Vin stampings.

[Tired Sheep]

No engine or trans tag would be unusual on an "untouched" assembly

[CharlesTurner]

The number of characters lines up with other stampings... it looks like it starts with a 9 and then followed by a '1', but maybe that is some other plant code?  The 400 series number at the end would normally be allocated to Mercury cars.

[shelbymann1970]

No engine or trans tag would be unusual on an "untouched" assembly

Uh, He has his original Shelby engine tag. It was still attached to the engine when he bought the car(usually misplaced during a rebuild especially if it was done it was done 4 decades plus ago). All castings are good. The Trans? Did you see the pic of it? I told him to clean it to find the tag which I'm sure would be there. He knew where to find the trans stamp and that is why it is in the pic above. So where is the trans tag on a C4? Gary

[shelbymann1970]

The number of characters lines up with other stampings... it looks like it starts with a 9 and then followed by a '1', but maybe that is some other plant code?  The 400 series number at the end would normally be allocated to Mercury cars.

All engines I have seen have the plant code as the second digit. The 9 makes no sense since there isn't a 302 4V in 1969 and the heads are cast 302 4V  and block are FEb 68 cast dates. All plants are letters and not numerical.  A=Atlanta, F=Dearborn, T=Metuchin, R=San Jose. Here is a link to Ford assy plant codes from A-Z and no "I" for good reason. So we are back to it isn't a vin from any plant in 1968 . http://www.mercurystuff.com/1968-ford-mercury-vehicle-identification.html

[J_Speegle]

Well the car sat on the dealer's lot for over a year. Date codes on engine all match up correctly. So the car get built at Metuchin and get shipped to Ionia. AO Smith coverts it over. Goes to the dealer and someone steals the engine and trans(who would want a 302 4V C-4?). Dealer orders a replacement.

Just spit balling ideas and possibilities

The long delay of sitting at the dealership so long could be connected with eh loss of drivetrain and the time to recover and replace it.

What are the odds that they would get an engine date coded weeks before the car was built at Metuchin?

Much better IMHO the closer the incident was to when the car was rebuilt. Maybe a one in six possibility that the replacement was made the same month, possibly, and the original engine

THe stamps appear to be done in a holding fixture as individual stamping of each numeral wouldn't be off the same on all numerals like it is on the block. Could that be an invoice number stamped somewhere for a replacement engine/trans?

Yes it appears that the numbers were placed in a gang stamp and done at the same time unlike the assembly line units were. Plus we have already established they do not fit the plant pattern nor the right size fonts. Leaves us with them being some other tracking number for other purposes

Shortage when the car went down the line(factory screw up?) and the car went to a holding area for those components? Since every original engine I have seen(not a whole lot) were always stamped wouldn't this combo also be stamped? Remember Feb components and Feb assy date on block. Car built 3-13-68

Car would not have been started (to be built at the plant) until all the major parts were ready and available according to the plant managers I've spoken with. They wanted smooth and fast and taking a chance that something wasn't in place at the start was a no start. Didn't have allot of room to store half finished cars but often used as an excuse my experience

[shelbymann1970]

Well the car sat on the dealer's lot for over a year. Date codes on engine all match up correctly. So the car get built at Metuchin and get shipped to Ionia. AO Smith coverts it over. Goes to the dealer and someone steals the engine and trans(who would want a 302 4V C-4?). Dealer orders a replacement.

Just spit balling ideas and possibilities

The long delay of sitting at the dealership so long could be connected with eh loss of drivetrain and the time to recover and replace it.

What are the odds that they would get an engine date coded weeks before the car was built at Metuchin?

Much better IMHO the closer the incident was to when the car was rebuilt. Maybe a one in six possibility that the replacement was made the same month, possibly, and the original engine

THe stamps appear to be done in a holding fixture as individual stamping of each numeral wouldn't be off the same on all numerals like it is on the block. Could that be an invoice number stamped somewhere for a replacement engine/trans?

Yes it appears that the numbers were placed in a gang stamp and done at the same time unlike the assembly line units were. Plus we have already established they do not fit the plant pattern nor the right size fonts. Leaves us with them being some other tracking number for other purposes

Shortage when the car went down the line(factory screw up?) and the car went to a holding area for those components? Since every original engine I have seen(not a whole lot) were always stamped wouldn't this combo also be stamped? Remember Feb components and Feb assy date on block. Car built 3-13-68

Car would not have been started (to be built at the plant) until all the major parts were ready and available according to the plant managers I've spoken with. They wanted smooth and fast and taking a chance that something wasn't in place at the start was a no start. Didn't have allot of room to store half finished cars but often used as an excuse my experience

Thanks for the help Jeff. So a screw up on engines wouldn't be an issue then. I think this is a mystery that will never be solved. It wasn't uncommon for Shelbys to sit more than a year at a dealership. Also I cannot comprehend someone stealing the car for an anemic 302 auto but who knows. Would a theft be in any records that SAAC or Marti might have?

[CharlesTurner]

The number of characters lines up with other stampings... it looks like it starts with a 9 and then followed by a '1', but maybe that is some other plant code?  The 400 series number at the end would normally be allocated to Mercury cars.

All engines I have seen have the plant code as the second digit. The 9 makes no sense since there isn't a 302 4V in 1969 and the heads are cast 302 4V  and block are FEb 68 cast dates. All plants are letters and not numerical.  A=Atlanta, F=Dearborn, T=Metuchin, R=San Jose. Here is a link to Ford assy plant codes from A-Z and no "I" for good reason. So we are back to it isn't a vin from any plant in 1968 . http://www.mercurystuff.com/1968-ford-mercury-vehicle-identification.html

Right, agree with your comment. Just pointing out that while the numbers/letters don't fit with expected codes, the number of characters is the same as a normal partial VIN stamp.

In regards to originality... I think I remember seeing date codes on original FoMoCo rod/main bearings.

[shelbymann1970]

The number of characters lines up with other stampings... it looks like it starts with a 9 and then followed by a '1', but maybe that is some other plant code?  The 400 series number at the end would normally be allocated to Mercury cars.

All engines I have seen have the plant code as the second digit. The 9 makes no sense since there isn't a 302 4V in 1969 and the heads are cast 302 4V  and block are FEb 68 cast dates. All plants are letters and not numerical.  A=Atlanta, F=Dearborn, T=Metuchin, R=San Jose. Here is a link to Ford assy plant codes from A-Z and no "I" for good reason. So we are back to it isn't a vin from any plant in 1968 . http://www.mercurystuff.com/1968-ford-mercury-vehicle-identification.html

Right, agree with your comment. Just pointing out that while the numbers/letters don't fit with expected codes, the number of characters is the same as a normal partial VIN stamp.

In regards to originality... I think I remember seeing date codes on original FoMoCo rod/main bearings.

also the font size is SMALLER than a regular engine stamp and it is obvious they were not individually hand stamped looking at the engine stamp and the upper half of the stamp pretty much missing. I thought replacement but the numbers were on both engine and trans. Then I saw the date codes. The engine builder told my friend all components were factory in the engine. Never apart. Never rebuilt. Really still in good shape. Just weird hence the topic here hoping for some more insight .

[Tired Sheep]

Please address why the ID tags for the engine and trans are missing?

If one chooses to ignore certain facts, its hard to take the assessment seriously.

You cant pick and choose which facts are relevant

I would say the burden is on the owner. Find other examples of this oddity or it will remain an anomaly

[shelbymann1970]

Please address why the ID tags for the engine and trans are missing?

If one chooses to ignore certain facts, its hard to take the assessment seriously.

WHAT THE F is WRONG with YOU? Trying to stir stuff up? Can you not READ? What ENGINE tag are you referring to other than the one that was MOUNTED to the engine which I told you specifically in a prior post which I also told you that it will be looked at real soon on the trans tag. I'm familiar with a top loader tag but not an automatic. If there is one it will be on it. If you cannot comprehend this post then please refrain because you are adding zero other than drama here. Gary

[J_Speegle]

............. So a screw up on engines wouldn't be an issue then........................

Correct its very unlikely that this engine with these markings was installed on the line or at the car assembly plant based on what I've seen and have been told. And of course why your searching for other possibilities

[Tired Sheep]

I would think you could ask Kevin Marti if there was a 1968 automobile with that consecutive unit number "403908" and if so what engine it had.

Like Charles Turner said, this could be from a Mercury. It looks the responses agree this part is a consecutive unit number.

[Bill Collins]

In my experience, the assembly plants often abbreviated the block VIN stamps, leaving out characters that would be physically obvious (like the engine code) given that was the type of engine they were being stamped onto.

91 is a Cougar body code. '68 Cougars were built at Dearborn and San Jose. According to Kevin Marti's Mustang and Cougar tag book, the highest '68 Cougar VINs are:
Dearborn - 587700 range
San Jose -  523500 range

So if I were asking Kevin Marti to run a VIN, it would be either 8F91J403908 or 8R91J403908.

1968 production ended in July. So the subject engine/trans' February 27 assembly date appears to correlate with a 400,000 series build. Keep in mind that the final six digit sequence is not exclusive to a particular car line at a given assembly plant. Units were consecutively serialized across all car lines being produced in that plant for a given model year.

Despite the claims by prior owners, I suspect this assembly was a post original sale transplant from a salvage Cougar, likely done very early in the Shelby's life. The proximity of the engine date to the production date of the Shelby is a coincidence, likely a result of the fact that, in order to get a then current 4 barrel 302, a salvage car would have also been a recently produced unit at the time the swap occurred.

This assertion is supported by the differing style of fonts between those on the subject block and that of VINs stamped at Metuchen Assembly, which produced the '68 Shelbys. Look at the two attached photos. One is the VIN which is the subject of this thread, the other a photo from my file of the block VIN stamp from a '68 GT350.

Note the variations:
- Overall construction of the number - no assembly plant letter on subject as commonly found on Metuchen stamp
Numeral differences:
- "8" top loop is equal to bottom on Metuchen, smaller on top on subject
- "1" has a foot on Metuchen, no foot on subject
- "9" has tighter bottom hook on Metuchen than that on subject

While the reason for the presence of this assembly in a Shelby is unknown, one could speculate that: The car was out of warranty and experienced an engine failure, so the repairer sourced a salvage assembly in order to save money. Or: It could have been a theft, and either the insurance company sourced it for the same reason, Or, the Shelby was sold as a recovered but stripped unit at a salvage auction and the buyer put it together with readily available used parts.

That's my take on it. Bear in mind that certain of our cars endured many abuses before becoming the icons of the muscle car era that we regard them as today.

[J_Speegle]

If this was a Ford VIN we would need to focus on finding what model used the 400000 series and then identify which of the ten Mercury or twenty Ford plants were assigning that range of VIN's in 68

Neither San Jose or Dearborn used the 40000's on Mustangs or Cougars in 68

Unfortunately the books I've opened so far do not include a cross reference for series and models of cars

Did a scan through the few non-Mustang, Cougar and Shelby's I have records of and found that none of the applications below showed up with a sequential number starting with a "4"

68 Mustang
68 Cougar
68 Shelby
68 Falcon
68 Torino
68 Thunderbird
68 Galaxie
68 LTD
68 Cyclone
68 Montego (for future reference those start with a "6")

Trucks, Econolines & Bronco had their own specific pattern different from passenger cars

[shelbymann1970]

One thing that has not been addressed is the FONT size. It is smaller than any VIN I have seen on blocks from 68-70. I'm pretty sure the factories didn't have different size stamps in a fixture lying around. What is also interesting is the engine failure aspect. It isn't a 289 HiPo, 428 car with a 4 speed. 302 automatic. In my decades dealing with these cars I have seen more failures of engines with manuals than automatics. One thing nobody mentioned even if we can account for the smaller font size  is a mis-stamped vin on a block. But my old 68 the second owner pulled out the 302 4 speed and installed a 428SCJ and automatic(around 1970) and changed out the complete rear end assy to a 69 3.50 TL and 69 Mach1 springs(all stamped/date coded and I still got the 2" drums that have never been cut and measure under 10").Not only is the plant letter or yeart  not in the vin but now a body style(91) is? I do like this discussion and appreciate the findings here vso thanks for all the input. The autolite carb on the engine is dated 1 month later than the car. That could easily be a batch of GT350s having their intakes done at the same time at a dealer when the AL  intakes became available and carbs being swapped or a warranty carb issue not in SAAC records.
So I have this question for those who have talked to plant workers: Were the blocks and trans hand stamp individually with each stamp hence we see them all over the place? Plant specific?
This engine, trans were definitely stamped in a holding fixture as witness by the perfect in a row stamp on the trans and the top part missing in the perfect row on the engine.
Here is a pic of the engine I put into my GT350. An Atlanta plant 302. Perfect in a row but one number was so light that with paint and the flash it doesn't show up in the pic. Appears to me to be done in a fixture.