When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
what bothers you so much that would make your head would hurt .I was simply trying to get as much info on this car as I possibly could and now that I have , I thank all of you out there who responded. Maybe your head hurts because you might wish you owned this car being #30. No offense, just saying.
Pretty much... So, if you have the 60th 63 coupe produced its worth 1/2 of $175,000 ?
I'm trying to understand the logic of some otherwise garden-variety, but very original, car that's not the first and the last in a production year having some fabled provenance based on its place in the factory assembly lineup...
My 63 car is the ultra-rare one-of-one 16,307th produced in that year...no other car has that VIN sequence number
Don't get me wrong, a rising tide lifts all boats, so I make out too when the silliness of irrationally exuberant valuations takes hold...
I sold #53 at Mecum last Jan for $144,000.00 30837S100092
that looks like a Hurst shifter. And those seat covers look like AK, not factory Dupont vinyl.
I thought you said this split was all original?
Lop $100,000 off my guesstimate if not all original.
no the seats are original and yes still have original shifter it was changed out in 1972 for better shifting because old linkage was noisy and sloppy thanks. wasn't sure if I should change it back or leave it the way it is.
no the seats are original and yes still have original shifter it was changed out in 1972 for better shifting because old linkage was noisy and sloppy thanks. wasn't sure if I should change it back or leave it the way it is.
Nice car, sounds like you got a reasonable deal. I'd sorta doubt that those seat covers are original, though. I've never seen an original 63 seat lose all of the "puffy" pleat shape, no matter how old or how many people have jumped on it. Very, very few lasted long without a tear, though, so it wouldn't surprise me if these were early replacements.
Nice car, sounds like you got a reasonable deal. I'd sorta doubt that those seat covers are original, though. I've never seen an original 63 seat lose all of the "puffy" pleat shape, no matter how old or how many people have jumped on it. Very, very few lasted long without a tear, though, so it wouldn't surprise me if these were early replacements.
It might be the way I took pics because I did check thoroughly and outside of a few minor cracks they appear original however intact. I have the original shifter but I think I am going to leave things just the way they are as this car is a survive=or and has not been restored except paint was buffed out. I'm pretty sure throughout the 55 years there was some normal general maintenance done . I am not going to try to restore anything on this car. Not looking for a trophy , just its rightful home and a place in history Thanks for your input.I seriously doubt however that having the hurst shifter in it would reduce the price of this car by a 100K Ha! Ha!
........I've never seen an original 63 seat lose all of the "puffy" pleat shape, no matter how old or how many people have jumped on it.
Very, very few lasted long without a tear........
To use for a point of reference........
This is what original, red '63 seats and carpet look like.
Not a rip or tear anywhere
no the seats are original and yes still have original shifter it was changed out in 1972 for better shifting because old linkage was noisy and sloppy thanks. wasn't sure if I should change it back or leave it the way it is.
175 really sounds like a lot of money, though, doesn’t it? This premium because it’s so early? Even the air cars haven’t reached that level.
It would be interesting to hear more input on the seats. I see the seat belt material looks correct so I’m assuming they are right even though I can’t see the buckles. Good master cylinder too, that’s often an issue.
If it were my car and I was trying to establish a number in this neighborhood, I most definitely would change that shifter out. I think that’s a no-brainer. I’d also schedule it for a Survivor certification at Bloomington in June and solve any other questions that might arise.
If it were my car and I was trying to establish a number in this neighborhood, I most definitely would change that shifter out. I think that’s a no-brainer........
I completely agree.
When a buyer is contemplating the super rich premium price for a "Survivor".....
the last thing they want to see are aftermarket parts jumping out at them.
To use for a point of reference........
This is what original, red '63 seats and carpet look like.
Not a rip or tear anywhere
Original Dupont vinyl with puffed up pleats, and stong graining jumps right out at you. Weak grain and flat pleats on repro covers are just as obvious.
Guys- my $175K guesstimate was predicated on OPs statement that this early production split is "all original". The photos and his comments have caused me to re-evaluate. I would lop off $100K to be more accurate.
To use for a point of reference........
This is what original, red '63 seats and carpet look like.
Not a rip or tear anywhere
Jeez Rich - My 2017, 4,000 mile daily driver that I slave over to protect and can't stand to get rained on, doesn't look that good. What a time capsule.
AK has been making covers for well over 40 years. A car restored 40 years ago and driven would look like the car in question.
We have seen this before, people find in 2006 a 1963 restored in 1976 with Terry Michaelis parts and think it is original because of the patina of the worn look. In reality, the restoration is older than the original was when it was restored (13 years vs. 20 years) so of course it looks old.
trim tag date a1 63 837 490c 936a serial #30837s100049 i have to figure out how to copy and paste tag to this site thanks
Originally Posted by mikelj
After reading this thread, my head hurts.......
Originally Posted by ezbidder2013
what bothers you so much that would make your head would hurt .I was simply trying to get as much info on this car as I possibly could and now that I have , I thank all of you out there who responded. Maybe your head hurts because you might wish you owned this car being #30. No offense, just saying.
I hate to be ugly, but I think Mike's head hurts for the same reason mine does - the inability of people supposedly smart enough to afford these cars and yet can't figure out how to post a picture, which would clarify everything.
Corvette Forum even made it easier, so you don't have to have a web hosting site anymore. Just click the darn icon and paste the darn picture!
We have seen this before, people find in 2006 a 1963 restored in 1976 with Terry Michaelis parts and think it is original because of the patina of the worn look. In reality, the restoration is older than the original was when it was restored (13 years vs. 20 years) so of course it looks old.
Just to be clear I am not saying the car owned by the op was restored or has old repro seat covers. Just stating the repro covers have been around longer then me
I hate to be ugly, but I think Mike's head hurts for the same reason mine does - the inability of people supposedly smart enough to afford these cars and yet can't figure out how to post a picture, which would clarify everything.
Corvette Forum even made it easier, so you don't have to have a web hosting site anymore. Just click the darn icon and paste the darn picture!
When it comes to computers I'm probably the dumbest one on here. Took me 2 years just to figure out how to put one of those little icons at the end of a thread. So yes, an attaboy goes to the site guys for making posting pictures even easy for me.
02-04-2018, 05:22 PM
30th 1963 corvette swc
