1964 Corvette 327/300 matching numbers $40,000

Nice car good colors, for sure. I can't read the pictures very well, but if you'll post the numbers both from the under the dash tags + the engine pad, I'll look up the data for you. As noted, the tranny numbers are much less critical. I'm no NCRS judge but the exhaust manifolds are not original, nor the air cleaner, valve covers and maybe the oil filler tube (don't have a '64, so not sure about that) picky, picky, picky! steve

 

Very nice car !
Didn't by 64 they all have discs or was that an option ?

I'm not really a Corvette admirer except for the 60's Stingrays.

 

65 was the first year for discs
the car has several mods but looks to be an real black /red vinyl car.
can't read the painted engine pad but could be original .. what most people want to see is an unpainted engine stamp pad so they can see the broach marks..to determine originalilty
not a bad looking car..GLWS

 

As noted, it does appear to be a real black/red convertible. My best 'Vette books are in the garage, but I think the car was born in mid-November, '63, with the engine built on November 4, '63. (4 on stamp pad ='64 followed by the VIN of 105335). F= Flint (all Vette engines were built there that year) and the II is November, then 04. I"m not an expert on the stamping and its broach marks, but cleaning off the paint, as already mentioned, would help. Someone who really knows the stampings can verify that they are real. Correlating the block's casting date would also help if one's serious about this car. steve

 

the end of the code kind of looks like RC which is the designation for 327/250 block.

It is hopefully RQ which would be a 327/300 4spd, and A/C block

The FII04RC is the "assembly" date

Flint
11 = Nov
04 = 4th
RC = Engine block code (see above)

The block casting # is a 7 digit number very near where the block and bell housing bolt together usually on passenger side and can be seen from above. Yours should be #3782870 There is also a "casting" date usually in that area too. Its a 3 or 4 digit # starting with a letter A-L = Jan- Dec then the day 1-31 and finally the last number of the year, which in your case should be 4

 

A few subtle corrections...the casting number (correctly stated) is on the DRIVER'S side, rear of block, near where the bell housing bolts up, the casting date, which should be just before Nov, 4, 1963, is on the passenger's side, same rearward locations.

The photos seem to indicate an "RC", code which is the 250 HP engine with a manual tranny. The interior pictures are not those of an AC car, so it's unlikely to be an "RQ" coded engine.

About 10 years ago, I bought a '66 BB 'Vette with AC, 4 speed, numbers matching, but much like this car, it needed stuff to get it closer to "correct" tho' I've never intended to show it. It was fun doing those things (valve covers, carb, shielding, etc) but expensive, as they add up. Don't forget that you'd need to source the correctly coded intake and exhaust manifolds among other items. Depends how compulsive you wanna be. I wouldn't buy this car if I wanted it to be "right", unless it was just fun a project. More correct cars can be had for less than you'd spend. However, if that was unimportant and I wanted a great color, fun driver, I get a PPI and get on the down the road.

At least the parts are pretty readily available and not at Ferrari prices. steve

 

Bryan - what is the condition of the soft top? Any pics?

My wife and I went to the Ocean City MD Cruise weekend last week. She commented that it would be fun to have an early Mustang convertible to cruise around in. Maybe I can talk her into a Corvette instead. Would prefer a reliable turn key car that could be tweaked as desired. We do not want a concourse correct car that would not get driven. From the pics this looks like a very nice car. GLWS (maybe to us...)

Thanks - Curtis

 

Gorgeous car... I've owned two of these.

That tag next to the passenger side trim tag is wrong. It should be rivoted on, and would not have grind marks underneath. That is a red flag for me. Where there's smoke...

 

Kevin, I noticed that problem last nite and I believe you are correct, not a death knell, but there will have to be a "story" to explain that. I'm pretty sure trim tags and correct rivets are available, which presents a double-edged sword. steve

 

Regardless of the engine code designator, it would not be hard to rebuild the engine with RQ specifications, or better. 1964's are the least collectible of the C2's so I think buyers are far less picky about them being anally numbers' matching versus, say, a 1967 tri-power. If you feel that you bought a car at auction that was misrepresented, then I think you have the legally basis to have them substantiate their claim of the car being matching. They might claim that the numbers match for a C2, but not necessarily this C2 as originally built. Weasels.

This is one of the reasons I got out of Vettes, except to just enjoy them as driving machines. The pedigree is just to difficult to maintain and substantiate. Plus, clever, unscrupulous fabricators can replicate a matching numbers car. Granted this is harder to pull off with a high profile model (like an L-88), but buyers of lesser models are seldom that educated or inclined to verify the numbers matching claim.

This is a beautiful driver's car, IMO and I wish you luck with your sale.

 

Crap. That means I have bought and sold a bunch of faked C2s.

 

I read the text from the NCRS book, but I don't have "attaching" privileges to show you, but it shows the VIN tag is correct, I think. Hard to imagine someone would fake a VIN tag and/or the deck stamped pad only to make the lowest HP engine they made that year. Doubt it's a 300 HP engine, unless someone made some mods (easy to do, right?). It's a C not a Q 'cause it's not an AC car. steve

 

Jesus , he's selling a 64 Vette for $40,000. Use to own a 63 convertible into 66 Hardtop. Don't recall reading he was selling 100 point car. Price is pretty fair, although a lot of the criticisms come from people who have no intention of pulling out their checkbook anyway..

 

Agreed. It would be hard to find another car for $40k that would generate this amount of fun and class. I rented my first Corvette last month, a 2016 Stingray. Much respect.