C-64c, How common?

From: Cliff Gregory <cgregory_at_lrbcg.com>
Date: Thu Jan 8 06:14:51 1998

I have them all, i.e., 64, 64C, and a 64 in a 64C look alike case. Although
not as common as the classic 64, the 64C is not at all rare. I found a
complete one with a matching 1541C drive at a thrift the other day for $5.
Among the Commodore community the consensus is that although functionally
the same, some of the chips in the 64C had been upgraded (if I remember
correctly, specificly the sound chips among others), and it is therefore
more desirable than the standard 64.

Cliff Gregory
cgregory_at_lrbcg.com
-----Original Message-----
From: classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu <classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
To: Cgregory <Cgregory>
Date: Thursday, January 08, 1998 1:36 AM
Subject: Re: C-64c, How common?


>
>Received: from lists2.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.1] by LRBCG.COM with
smtp
> id ABCEAFBJ ; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 01:36:04 -0500
>Received: from host (lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13])
> by lists2.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with
SMTP
> id VAA13060; Wed, 7 Jan 1998 21:34:23 -0800
>Received: from mx5.u.washington.edu (mx5.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.6])
> by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with
ESMTP
> id VAA41218 for <classiccmp_at_lists.u.washington.edu>; Wed, 7 Jan 1998
21:34:20 -0800
>Received: from iac12.navix.net (iac12.navix.net [207.91.5.12])
> by mx5.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.09) with ESMTP
> id VAA05257 for <classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>; Wed, 7 Jan 1998
21:34:19 -0800
>Received: from navix.net (xyp99p14.ltec.net [205.242.158.24])
> by iac12.navix.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA27937
> for <classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>; Wed, 7 Jan 1998 23:20:40 -0600
>Message-Id: <33EC0CF9.CA43793D_at_navix.net>
>Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 23:23:54 -0700
>Reply-To: classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu
>Sender: CLASSICCMP-owner_at_u.washington.edu
>Precedence: bulk
>From: Cord Coslor <archive_at_navix.net>
>To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers"
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
>Subject: Re: C-64c, How common?
>References: <199801080420.OAA02158_at_arthur.merlin.net.au>
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
>
>I have a C64c, although I haven't found them to be very common. This unit
may
>be for sell as well if anyone is looking for one. Also, I too found a C64
in a
>third party case that looked just like the c-64... and it also was made in
>Australia. I can get this for anyone that might want this unit as well. Let
me
>know.
>
>CORD COSLOR
>
>adam_at_merlin.net.au wrote:
>
>> >I'm starting to wonder about how common the C-64c is. I have yet to see
>> >one, I picked up the manuals when a favorite bookstore had a set a few
>> >months back. Then last weekend I was at the bookstore and they had like
3
>> >or 4 sets of manual. But like I said I've never seen an actual
computer!
>>
>> I'm assuming you mean the different case design - over here (South
>> Australia) they seem to be as common as the old breadbox sort, but I
>> suspect that in numbers they are slightly less than the older designs. I
>> have three of them, and I only wanted the one. As far as I know there are
>> no functional changes, although Commodore had a history of working out
>> ways to make systems cheaper, so there may be a difference internally.
>>
>> I did find one old C64 in a third-party case which looked very much like
>> the C64c, though. Interestingly enough it was made here - I would have
>> picked it up, but I shy away from collecting computers based on the
>> different cases, as there are too many to collect just based on the
>> different systems themselves, and space is limited.
>>
>> Adam.
>
>
>
>
Received on Thu Jan 08 1998 - 06:14:51 GMT