Just a thought regarding drawing structure and nomenclature:
NEVER USE INTELLIGENT PART NUMBERS!!! Part numbers are just a unique identifier for a part, no more. They should just be some number. Start with 1 (or something like 10000000) and assign all part numbers sequentially. Part numbers should in no way describe the part or how it is used. This allows for flexibility down the road when the part's description or use, or how it is made changes.
I also suggest keeping the drawing #s the same as your part #s.
For tabulated drawings, what we do is make the tabulated drawing using a design table that lists the part according to part number. Then, we make a "pointer drawing" for each part number that only states 'See drawing XXXXXXXX' for details.
Thus, say we have a model named 123 that contains configurations (using a design table) for part numbers 456 & 789. We make a drawing named 123 that shows the model and design table to completely document all configurations (456 & 789) on that single drawing. We also make drawings for 456 & 789, but the only thing on these drawings is a note saying 'SEE DRAWING 123 FOR DETAILS.'
This is the way we do things, and think it works pretty well. You could also use a dash (XXX-YYY) number system to designate configuration YYY of part XXX, but I would advise against this. What happens if (for whatever reason) you decide to remove 123-456 from the design table and create a separate model for it?
Like Wayne mentioned, Lee has a nice tutorial on tabulated drawings and design table to help you out as well.