I have tried and tried to figer out the differance bewteen these two models and for the the of me i can not find a clear answer. So could some one please help me? Is one better than the other? I plan on getting one of these I just would like some help on choosing the best one. Thank you.

The WASR-10s are purpose-made sporter rifles from Romania. They come in country with the PSL-style stock, narrow mag well, muzzle nut tacked on, and the ears shaved off the bayonet lug. It's here that Century opens-up the magwell and puts normal Romanian stock and the needed 922(r) compliance parts.

IIRC, the WASR-10/63 rifles are actually made from surplus, demilled md. 63 rifles, I think they're put together here as they do have the threaded muzzle/slant brake and intact bayonet lugs. Basically, if you care about the bayonet lug, get a 10/63. Otherwise, grab a double-stack WASR-10 (one can buy then in single or double stack) and carefully file off the tack weld on the underside of the muzzle nut/FSB.

Both still have chrome-lined hammer-forged barrels and both lack the magazine well dimples.

WASR 10s were made in Romania of new production parts. Some were sold with thumbhole stocks and some were sold with pistol grips and standard stocks. Some were sold with 10 shot magazines and some were sold with standard magazines.
WASR 10s are no longer made. They have been replaced by GP WASR 10s and 10/63s.
WASR 10/63s are made in Romania by demilling existing rifles and rebuilding them on new receivers which accept a single stack 10 shot magazine.
Century opens the magazine well to accept standard magazines and replaces some parts with US made parts to comply with Federal law.
Since last summer WASR 10/63s have new production Romanian made chrome lined barrels to comply with the latest BATFE ruling.

Thank you.
Ive seen both models around here. Both have the standard CAI packag rifle, 2 Hi-cap 30rd mags, sling and stuuff. so i thing i may choose the 10/63. mainly because i like the look of the slant break

Just my opinion:

 But of the two, it seems like the 10/63's are just a hair straighter/cleaner.     Wheras I saw alot of Wasr10's with canted sights,etc.   Very few 10/63's.    Not a huge enough selection to be sure (About a combined total of 16-20 over the past year), but it's a thought.

My 10/63 is not on a new receiver. It's stamped as 1973. Had a new CL  barrel.  It had a tacked on muzzle nut., & no bayonet lug.  The mag well was opened up, & a tapco trigger.
I bought it almost 3 years ago.  

Your 10/63 is indeed on a new receiver. It is on built on a surplus trunion with a 1973 date.  If it were on an old receiver it would have the third hole for the FCG and would be considered a machine gun by the nitwits in the ATF............

ahh

I just bought a wasr 10/63 and it came with no cleaning rod or cleaning kit.no sling it did come with two 30rd mags.It is also dated 1973 Whats the story with the ATF barrel ?

Sticky in AK Discussion.

Short version is that ATF ruled that barrels that used to be on MGs can no-longer be used on 'sporter' rifles coming into the country. Thus, all the barrels on new incoming WASRs have new-make barrels instead of the surplus ones. They are still Romanian manufacture, chrome-lined hammer-forged barrels. The only difference is that they were made today instead of 30-40 years ago.

Whether the barrel was on a "machine gun" or not is irrelevent.
The statute passed by Congress prohibits the importation of barrels and receivers for military surplus firearms.
Previous administrations permitted the importation of such a barrel if it was part of a firearm that met the "sporting use" requirement.
The current administration decided to interpret the law litterally - no importation of surplus military barrels.

Thanks for the explaining the  barrel situation. What did the goverment gain by doing such a thing.?

I can't claim to know why Congress does anything. If one applies logic to the situation (which is always a problem when dealing with the .gov and especially when dealing with Congress) one possibility is that the ban on importation of military surplus barrels and receivers ws intended to prevent importers from getting around the ban on importing surplus firearms by disassembling the weapons, importing the parts and then reassembling the weapons.

the simplest way i have found to explain the barrel ban and 922r in general is the people in our government think us ignorant citizens are buying aks and other assault rifles to mow down school children or whatever other bs.  then you take a congress and president that are liberal extremists who know little or nothing about guns and they interpret using former "machine gun parts" as us poor stupid commoners as literally having machine guns because they have former machine gun parts on them.  therefore by banning them this ensures they are semi-auto only.  all of these bans as im sure the rest of you know is arbitrary.  it makes no difference where or when the parts were made.  but when they get their way its just one more step towards a total ban that they want.