The 1963 Corvette Split Window Coupe (SWC) has become an icon, and one of the most expensive and sought-after of all classic Corvettes. But that wasn’t always the case.
The second-generation (C2) Corvette was a huge leap over the first-generation both in terms of performance (with four-wheel independent suspension) and comfort (with convenience options like air conditioning and a new fixed roof body style). While the styling was daring and holds up well even half a century later, the split rear window was the most controversial part when it first came out.
1963 Corvette in all its split-window glory. GM Press Photo.
By now, we probably all know the broad strokes of the story: Bill Mitchell, obsessed with marine design, insisted on the split rear window in order to allow the central “spine” to flow unbroken all the way from the roof to the rear deck. Zora Arkus-Duntov reportedly hated the split rear window, as it impeded rear visibility, which was critical to road racers.
1963 Corvette Grand Sport
True to his word, Duntov insisted that track-ready 1963 Grand Sport model (of which only five out of a planned 125 were made) sported a single unbroken rear window, technically making them the only 1963 Corvettes sold without the split window.
Duntov was apparently not alone in his dislike for the split rear window. The automotive press blasted the split rear window, and customers supposedly weren’t too fond of it either. The end result: The split rear window ended up being a one-year-only styling feature. 1964 and later Corvettes would have a single-piece rear window.
This is where we leave the realm of fact and enter the world of urban legends. It doesn’t take much research to find stories of people taking a saw to their 63 Corvette to remove the center pillar of the rear windows. Other accounts even allege that some Chevy dealerships were replacing the split rear window with single panes of glass for dissatisfied customers. So How much of this is actually true?
Let’s start with parts of the story we can verify. Did the automotive press really gin up hatred for the split rear window? Car and Driver didn’t mention the split rear window at all in their April 1963 road test. In their October 1962 preview, C&D noted that “The deep twin windows give a good rear view.” Mmmkay, not what I was expecting.
However, Road and Track, in their review, did have this to say: “Our only complaint about the interior was in the coupe, where all we could see in the rear view mirror was that silly bar splitting the rear window down the middle.” Motor Trend was perhaps the harshest, saying that “The rear window on the coupe is designed more for looks than practicality, and any decent view to the rear will have to be through an exterior side-view mirror.” They further mentioned in a photo caption that the split rear window “definitely hampers vision.” So on the whole, the negative press coverage portion of this story is true.
Next, is it even possible to remove the center pillar from a 1963 SWC Corvette? Of course, given enough time and money, anything is possible, but in 1963 this would have been a daunting task. Peterson Publishing detailed the process in a 1963 Custom Corvettes magazine article that I’ve sprinkled throughout the remainder of post, and it is not for the weakhearted. For starters, there isn’t a single connected piece of glass lurking under that center pillar – each pane on the SWC is a separate piece of glass. This article yada-yadas over a lot of key details, including sourcing a plexiglass single-piece rear window, as well as fabricating new window moldings using leftover bits and pieces of the old moldings.
Obviously, after 1964 this process would have been much easier – all you needed to do was source a replacement window and trim for a newer model Corvette. My guess is that most of the SWC “unsplitting” took place after 1964 using this process, and not the 1963 Custom Corvettes magazine process.
So we know for sure that at least one 1963 Corvette was modified – the photo car in the Peterson piece (which also sports the six tail light modification, which has its own interesting history. Clearly the owner was not averse to taking a saw to their car). We can also glean that there was at least enough general interest in the topic for Peterson to even produce the article in the first place.
Perhaps the most suspect part of this legend is the oft-repeated (but never cited) claim that dealers performed this modification on behalf of their customers. Prior to 1964, what exactly would said dealer have replaced the rear window with? Car dealers are in the business of selling cars, not performing extensive customization and fabrication – most are not set up to even do this kind of work. And after 1964, a far easier (and cheaper) option for all involved parties would have been to simply trade the 1963 Corvette in on a 1964 or newer model.
What evidence remains today that people were taking sawzalls to their ’63 Vettes? Let’s just say I spent multiple hours going down that Google rabbit hole so that you don’t have to. Bottom line is that I could find no pictures of surviving 1963 Corvettes with the split window removed. This is not surprising due to the rapidly rising values of these cars – any examples that were previously cut would have long since been restored back to their original condition.
As you would expect, Corvette forums are rife with speculation and third-hand anecdotes. One former owner of a 1963 Corvette did confess to performing this surgery in the late 1960s to give his car the updated look of the newer models. I suspect this is when (and the reason why) most of these modifications would have taken place: By the late ’60s, 1963 Corvettes would have been abundant and relatively cheap, and replacement 64-67 rear windows were readily available. The split window would have looked “old” compared to the newer models’ single-piece rear window. The general consensus in the forums is that the number of 1963 Corvettes that were modified like this ranges from low 10s to perhaps several hundred, an estimate that I concur with.
Period correct modifications typically don’t have a huge impact on the value of classic cars, and in some cases (like a badge from the original selling dealer) it can actually enhance the provenance of an original, unrestored vehicle. Somehow I don’t think that would be the case for a 1963 Corvette with its defining characteristic removed. While I for one would find a 1963 Corvette with a yellowing plexiglass backlite and cobbled-together window trim far more interesting than yet another over-restored split-window coupe, the marketplace reality of these cars means that any such examples have long since been restored back to their original configuration.
I prefer a car to be as close to original as possible.
IIRC, those with the one year split rear window are worth considerably more due to exclusivity. Can you imagine how much those separate glass panels would be worth today on the replacement market.
Also, those extra rear lamps diminish the value in my opinion.
You can easily imagine this process documented as a Youtube video. I wonder if any of those guys from the 1963 article are/were still around to see Youtube.
Mitchell did love boats, but I always thought the Sting Ray’s split rear window was inspired by the Bugatti Type 57SC Atlantic, arguably Jean Bugatti’s finest hour.
The C2 was a striking car and still turns heads, but compared to the Atlantic, it might as well have been wearing a flour sack.
The dorsal fin and split rear window on the Atlantic looks to me to be a pretty blatant crib of Tom Tjaarda’s very advanced aerodynamic car, the Sterkenberg, as written up in the July 1931 issue of Modern Mechanics, three years before the Atlantic. It was also cribbed by Tatra for their T77.
More on that here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/automotive-history-whos-the-real-father-of-the-volkswagen/3/
I’d always assumed the split rear window on early VWs (and other 1930s designs) was there for the same reason front windshields were often split – because it was cheaper to make two small pieces of flat glass than one large piece of curved glass. It doesn’t seem to me the Beetle split rears were a concession to style as with the Corvette or Bugatti.
That too. But at least one of the earlier VW protoypes (1936) had a clearly raised center ridge that ran all the way over the roof, although it did not have rear windows. I’m quite convinced that the Tatra’s dorsal fin (and others) was an influence, and the vestiges of that can be seen in the final design.
They could have just put in one smaller flat pane, as it would have given just as much visibility. The styling element was important.
FWIW, all of the earlier VW prototypes did have a single flat rear window, like the 1932 NSU Type 32. Which strongly suggests that the split window was more driven by styling.
This is probably true, but in terms of what Mitchell and other GM designers would still remember clearly and be inspired by 25 years later, I think the Atlantic “wins.” (I’m not debating that Jean Bugatti or Bill Mitchell would have been aware of the Sterkenburg at the time — it seems very likely.)
Admittedly the Sterkenberg was not exactly well known. But it was of course heavily copied by Tatra, with their 77 and 87 and the postwar T600/Tatraplan, and those were.
Very interesting read. Imagine doing this then going back. I doubt an owner would admit to it today.
Now you need to find the super birds that didn’t sell and had their noses and tails removed!
I can easily visualize that glassed-in “angle iron” rusting out in a few years, especially if (when) the patched together rear window gasket leaked.
In 1963 it was fair to call out a styling gimmick for what it was. In 2022, cutting out that rear vision obstruction would be akin to cutting off a body part.
While all of the ’63-’67 Corvettes are rolling artwork, the original is still the best in my book.
I’m in the minority on this one, but I’ve never been a fan of the ’63 precisely because of the split window. I’ve driven a split window coupe and the visibility is pretty well non existent out back. I sure wouldn’t have gone to this extreme though. Triple tail lights were a fairly common mod on this generation of ‘Vette back when they were just used Corvettes and not investment instruments.
There was a biker in my hometown that used a split window as a winter car! It had fender flares, stress cracks, roached interior and a bad paint job along with a 327 and 4 speed. It still had the split, along with the factory “Air Conditioning” bowtie decal in the right rear window panel. He wanted $8500 for it, with no takers for a couple of years. I’ve often wondered what became of it.
I guess this is why the “boat back” Riviera had a one piece rear window from the beginning. although I’m sure some of Mitchell’s early sketches for the Riviera had a split window.
I’m inclined to agree that apart from an occasional customizer going a for a distinctive look single window conversions would have happened after the 64 came out to look like the new ones, and utilize the factory rear window.
The raised center section of the rear window (necessitated by the boat-tail design) seems more of an obstruction than the center split.
Are there ’64-67 Corvettes out there that were modified to have split windows? That would seem easier than the reverse. I know there are (or were) kits to install split rear windows on newer VW Beetles, as well as the small oval window that replaced it.
I gotta be honest, I think the split window was a little too self indulgent of a design from Bill Mitchell, it’s such a minor affectation in the scheme of the overall design it’s amazing that ever made it past the clay stages to production. Though I’m sure that’s a big part of the appeal, design purity and such. For me a C2 is a C2, they’re all gorgeous and the boat profile isn’t at all hampered by its deletion for 64, the split window isn’t any more significant to the design for me than which style of fender vents it had on the side.
Same with split window bugs for that matter, the unbroken oval looks just as interesting
The VW’s split window was a reflection of a major styling theme of the time, harking back to Tom Tjaarda’s 1931 Sterkenberg (below) with its dorsal fin. That was heavily cribbed by Tatra and by Bugatti for their Atlantic coupe, and others too. VW did not adopt the actual fin, but there is a suggestion of it in the crease in the rear deck lid that comes up almost to the split in the rear window. The split window was still very in, and was widely used on other cars too.
The ’63’s split rear window was previewed on the ’56 Olds Golden Rocket. It’s not attributed to any specific stylist, but I would not assume it was Bill Mitchell. I suspect he just had it resurrected on the C2 coupe.
That roof (and the whole rear end) was in turn used on this ’58 Corvette concept.
Yikes! And to think people get bent out of shape over the hood louvers and trunklid strips on the production 58s!
Thank God this concept never went anywhere! Ugg.
I’ve been thinking about that clay, with the overall more rounded profile of the roof the split windows it actually kind of resemble the top two panes of glass on the front of the WWII B29 bomber, the C2s flatter roof and crisp edges change the look drastically(for the better!)
While the 1963 Corvette split rear window is a love-it or hate-it thing, it is valuable today as a collector car. Behind it all is the structure of the car. The split window for 1963 was structural. They redesigned the structure of the car to eliminate the rib in the middle of the rear window opening. This structural redesign was completed and tested in mid-production of 1963 (around March 1963). The decision within Chevrolet was to wait until the1964 production run to make the design change. So, the 1963 coupe is the only C2 coupe that has a collection value higher than its convertible counterpart for the same model year.
What “structure”? The center rib was just part of the fiberglass body, and easy to eliminate, as a number of folks did themselves. It’s not like there was any steel understructure there.
My father was a corvette specialist in the early 60s he told me that he removed the split on three cars because the customers wanted their cars updated he was in the quad cities at that time he said later on what a mistake
Wow ~ looking at someone cutting and grinding fiberglass in bare hands and no safety suit makes me itch all over just thinking about it .
In the 1970’s finding a split window ‘Vette was the unicorn as many (most ?) seem to have been changed to one piece glass by those same coverall wearing Corvette stereotypes…
-Nate
I remember reading about a company that marketed a kit to convert the split window to one piece. If any of these projects still exist it would be a rare find.