63 fender flags THICK or thin?

[Jon Elliott]

Does anyone know about what VIN that they changed from thin flags on the front fenders to the thick flags? thnx, Jon

[Rick A.]

Re: 63 fender flags THICK or thin?

believe ALL 1963 were thick - the thin ended with the 1962 model

[Joe L.]

Re: 63 fender flags THICK or thin?

Rick-----

Early 1963 used the same crossed-flag emblem as 1962. However, I don't know when this ended. I believe that it was quite early in the 1963 model year, though.

I don't think that 1963 Corvettes were ever SCHEDULED to receive the 62 emblems. However, it did happen, perhaps due to some delays in getting the 63 style emblems manufactured.

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 fender flags THICK or thin?

Joe,

It's POSSIBLE that some of the pilot cars may have used the 62 style emblem but not likely. In fact, I know that two of these first 25 pilot cars did not have the 62 style 3792000. Both had the original emblems on the original fenders with the original holes. (as of more than 30 years ago) The 62 emblem mounting studs are not in the same position as the newly released 3827158 emblem for 63, so the 62 emblem won't even fit without modification.

This has been a misprint in all of the parts books since the first printing of the 63 parts book.

[Joe L.]

Re: 63 fender flags THICK or thin?

Michael------

My information was not based upon information presented in the 1963 P&A Catalogs. In fact, I've always assumed the information on the fender emblem found in the 1963 catalogs to be incorrect. That's because, from what I can tell, the 62-style emblem was never scheduled to be used for a 1963 Corvette. So, whether it was actually used, or not, the P&A Catalog should not reference it as being used.

Basically, my information comes from what I recall of reports from owners of early 1963 cars. I've never otherwise verified the accuracy of that information, though.

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 fender flags THICK or thin?

Joe,

I think the story that originally started with the incorrect listing in the 63 parts book, was reinforced by some of the early Corvette "information" books that came out in the mid 70's. That caused more books and incorrect info, which most likely created the belief that these things were actually correct for early 63's.

Somehow, it then became know as an "early/late production thing, but it was never actually printed in the parts book that way. There was a listing for 62-63 Corvette, and another for 63 Corvette, each showing different part numbers.

This story has been around for so many years that it eventually became the accepted means of determining an early car from a late car. And once an owner has these early emblems mounted, he's not likely to admit their incorrect.

How's that go.... "The ability to sustain disbelief is directly porportional to the reward of doing so"

[Philip C.]

Jon I guess Joe and Mike are saying Thick *NM*