Greetings! My apologies if I have posted my need incorrectly. I did search the forum first, and found a thread about generators, but nothing pertaining to the correct Ford part number for the 1962-63 Ford 33 amp standard generator. My study suggests that the OEM brushes were thicker than the aftermarkets, which would provide more surface area for conduction. One number I found for late 40’s-late 50’s generators is B6A-10043-B, but I’m not sure these apply to the 60’s generators. Any help is most appreciated! Thanks in advance!!
My notes say Ford C0AZ-10043A generator brushes, listed for '60 Falcon, '49-'61 Ford, '49-'51, '56 Lincoln, '56-'62 Mercury, and '48-'63 truck. The B6 in the part number that you supplied is 1956. The C0 in the part number that I supplied is 1960. That is what I put in my 1960 Falcon when it still had a generator. The rest of the part number is the same, but the revision suffix.. They may be the same part.
Can anyone tell me what application the generator brushes with a single lead wire had? Their part number is COAZ-10043-B. I need all the amps possible from this generator. I don’t want to switch to an alternator; it’s not correct for the car. Thank you! Bob
As far as I remember, my 1960 Falcon had brushes with a single lead, but it has been about a decade since it had a generator. I cannot recall a reason for the two-wire ones. Both wires are attached to the same brush. I can only surmise this is so that they can conduct higher current, versus the single-wire ones.
Ford had a habit of superceding the letters to the current year. Like the COAZ-A might change to C1AZ-A or C2AZ-A , but being the same part.
Folks!!! Thank You so much for your help! Everyone has been very kind! Kultulz, are you referring to the FAS-10139-B number cast into the front housing? If there’s a number stamped into the main body to which the field coils are attached, I won’t find it, because I powered coated it 17 years ago when I last rebuilt it. I know it’s a standard 12V, 30A generator manufactured in late 1962 ( Sept-Dec) but no later than April of 1963. The brushes in it now are two wire, but the brush attached to the Armature post is worn out, in contrast to the brush grounded to the backing plate, which has only minimal wear. The commutator isn’t scored, but it would benefit from resurfacing to maximize contact with the new brushes. I’ll try to send a photo of the backing plate containing the brushes with this reply. AGAIN, THANK YOU everyone!!!!
Kultulz, can you provide the legends to the columns for the chart you shared?? My investigation suggests that the brushes ending in 69-B or 43-B were all single wire. Brushes whose part number ended with 69-A or 43-A were double wire. I have no idea what the difference is between the 10069-A and the 10043-A part numbers. Do you know??
This is what Rock auto shows for a 62 country sedan. Fron here 1962 FORD COUNTRY SEDAN 4.8L 292cid V8 Alternator / Generator Brush | RockAuto
The STARTER MOTOR ASSEMBLY ID STAMPING NO. will be found on the starter HSG. It identifies the ASSMBLY ENGINEERING PN and gets you into the correct parts list in the MPC. The number you have is the front plate STAMPING ID NO. BASIC PN 100043 does not show in the MPC. Again, it may be an ENGINEERING NUMBER.
Thanks again to all for your help!! I didn’t realize Rock Auto had such detail in their parts list!! This was very helpful! I’ll let you guys move on to rescuing others!
Folks, just a wrap up on my quest for the correct brushes for my Ford Generator. It’s build date turns out to be early 1963. The Ford brush part number is C1AZ-10043-A. kudo’s to Gimpy, because he was correct!! These brushes have a slight lip on the end of the connector that is screwed onto the spring actuated lever. I have no clue what happens to the generator output if you install slightly incorrect brushes, but I don’t wish to be the test case! I will report the amp output after I turn the commutator and get it reassembled. Thank You again, for the time spent assisting me!!!! Bob
Folks: This will be my last entry on this thread, I promise! Do any generator experts have thoughts on why one brush is only 20% worn compared to the correct NOS Motorcraft brushes, versus 51% for the other? Here’s another photo of the wear difference. The bearings are like new, and the commutator has no ridges on it; the latter should have affected the wear on both brushes similarly. Thanks!
Different spring pressures could be the simple answer. I know that in some cases the polarity of the current in a circuit will affect the contacts differently in a switch due to current flow. Another instance could be the capacitance in the circuit, which does affect which side of a set of points will erode, vs the other side of the points having built-up deposits. Maybe one of these could be a more "scientific" reason, but I'd lean towards different spring pressures being the cause.
Ebbspeed: Interesting comments about polarity and capacitance! I had my assessment of spring tension tested by a mechanic friend who agreed that the springs seemed very similar. We also scratched the brush material to assess hardness, and they seemed very similar. Regardless, I bought new springs and NOS Motorcraft brushes, so we shall see how it wears in the future! Thanks to all!!! Bob
38 Chevy: That’s a great idea if I was in a pinch! Unfortunately, the badly worn brush is so short that it won’t make good contact the commutator. I’ve gathered the parts to rebuild it, since I need every amp possible to run my old car. Thank You for responding!! Bob
I don't know if you are still looking, but maybe try your local Auto-electric rebuilders. My local one is very helpful and is happy to sell parts including brushes. Also they are the best authority to answer questions about why one brush wears faster.
The Jalopy Journal
