When I first saw the 1962 PLYMOUTH'S as a kid, it appeared to me to be one of the oddest looking cars I'd ever seen. And when asked to name a car that from a styling perspective, I thought missed the mark, the '62 Plymouth was usually the one that came to mind.
But in just the last few years, I've found myself gravitating to this car with more appreciation of its unique and different look. That appreciation has moved this Plymouth over to my list of cars that I now find attractive, perhaps because of its oddness.
Now when attending old car shows, I find myself enjoying a '62 Plymouth more than the usual Chevy's and Ford's (or most every other car) of that same year. Lesson learned, never say never.
George Schire
Oakdale, Minnesota
I loved these from the get-go, but I prefer the base (Savoy) body style.
John Bono
North Jersey
I have always thought the 62 Fury 2drht. was a very decent looking car; it was the Dodge that took me very many years to warm up to.
I have always thought the 62 Fury 2drht. was a very decent looking car; it was the Dodge that took me very many years to warm up to. I will say though that they could have been a little more imaginative with the Fury tail light selection.
Plymouth & Dodge: 1955 to 1960 alright, 1961 to 1963 don't care for, 1964 to 1972 good.
I have always thought the 62 Fury 2drht. was a very decent looking car; it was the Dodge that took me very many years to warm up to. I will say though that they could have been a little more imaginative with the Fury tail light selection.
I know what you mean about the Dodge, as the grille and headlight arrangement takes some getting used to. However, I do like the rear-end treatment better than the Plymouth's for '62. This said though, for the same reasons I've come to like the Plymouth, I also like the Dodge. They look enough alike, yet are unique in their own way.
George Schire
Oakdale, Minnesota



