Engine Block Identification Number
Thread Starter
|
Hotshot
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 11,958
Likes: 228
Engine Block Identification Number
The 96 5.8 that I am working on doesn't have a complete ID number on the block. Also where the date code would be is blank.
Based on what I gathered these numbers are roller 351W blocks.
F4TE-6015-AA-12 for 93/94
F5TE-6015-AA-12 for 95
F6TE-6015-AA-12 for 96
This block is missing the 2nd and 3rd characters. Here is its number. What the heck does this mean? Is it a replacement motor or the last production run or something?
F___E-6015-AA-12
Based on what I gathered these numbers are roller 351W blocks.
F4TE-6015-AA-12 for 93/94
F5TE-6015-AA-12 for 95
F6TE-6015-AA-12 for 96
This block is missing the 2nd and 3rd characters. Here is its number. What the heck does this mean? Is it a replacement motor or the last production run or something?
F___E-6015-AA-12
Senior User
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
From: Durham, CA
F4TE is 94 and newer but to my knowlege, there is no F5, F6, F7 blocks. The ONLY time they change that casting code is when there has been a revision or change. Since there was no change from 94 to the end of production in 97 they all carry the F4TE casting code. This is also the reason why the term "#s matching" on most Fords is misleading. Best you can get in most cases (aside from some of the hipo mustangs & the like of the glory days) is period correct.
Moderator
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 22,415
Likes: 92
From: Denver Metro Area, CO
F4TE is 94 and newer but to my knowlege, there is no F5, F6, F7 blocks. I have no idea about that. The ONLY time they change that casting code is when there has been a revision or change. Since there was no change from 94 to the end of production in 97 they all carry the F4TE casting code.
An actual casting date will be located elsewhere and is stamped in.
EDIT: This site may help:
Classic Mustang Part Number Decoding Guide
Moderator
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 22,415
Likes: 92
From: Denver Metro Area, CO
F5TE and F6TE certainly exist as FoMoCo part number prefixes.
But, coming out here saying only that you recently read of something - implying the other guy is wrong - without providing any sort of source for your information isn't helping anybody and only helps to spread confusion and rumors.
If you can provide a hyperlink to your source for that information then that might help; however, it needs to be a credible, reliable & verifiable source to have any faith in it as a true source of information. If it's something unsubstantiated you just read in a forum someplace, well, then it's an opinion and has no merit and value unless the author is somehow known to be credible.
I already said I don't know the history of the Wheezer engine, when the final casting was made, and I don't have any 1990s FoMoCo documentation to look it up, either. Sorry.
Nor can I explain the missing characters, but pictures might help.
But, coming out here saying only that you recently read of something - implying the other guy is wrong - without providing any sort of source for your information isn't helping anybody and only helps to spread confusion and rumors.
If you can provide a hyperlink to your source for that information then that might help; however, it needs to be a credible, reliable & verifiable source to have any faith in it as a true source of information. If it's something unsubstantiated you just read in a forum someplace, well, then it's an opinion and has no merit and value unless the author is somehow known to be credible.
I already said I don't know the history of the Wheezer engine, when the final casting was made, and I don't have any 1990s FoMoCo documentation to look it up, either. Sorry.
Nor can I explain the missing characters, but pictures might help.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
|
Hotshot
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 11,958
Likes: 228
Why do you refer to it as a wheezer engine? You don't like a roller cam 351?
I'll try to get a picture, but it looks exactly how I described it. I don't know if I can get a picture to come out good enough.
I'll try to get a picture, but it looks exactly how I described it. I don't know if I can get a picture to come out good enough.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
Moderator
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 22,415
Likes: 92
From: Denver Metro Area, CO
It's the pet name it was given when I was growing up, when the 351 Cleveland (particularly the early 4V variant) was the mid-sized engine of choice.
FTE Legend
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 31,930
Likes: 1,499
From: Ottawa, Ontario
The wheezer designation is common.. I have been known to use it on occasion, and it referrs to the fact that this whole family of motors are somewhat incapacitated with heads that were originally designed for a 262 or 289.
Missing numbers on a casting isn't uncommon, it's possible the mold used in this case was damaged or worn, it probably wasn't something intentional but we may never know for sure.
Missing numbers on a casting isn't uncommon, it's possible the mold used in this case was damaged or worn, it probably wasn't something intentional but we may never know for sure.
Thread Starter
|
Hotshot
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 11,958
Likes: 228
Ah, That makes sense.
Thread Starter
|
Hotshot
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 11,958
Likes: 228
The wheezer designation is common.. I have been known to use it on occasion, and it referrs to the fact that this whole family of motors are somewhat incapacitated with heads that were originally designed for a 262 or 289.
Missing numbers on a casting isn't uncommon, it's possible the mold used in this case was damaged or worn, it probably wasn't something intentional but we may never know for sure.
Missing numbers on a casting isn't uncommon, it's possible the mold used in this case was damaged or worn, it probably wasn't something intentional but we may never know for sure.
I didn't think of the mold being damaged or worn. That very well could have been.
Freshman User
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: Park Hills, MO
According to SA Design’s Ford Parts Interchange book there are F4-F7TE engine blocks. From my experience on the blocks they change the stamp on the side every year. I have had a lot of Ford’s with a lot of different style’s and years of engine’s, and in every case the stamp on the side was more a date code than anything. Perfect example. My uncle has several old FE engines laying around. 2 are stamped C6ME-AA, yet 1 is a 360 and 1 is a 390, but both came out of a 66 vehicle. I guess since it’s technically the same block is why the code is the same, even though everything inside the 2 are totally different. The only way to tell what you have with those engines is to take something and stick it in one of the cylinders, bring the piston to the top, mark your “stick”, then take the piston to the bottom, and mark your “stick”. Based on the travel distance that will tell you 360 or 390. He Also has a ‘68 390 stamped C8ME-AA. It’s identical inside and out to the C6ME 390, same internal parts and everything, but the code changed because the year it was cast changed. So a 94 351 Windsor, maybe late 93’s, would be stamped F4TE for 1994 truck engine. According to Ford’s stamp coding and my parts interchange book, a 1995 351 would be a F5TE, a 1996 stamped F6TE, and so on.
Cargo Master
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,322
Likes: 288
From: Laramie, WY
Picture proof or stop speculating and spreading misinformation.