Originally Posted by Jer
.
The issue with a Daytona and SuperBird convertible is that it antithetical to the reason those cars existed at all. These cars were designed and built for a specific purpose, to slice through the air better, hence the nose, wing, and flush backlight. A convertible top on either flies in the face of the design and purpose of the cars. It's like sticking a two-barrel carb on a 426 race hemi. You can, but it ignores the basic reasons it exists at all.

The thing that defines a second-gen Charger is it's roofline, C-pillar buttresses and backlight. Immediate recognition. A Charger convertible is stunning with the top down, but with the top up, it looks like a wonky Coronet rebuilt with Charger parts. I love the '70 Super Charger, but that's a beast of a different sort.

Don't get me wrong, there certainly have been a bunch of them built over the years, so your opinions may be different. I certainly admire those who have that kind of talent to take on this kind of build.



I have six second generation Chargers with the factory roofline to look at in the garage,two of them have factory sunroofs,and one is a V code Sixpack car,so having the seventh one being the convertible is fine with me.

20220925_200214.jpg

70 Charger R/T SE 472 Hemi 70 Charger R/T convertible 70 Charger R/T V Code Sixpack 69 Charger R/T SE Sunroofcar 68 Charger 383 68 Charger 318 71 Charger R/T 70 Challenger convertible 71 Challenger convertible 71 Cuda 340 09 Challenger R/T Classic