60 ragtop vs. 63 ragtop

[ghia1969]

I am seriously considering purchasing a ragtop beetle and have a choice between 2 comparable all stock bugs a 60 and a 63, both priced about the same. Which would you choose and why? Thanks

[66brm]

63, if its just a year thing, much easier to find parts that aren't one year only pieces
_________________
Aust. RHD 66 Type 1
Aust. RHD 57 Type 1 Oval

[stale air]

Well, I'm for the 60 because of the same reasons 66brm is not. Cool one year only items, plus early taillights. In my eyes you can't go wrong with pre 61 cars.
_________________
WANTED: Henry Veale Santa Rosa plate frames
WANTED: Brittsan Motors Fresno plate frames
WANTED: Any Georgia plate frames

[61SNRF]

It depends on what you want really. I would seriously consider the '60 myself.

But, you have to consider that the '60 is more like a 50's car.
It was the last year for the 36hp engine.
It was the last year for split case transmission with a non-syncro first.
It was the last year for screw type electrical connectors.
I think they do have more interesting interior fabrics, paint and wheel colors.
They do have the smaller tail lights, license light and a Wolfsburg crest too, something the '63 doesn't.
I consider them a more of a true "vintage" VW and would compare them more to the '58-'59's.
They also get my vote to allow them to show and compete in the Vintage Treffens normally limited to no later than '57 for the above reasons.

In general, every year featured progressive refinements, so from a mechanical perspective, the '63 is more modern, up to date and compares with it's contemporaries of the 60's better. Just look at the year to year comparisons for items changed, there are too many to list, but here are a few...
It has the 40hp engine.
It has a full syncro tunnel type transmission.
It has modern push on electrical connectors.
It has factory seat belt mounts.
It has rear seat heater outlets.
It may have the fresh air heater depending on build date.
It has the improved steering box, although some people I know prefer the early one for feel and effort.

Best wishes and hope you make the choice that pleases you most.
_________________
-Bruce

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[tkelley]

I've owned a 60' rag and now own a 63'...both (were)are stock except for suspension.


I liked having the older styling cues (snowflake tails, hump gas tank, etc.) on the 60'

But I do like having the gas guage and a little more room in the trunk(bonnet) on the 63'

My 63 is more original and in better condition overall than the 60'


They're both very cool years, IMHO.



Tom
_________________
When the sun doesn't rise, we'll replace it
with an H-bomb explosion or a painted jail cell...

[Darkhorse]

Older is always nicer in my opinion, plus doesn't the 63 have the junk handle for the rag versuses later models? It really comes down to what each one needs to return to the road
_________________
1962 OG PEARL WHITE RAG TOP BUG

[flyboat]

I like the 63 because it is the last year for the ragtop and parts are easier to get.
_________________
79 super Vert
62 Ragtop Bug
66 tintop Westy
Porsche 914
09 Z06 Vette track car

[ghia1969]

I truly appreciate all the feedback. Some great insights on the pros and cons of both. I guess the bottom line is that you can't really go wrong with either. One thing that I forgot to mention is that the 60 is beryl green and that is really an awesome color. Well if all goes according to plan, I'll be posting pics of my purchase in the next couple of days.

[stale air]

[63type1]

I really like the trunk springs on the '63 much better than the mechanical latch type support of the pre-61's. So many older front hoods have been tweeked by attempting to shut the hood without releasing the latch. It's kinda funky, but once you know how it works then it's fine. But be sure to swat away any service attendants or that guy at the car shows that insists in being hands-on. Both cars are a great choice though. I doubt you will have regrets after purchasing either year.
_________________
'63 ragtop

[ovalshark]

I have a 62, and I wish I would have passed on it just because I like the tail light on the earlier cars.

[60ragtop]

Which ever has the least amount of rust.
I had a 63 and a now a 60. I like my 60 more now that I put on the WW dual carb kit and a stroker crank along with super cam. + 30 MPG
But I put over 200K with the stock 36HP in it
Parts are out there for either one.
does the 60 have the stock 36HP and non synchro'd first gear?
_________________
Rick
Certified Mechanic by the State of Michigan in 1977
ASA certified in 1987
Certified Hunter Wheel Alignment Master Technician 1986

[bill may]

[bill may]

[Starr1969]

Drive them both, see which one you don't want to walk away from.
_________________
HERS: "Starr" 1969 toga white w/ sunroof
HIS: "Orange Crush" 1974 Super
OURS: 1976 Riviera Camper...needs engine work

[bill may]

[ghia1969]

The 60 is all stock including the 36 hp motor and and non synchro'd first gear. The 63 does not have the crest. I have to admit, I am leaning toward the 60. Fortunately, neither of the cars have rust. The 60 has 74k documented miles and is 100% original. If I buy the 60 tomorrow, I will post pics. Thanks again everybody for this lively thread!!!

[glutamodo]

Personally, I'd prefer the 1963, but... with that few miles the 60 sounds tempting.

[AlteWagen]

the 60 would not be beryl, its either jade green or mango green. BOTH ROCK!!!

[jhicken]

You all forgot the most important reason to go with a '63... it's the Herbie year!

-jeffrey
_________________
Der Kleiner Kampfwagens