John Bono
North Jersey
They are all good-looking tops on this very attractive Plymouth which was finally getting back to true full-size status after an ill-advised downsizing earlier in the decade.
I favor the more formal Fast Top. It looks especially good wearing a vinyl top.
I prefer the hardtop. I’m not a fan of that “fast top” styling on this Plymouth.
steve
Both #'s 1 & 2 have found disfavor with me over the years. But I have ALWAYS loved convertibles. My vote.
Hardtop. I love this era's trapezoidal pillars.
Retired in Dunedin, Florida.
Convertible for me as well. 😊
Another vote for the convertible. Don't care for either of the hardtops.
For some reason I have a real fondness for cars with a wide-based or "triangulated" C pillar, and an equally strong dislike of C pillars that narrow towards the base, so obviously I vote for the Fast Top.
No doubt the convertible was a delight to drive around in, but stylistically it looks less "complete" than the closed versions.
Graeme.M. Ogg
London U.K.
Convertible for me too. I would likely go for the hardtop next.
I love em all. Small medium and large. Plymouth gets my vote for most of their 1960s designs
Well! My heart wants to vote for the ragtop. But the fast top is just quirky enough to garner my vote. Good matchup, John!
John Kuvakas
Warrenton, VA
Oh, I don't find it quirky at all!
It was also used on the Chrysler 300, where I thought it looked pretty good, especially viewed from the rear
although I grant you the "formal roof" on the 300 also looked pretty nice (with none of that "narrowing towards the base" look that puts me off the Plymouth).
Eye of the beholder . . .etc.
Graeme.M. Ogg
London U.K.
Fan of the Fast-Top - makes the low-priced Plymouth look upscale, like its Chrysler cousin!
Barry Levittan
Long Island, NY





