BFowlkes

I'm looking for some opinions about buying a C1 58-60 vrs a C2 64-67. I plan on buying toward the end of the year. I've got a 69 Coupe and an 2007 Vert. But I've starting thinking about a C2 and I don't have much experince with them. I looking for a good condition driver, doesn't have to be a show car or be Numbers Matching but I want it to at least look orignal. I got about 40 to 50 to spend, I know that's a stretch for a C1. But can anyone give their opinions on the differences (other than styling) This is meant to be a driver to intermeadiate range shows and trips (less than 600 miles) and just fun tooling around home. I live the south so I'll need to have AC eitehr factory or aftermarket. I put a vintage air in my 69 and it's great.

I'd really like a 63 SWC but I think that's out of my price range.

Thanks.

ghoastrider1

you might get into a C-2 a bit cheaper than a C-1.
C-2 handle,and stop better than C-1
C-2 coupe,IMO. is one of the best looking cars ever built.
C-2 coupe has more interior room.
C-2 has more engine options.
C-2 could be had with air conditioning.
C-2 ..just plain sexy.

C-1 with hard top..one of the best looking cars ever built.
C-1 They still run like a bat out of hell
C-1 solid axle is harder to break
C-1 several "styles" to chose from
C-1 they started it all
C-1 a bit more primative, perhaps a bit easier to work on.
C-1 just plain sexy
You have to decide which style blows your skirt up.

bb62

Quite frankly, 67s are generally more expensive than 63 SWCs, especially when they have big blocks. A NOM 63 SWC is not out of your price bracket.

OC-1

Pre 1963 vettes are simpler almost, like a canoe. If it is broke the problem is evident.

The design is classic in the true sense of the word and it garners as much attention these days as it did when new.

Easy to work on, don't have to drop the spare tire carrier, exhaust, filler panel to work on the bottom end.

No trial fitting the rear bearings and being charged a ransom to do wheel alignment. No rear alignment specs.

No messing around with rotating headlights.

Change the rear almost as fast as you can rotate your tires.

You want breeze? open the cowl vent to see what mechanical ventilation is like.

They do ride harsher than a mid-year.

Brakes can go away temporarily if you drive thru deep water.

Mid-years have the same impressive styling and they ride nicer.

Coupes from 63 to 67 have a compromised rear view because of the angled rear windows.

OldKarz

I don't think you can go wrong either way....

Corvette Mike SoCal

We have a nice 61 in our showroom that fits in your range.


http://www.corvettemike.com/showroom/?cf=1081#top

BFowlkes

Thanks for the comments. Any other opinions? Like I said I'm trying to gather as much data as I can before beginning the search in earnst right after the first of year. That's unless of course a deal comes up I can't refuse!

RJH

I was in the same position as you are this time a year ago. I had owned a 66 conv and a 62 years ago. I liked both body styles. For me, it boiled down to the looks of the 61/2. I just felt I would be happier. You don't see as many c-1's. I am glad I took my time in the decision making becuse now I am very satisfied with my choice. I looked at alot of cars and finally decided on a 61 2 top 283/270 unrestored original. I had an NCRS member who was very knowledgeable on 61's go over it to ensure it was the real thing. He was a real pro and made me very comfortable with the whole process. Go with your heart! Russ

56Heap

You got lucky not many of those around. Congrats

dizzydale

All this and NO mention of the TRUNK.diz

Qblue92

You could get a nice C1 for 50. you could also get a decent 63 SWC for 50.

tomo67

I have a '67 BB convertible and a '59 with hardtop and a 283. Both are 4 speeds. Both have outstanding looks but under the '59 is 1949 Chevy technology. Now the '67 is O.K. in the handling and ride department but the '59 leaves even more to be desired in handling. On radial tires. The ride is O.K. I will be doing a frame off next year and hopefully the handling will improve. It's also a bit cramped if you're around 6'. They both are classics.

You MUST drive a C1 and a C2 before you make up your mind.

(If I want to take a trip, I take the 2005.)

Good Luck.

ghoastrider1

Mike Terry told me that later on he is gong to sell his 63 sw. Its a nice looking car,not perfect, you might send him a message.He also has a 66 for sale at the moment.

Workin On 59

Lots of good comments above on this subject. I agree that personal preference should be the deciding factor.....what do you want to look at sitting in your garage as well as what you want to drive. As mentioned earlier the C-1s are more primitive technology which is also easier for most folks to deal with if they do their own work.

If chrome is your eye candy a 58 will not disappoint you. If you are into period correct horsepower a late Big Block c-2 might be your huckleberry.

Either choice is a good one, IMO. Have fun, explore what's available, don't be in a rush, and do what's right for you.

larryseed

I know of a 62 for 40, 0000 Calif car.

BFowlkes

Do you have Mike's ID or email address?

Also tomo67, thanks for that info. Space is a factor as I'm 6'3 and 225 lbs. (on a good day)

I do plan to drive some cars at some of our Corvette functions.

sub006

I like the looks of both, but C1's are much less comfortable to drive.

In 1953, the only way to get a car really low on a Chevy or Ford sedan chassis was to lower the seats so much your legs stick practically straight out in front of you; like sitting against a wall with your legs on the floor. '55-'57 Thunderbirds have the same problem.

Chevy picked the hottest 1950 production sports car in the world to copy the driving position. This was the XK120 Jaguar. So not only do you have the seat/floor relationship issue, the huge steering wheel is practically in your chest.

When the '63 was being laid out, a Maserati GT was used for the interior ergonomics. And that's why C2's are more comfortable than C1's OR C3's!

I've upgraded my '64 further with '84 seats, but I think a black '62 with fawn interior is a thing of beauty. All 'Vettes are winners, just depends what you want to use them for.

Gman58

I have owned both C1 and C2. I presently own a 1958 and rarely drive it. It is definately not a great handling car. The C2's I have owned handled much better. I will be selling my 58 and begin by search for a
C2. I prefer small blocks but that is a personal choice. Greg

Procrastination Racing

If I were in your spot, I would do this. Consider that there are basically three cars you are talking about: C1, C2 coupe, and C2 convertible.

I would go drive all three. Then decide.

If you have a local club, and there are any members in it with one of these cars, talk them into a trip to a show or the local cruise night and ride along. If you can talk someone into driving, it would be better. It will give you the feel you are looking for.

If not, then you can do what many do - find a dealer.

73LS4

Great review, I've owned all of them... depends on what you're going to use it for. Most of the nice ones just sit in the garage anyway, so who cares what it drives like. I lived thru the C1-C3 generation, and everytime a new one came out we all migrated to the new one, because they usually made the previous year look like an antique.

Without driving them, you definitely can't choose which one you would actually drive once in awhile. C1s are definitely rough riding, and sit goofy... but beautiful and cool to drive once in awhile. C2s and C3s have that rear axle that's always screwed up, but if you buy a nice one and never drive it, who cares. I prefer 62s (last of that generation) and 67s (last of that generation) and 73s (last of that generation). Anything between 74 and 97 is of no interest to me. If I wanted to actually drive it often, it would be at least a 97. I wouldn't buy anything older than that if I wanted performance or comfort or reliability. I drove a 97 vert the other day with 120K on it, and it would put any 67 L88 to shame... but then we don't buy the old ones because they were great cars