TCracingCA

It seems like the value guides run a sort of value spread in general between Coupes and Roadsters.
I do think that the 1963 Coupes (due to the attraction based on the popularity of the split window does generally command higher asking prices than the 1964 Coupe. But I believe the 1964 Roadster with the following year improvements should list higher in value than the 1963 Roadster, even though they are all really good cars. Or maybe no, because the 1963 Roadster still is the first year of the C2 convertibles and first year matters! Thus related to the real world and not speculation, what do you think?
I tried to buy a 1963 carcass car, and the Owner felt he had gold! No negotiation. He kept telling me "but it is a 1963!" I told him it was a project, he repeated "but it is a 1963!" PS he also took it home at the end of the day, unsold!

John McGraw

It has been my experience, that when comparing equal cars of 63 and 64 vintage year, the 63 will always bring more money. I think that it is related to the 63 being the first year of the body style. There is no doubt that 63 cars are more expensive to restore, due to the many 1-year-only parts used on them.



Regards, John McGraw

TCracingCA

If a 1963 is restored or in tack, then value would be higher based on unique one year only parts/features! The car needs restoration or crucial hard to find parts are missing, then the spread in value should for a unique one year only car- should fall off substantially based on that, and more so than the other years. Thus a project car 1963 roadster (needing everything) should be a rock bottom C2 car. A 1964 roadster needing everything, not as big of a problem (would retain value better in the worst condition and up until you are talking about the whole (intact) cars. Then different story, Makes sense! Thus maybe the guy that had the project 1963 is a forum member and will read this, and I will get the phone call.

MiguelsC2

If the first year was that big a deal? The 68 C3 would be the top dog. Most run from them.

Any 64 C2 will be worth less than a comparable 63. Period. The value is not higher because of parts costs. IMHO it's strictly desirability based.

All this talk of 63 unique parts is really not that significant. Most if not all are available as repros. IMHO The price difference is insignificant in relation to the total restoration costs.

MikeM

What is your point? Sounds like he decided you were nothing more than a tire kicker wasting his time and told you to hit the road!

PS. He didn't sell the car but you went home empty handed!

Some people like each body style and some people like the different years. That's why there's some of each. I personally looked a long time to find my favorite midyear, a '63 convertible! I had a '64 just like the '63 but I sold it because it wasn't a '63 CONVERTIBLE!

vettebuyer6369

The original question is getting lost a little bit.

If the question is, does the SWC drag up the value of the roadster, I'm going to say no. Ive had a couple 63s and the coupe never really seems to have affected the roadster's market price in my opinion.

If your question is why did the guy overvalue his car? The answer is, Corvette owners do that every single day, with every model of every year. I don't think his comment (its a 63) was related to the SWC. Maybe it was, but it was pointless, I think.

As far as 63 vs 64, they both undersell compared to 65-67, in my opinion unnecessarily so. 63s pull a bit more money, but I think its the unfair "black sheep" title the 64 holds rather than some intrinsic first year, one year only parts advantage. Again, just opinion, no valid proof out there.

I still think 63 and 64 roadsters are the absolute best Corvette value in the entire series.

70mph@2200rpm

Having disc brakes is superior to drums...I would not want to own (drive frequently) a car without them. So I assume for many buyers, that would be a necessary extra expense.

TCracingCA

I have my 1964 and struggling with where I will take that car build. I bought the 1968 to cut up for racing, but it is too nice of a car, so I am leaning toward a nice driver with L-88 goodies for it. Thus the interests in the 1963 project was for just making a pure race car. All of the few unique goodies, don't matter because it would all come off. The car was already flared with one crunched fender (nothing left of it), so I would have to pattern another flare with contour gauges and alot of glass work. Thus these types of cars don't come along often (C2, flared, gutted, disrepair, non-running). I always know when their is no price on the windshield, then it will be an interesting negotiation. It started with a question to me as to what I would pay, not what he wanted.

TCracingCA

I think the 63 and 64 cars are the best value. That is how I ended up with a 1964 and why this 1963 caught my eye. My thread intro was kind of muttled. Theory on value, theory on sellers thoughts, theory on magazine price guides, etc.. All kinda relevent. I think the guy selling his 1963 was pleased to get some interest, but not the cash he was looking for at least not from me, and yes it would be nice if it was in the garage. Thus that has been clarified, so back to perceptions from year to year, C2 1963 and 1964 car variations, perceived pro's and cons, etc.. All interesting to talk about. Thus I don't know where this thread will go, what direction, but your observations were dead on. Great summary!

sub006

Having had a '57, a '66 coupe and still my first 'Vette, a '64 roadster (no soft top), the C2 I want MOST is a '63 SW. I'll put up with the leaks, rattles, crummy ride for that extra back window. For that matter, maybe I'll improve it with later-model body mounts and other small details.

My roadster is already how I want it, I like the 64 instruments the best of all C2s and don't want cookie tins. '63s OTOH have much cooler hubcaps.

In answer to the original question, I think the '63 coupe and '63 convertible stand separately on their own merits, as is the case from '64 through '67. You pays your money and you takes your choice, with 1963s of equal condition it will almost always be more for the coupe unless for example the convertible has FI and the coupe doesn't.

Rich Yanulis

Someone mentioned in an earlier post, there are different Corvettes for different people.

For myself, I think the '63 Gages are the best looking of ANY year, bar none........also, I love the unique '63 hood.

So in my opinion, the unique (one year only) style items of the '63 justifies a premium in the price.

KC John

That is a funny statement, cars with drums are driven everyday and are just as safe as disk brakes unless they are being stressed as in road racing.

Also the gauges in the dash and the grilles on the hood are much better looking in my opinion than any other year (except for BB hoods). I also think the gills on a '63-'64 are the best looking design of all the mid year cars.

I think the hidden fasteners on the door panels are nicer in later years, and I was never a fan of the plastic glove box door on the '63. I also think the '63 has the best looking console.

I'll have to admit the fit and finish on the later years were a lot nicer than my '63, but given the same quality, I would rather have my '63 than any other year.

They are all a little different, and that's why we all get to choose the one we like the best.

70mph@2200rpm

"That is a funny statement, cars with drums are driven everyday and are just as safe as disk brakes unless they are being stressed as in road racing".

Let me rephrase my comment.
Some buyers may assume that disc brakes are superior to drum brakes and would therefore find cars with drum brakes less desirable.
However, thanks to your keen insight, those funny ideas might just lose traction.

Frankie the Fink

You might not say that doing a panic stop after driving through 8"" of water.
I don't see SWCs driving up the price of a '63 roadster by a single nickel.

Dan Hampton

If you're driving through 8" of water, how much braking are you really going to need? I agree, however, with the second half of Frankie's statement, and more to the point, I would rather have the discounted '64 roadster than the '63. The physical difference is negligible and I find nothing significant about the '63 unless it is a coupe.

sub006

midyearguru

Years ago, many people thought the 1963 Roadster's best bet was to use it as a platform to build a Grand Sport replica. These days I think the '63 Roadster has come into its own. I've owned many mid-year cars including a 1965 Fuelie Coupe, 1965 396 Coupe, 1966 427/425 Roadster and a 1963 Roadster......a very early car with all the "special" features. Don't ask me why but I like that car the best of all the mid-years I've owned. Maybe it goes back to when I saw one on a Beach Boys album cover, or maybe from Route 66, or maybe all that anticipation when I was a 13 year old kid when the NEW Corvette was first introduced (myself and friends would camp out at the local Chevy dealership to see the new Sting Ray !!) Whatever.

midyearguru

I also think the 1964 Corvette got a bum rap in the vintage Corvette community. I've heard them called the "orphan of the mid-years"...and worse! I've read that Duntov would glow when describing the 1964 improvements: better ride, quieter interior, improved engine performance, etc etc. And, he was correct. They are probably the best bargain in the mid-year buying market . I have never owned a '64 but wouldn't hesitate if the right candidate came along. And, like all mid-years, look best when left factory original.............IMHO of course.

Easy Rhino

I agree. 97% of the people do not even know what a mid-year Corvette even is, and 99.x% couldn't differentiate between a '64 and any other mid-year model.

Since any bum rap crowd arises from Corvette people themselves, it makes the '64 the best value out there for getting into an affordable mid-year.

Vettrocious

I understand why 63 Coupes are worth more than 63 convertibles, but having owned both, I found the coupe a lot less desirable as a driver than the convertible. Between the coupe's nonexistent rear visibility and lack of ventilation, the coupe can be a challenge, as well as very hot to drive.