Mercury Cougar Owners banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I found this on the car, have no idea what it means:
2F94Q545679 76F - 24D 622
3B AC PB DW
ST RM PW LHPAC
DE

This is Greek to me, hopefully someone can help. I wanna know where my cat came from:D
:1poke: Kyle:1poke:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,691 Posts
It sounds like a fender tag, perhaps? If you have the data plate (actually a decal in 1972) I could tell you more.

2F4Q545679 76F 24D 622
Model Year: 1972
Assembly Plant: Dearborn, Michigan
Body Style: ?
Engine Model: ?
Sequential Number: 5679
Body Style: XR7, Convertible
Exterior Color: ?
Interior Trim: ?
Scheduled Mfg. Date:
District Sales Office:
Differential type/Ratio:
Transmition Model:

Tim B
1969 XR7 428 CJR convertible
http://members.aol.com/timbrands/index.html
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
Kyle,
This is the body buck tag. I bet you found it on the core suport above3 the passengers headlight.
2F94Q545679 76F - 24D 622
3B AC PB DW
ST RM PW LHPAC
DE
Now if I remember correctly...
2=1972
f=dearborn built
94=XR7 convertable
Q=351C 4V cobra jet
545679=45679th built for 72
76F=XR7 convertable
24D=I think maybe build date(this location is color on 71 & earlyer)
622=?rotation number?
3B= color light blue
AC=air cond.
PB+power brakes
DW=white with black XR7 bucket seat int.
ST= sterieo radio(Any optional sterieo, 8 track am/fm ect.)
RM= remote mirror
PW=power windows,
LHPAC=look and see if its LHRAC=left hane race mirror
DE= I'm not sure I thought it was defoger but you wouldn't have one on a conv.
I am not 100% sure of all this but it is the best I can tell. Sounds like a nice car. Neal
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,691 Posts
That's the fender or buck tag. In 1969 they were attached to the fender/radiator support.

Mine said:
9F94R523524 76B M 099

6F AC PT PB

PW

D2 (turned 90 degrees down) B3 (turned 90 degrees down and stamped from the other side, so it appears backward)

Tim B
1969 XR7 428 CJR convertible
http://members.aol.com/timbrands/index.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,299 Posts
Q??? uhh, uh hem, that engines, uhh, no good at all. if you give it to me ill dispose of it :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
what are the performance numbers for the "Q" engine?
must be good if I should "dispose of it".:D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
To be honest, The 70 "M" clevland was better.the 72 "Q" is rated at 266horses at 5400rpm and 301 feet pounds of torque st 3600 rpm the 70 "M" was 300 and 380.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,299 Posts
well, yeah, net HP vs Gross. that would make the Q at about 330 or so if rated in the same manner
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
what kind of rear axle is on this car? what kind of accelaration am I looking at? :flamer: :chain: Rice Rockets:badass: :aug2:
Hopefully I can burn some rice beaters when the car is up and running.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
Look at the drop in torque. It was also low compresion. I have had a 71 "M" and a 72 "Q" . the M would kick butt over the Q. And the 70 "M" has more power than the 71.

The info you gave us does not have the rear axle code. It would be on the door tag if it is still readable. You could also get under the cat and look for the tag on a not on the pumpkin. Don't brake it off it will leave some needed info behind. Neal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,299 Posts
if im not mistaken, even the 72 M had more torque than the 72 Q .....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
there is no 72 "M" but if you ment 71 "M" yes it does. its rated at 285HP @ 5400rpm with 370 ft lb tq @3400. Neal.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
The only other 4bbl engine in 1972-73 had 290lbs. of torque and 248 bhp. Badcatt if you think that an M can beat my Q, that sounds like a challenge.:1poke: if you come to cali we can see.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,299 Posts
oops, my fault. here this book i have for 72 Mustangs lists this.... the Q had 266 [email protected] and 301 lbs @ 3800. the R code 351 had 275 hp @ 6000 and 286 lbs @ 286. those are net ratings as well, and California spec engines. ( the footnotes said so ) running on regular gas of 91 ( ! regular ! ) octane.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,105 Posts
I no longer have eather the 71 "M" or the 72 "Q". the only other engines I'm awair of in 71/72 cougars only had a 2V carb. I'm not saying the 72 Q is a slug, it was just detuned to meet emishions requirments. I have liked Clevlands for some time and have a mild 2V headed one in Badcatt. Hope you get it together so you can tromp some boe ties soon. Neal.
P.S. The "R" was no optioned in a Cougar in 72:cry: like it should have been.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Sure thing! Soon as it's up and running the bowties and ricerunners are gonna know bout it:D Another thing: what headers would run best on this engine:confused:
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top