and enlargement/detail from Library of Congress collections, Long Beach Assembly Plant, April 1930, so the engines are for Model A's, but you can imagine the same happening for the V-8's.
Click to expand...


Jeff, that's not topic drift at all. It's continuation of the explanation about serial numbers.

About first-In/Last-Out, You'll remember, Old Henry made use of everything, no waste, no unproductive energy expended. In the design of assembly plants, spur lines were utilized as storage space for boxcars of incoming parts and assemblies, those boxcars being unloaded only as needed, the contents going directly to the assembly lines by way of conveyor lines, with only a staging area as intermediary storage. This was the plan, and was made to happen as much as practical, though no doubt there were major exceptions, as can be seen in the Long Beach photo you posted!
...Perhaps, Old Henry saw that photo and said "What a waste of time!"
 
V8COOPMAN said:
"h'beams"....Please allow me to help you fully understand just a little bit mo-better about engine numbers, frame numbers & trans/bellhousing numbers.

Way back in the day....up through the 1931 Model "A", Ford actually did stamp the "Motor Number" on a smooth, blank pad that was cast on the drivers' side of the 4-cylinder blocks. When that engine/trans combination was lowered into a chassis on the assembly line, the chassis was also hand stamped with the SAME number stamped on the engine. On a Model A, that MOTOR Number was the easiest to see and be read on that engine pad, as the numbers stamped into the frame (on a Model A) cannot be seen without raising the body. Today, since many Model A engines have been swapped and replaced, it has become difficult to verify TITLE numbers without lifting the body from frame.

Now in 1932-1948, Ford began stamping sequential "Motor/Engine Numbers" (as they were STILL referred-to) on the transmission clutch housing pad at the time the transmission was bolted to the engine, creating a MOTOR/TRANS assembly. The term "Motor Number" was likely just carry-over from the Model A days as what it was referred-to in written manuals. That V8 engine/transmission assembly with stamped "Motor Number" on the trans pad was stored with thousands of other like assemblies, until they were shipped to automobile assembly plants all across the US. When each motor/trans assembly was lowered into a new chassis on the assembly line, the SAME "Motor Number" that was stamped into the trans pad in the engine assembly plant is now hand-stamped into the frame rail in the three usual locations. Clearly, the Motor Number (on transmission) has EVERYTHING to do with the three numbers located on the frame. Also note that it is much easier to verify the "Motor Number" stamped into the FRONT location of a frame rail, rather than having to remove the carpet/mat/padding material which is necessary to read the MOTOR Number on a '32-'48 transmission pad. Coop

.
Click to expand...
Thank you, Sir. 'nuf said!

. . . re the three locations on the frame, fortunately the location by the steering box is visible. (apparently one would have to be.) but what is the reason for three locations, two of which can't be viewed anyway(unless body off.) Side-frame stamp if three locations is necessary!
amen.
 
highbeams said:
Thank you, Sir. 'nuf said!

. . . re the three locations on the frame, fortunately the location by the steering box is visible. (apparently one would have to be.) but what is the reason for three locations, two of which can't be viewed anyway(unless body off.) Side-frame stamp if three locations is necessary!
amen.
Click to expand...


UNFORTUNATELY, there was NO stamped number "by the steering box" on Model "A" frames. They had their forward-most numbers stamped just under front, left corner of body. So in '32, Ford corrected that little oversight.

Why THREE locations? Well, why not? Today, it is frequent to find that front number had been stamped by a weakling, leaving the numbers difficult (or impossible) to read definitively. Or, what if the car was involved in a terrible head-on collision, obliterating that front number entirely, yet somehow necessitating the need for positive identification? Other manufacturers stamp numbers in multiple locations also! Coop

.
 
V8COOPMAN said:
UNFORTUNATELY, there was NO stamped number "by the steering box" on Model "A" frames. They had their forward-most numbers stamped just under front, left corner of body. So in '32, Ford corrected that little oversight.

Why THREE locations? Well, why not? Today, it is frequent to find that front number had been stamped by a weakling, leaving the numbers difficult (or impossible) to read definitively. Or, what if the car was involved in a terrible head-on collision, obliterating that front number entirely, yet somehow necessitating the need for positive identification? Other manufacturers stamp numbers in multiple locations also! Coop

.
Click to expand...
Okay; thanks for that, Coop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top