'69 Charger R/T convertible

[472 R/T SE]

Other B body choices out there.  I hate the fact the rear window area is all completely lost.

[Magnumcharger]

  Ma Mopar didn't make them for a reason and I understand why. I don't like the straight up look of the windshield post/frame/glass on a conv Charger.

I agree...which is why I changed the post angle in the second picture...above.

[stripedelete]

Nice job on it but

As much as I love convertibles, it just doesn't look right on a charger.  Maybe is the roof line for me that makes the car along with the other body lines but I just can't see it looking better as a convert.

X3.  I'm sure Chrysler mocked one up back-in-the-day and saw the same thing.

[Skyview69]

I want to see it with the top up and then make a decision.   

[Magnumcharger]

I want to see it with the top up and then make a decision.    

Lookie here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dodgedeora/sets/72157607518259173/

[Charger´69]

No no and no, 2nd gen Charger and convertible  I don´t like, it doesn´t look like a muscle car anymore 

[375instroke]

The 4-door to hardtop windshield difference is obvious, but I never noticed it on convertibles.  If I was to do this, the top would have sail fins.  I've seen them on Fiero convertibles.  I understand that the top is the same as '67 and earlier convertible tops.  So is the windshield the same as a 4-door, or is it unique to itself?  All these convertible Chargers looked messed up.  They all cut corners, grafting Charger panels onto a convertible body, and calling it done.  People look down to installing a '68 grill on a '69, for instance, but a Coronet roof on a Charger is fine?  I don't think so.  The convertible rear window looks similar in size to a Charger window, so that could stay.  I'd at least extend the roof back in the corners and use cables to maintain the shape.  There are cables in there already, so it's not like it's a big re-engineering effort.  Lowering the windshield would be the big challenge.  Since the top is the same as earlier models, I think it looks that way because of cost saving measures, not because of some engineering necessity.  In the end, though, with the top down, it still looks funny, so I guess I'd have to leave the top up all the time.  What would be the point, then?  Just to show off?  The other B-bodies look OK with the tops down, but they look funny with it up, too.  E-bodies look fine with the top up, or down, and maybe that's because they were designed for that body.  Well, I hope someone that decides to do another one of these does it the right way.  I'd really be impressed.  Now, what to do about the rear upper door pads?

[Skyview69]

I want to see it with the top up and then make a decision.    

Lookie here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dodgedeora/sets/72157607518259173/

Hmmm...I'd have to say it is not for me however it is a Charger and it does look good either way

[Vainglory, Esq.]

For me the biggest question has always been whether there are sailpanel-esque parts of the top that allow it to flow into the quarters.  If not, it doesn't look like a Charger.

That shouldn't be a total deterrent though, since I'm sure they could be made with enough skill and time.  After all, if you look at the BMW 6-series convertible, you see that it can be done.  Admittedly not the best example, but at least clear proof that a convertible roof does not have to destroy the flow of the bodylines.

[MoparManJim]

You know, after looking at the photos and reading what all you said. I got thinking, I like building models all the time and doing different things to them and adding much detail as I can when I can.. I got thinking (yea I know that is scary  ) maybe later on down in the summer. I think I will get a revell charger kit and do a model charger convertible with a working correct roof on it  . I wonder if I could pull that one now that I think about it 

[375instroke]

Here's a Fiero as a Ferrari convertible clone with sail fins.

[chargd72]

How do you know if they're real or not?  There is a pair for sale on craigslist by me.

VERY RARE Recall Wheels 

Im guessing they are not originals but the repros that are now out there.

How sad, everything can be faked now... 

[bakerhillpins]

VERY RARE Recall Wheels 

Im guessing they are not originals but the repros that are now out there.

How sad, everything can be faked now... 

Are these original recall wheels? Pic swiped from ebay auction http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/BUILT-383-MAGNUM-TCI-Tranny-MSD-CAM-Lots-O-Xtras-/230485016697?cmd=ViewItem&pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item35a9fa4079

Not a big fan of loosing the sail panels with a rag top.. 

[bakerhillpins]

I've wanted to build a Charger convertible for Decades. 

I've just never been able to lay my hands on a 68-70 B-body convertible that either wasn't a total rust bucket, or big $$$$ and too nice to cut up...

...Now, with all of the AMD sheet metal that is available AND my extensive stash of second generation charger parts, I wouldn't even NEED a charger donor car to start with, just the B-body convertible, the credit card, and my junk pile...

Anybody got a Coronet rag top they want to unload? 

You can apparently get all the tin from these guys:
http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,48966.0.html

The post is old so I wonder if they are still selling as I don't see a lot of Charger verts... Which is fine with me. 

[375instroke]

Did you get the right picture?  The original recall wheels weren't chrome.  They had trim rings.  I've seen two different centers and two different trim rings used.

[chargd72]

These are the ones I was talking about.

[resq302]

The appear to be the alluminum slotted rims. 

[bakerhillpins]

Did you get the right picture?  The original recall wheels weren't chrome.  They had trim rings.  I've seen two different centers and two different trim rings used.

Sorry, I wasn't suggesting they were recall wheels, just wondering if they were. I take it by your response that they are not which answers the question. 

[A383Wing]

Not a big fan of loosing the sail panels with a rag top.. 

The '68 Charger 'vert that Bob had was designed to have the tunnel back sailpanel design. Top was a "scissor" style like the mid '70s GM cars had. You would have to ask him for more details about it.

[bakerhillpins]

Not a big fan of loosing the sail panels with a rag top.. 

The '68 Charger 'vert that Bob had was designed to have the tunnel back sailpanel design. Top was a "scissor" style like the mid '70s GM cars had. You would have to ask him for more details about it.

Ok, so more like folks were suggesting with the BMW and Ferrari. I guess I could hold off judgment until I see a top like that but top down just doesn't do it for me at all.

[Old Moparz]

Not a big fan of loosing the sail panels with a rag top.. 

The '68 Charger 'vert that Bob had was designed to have the tunnel back sailpanel design. Top was a "scissor" style like the mid '70s GM cars had. You would have to ask him for more details about it.

Ok, so more like folks were suggesting with the BMW and Ferrari. I guess I could hold off judgment until I see a top like that but top down just doesn't do it for me at all.

I've only seen one Charger convertible where the person building it was trying to keep the roof line of a hardtop Charger. It was from the northwest & had supposedly been owned by a Chrysler engineer, then sold before it was ever finished. I am pretty sure a member on this site bought it & still owns it.

[Khyron]

These are the ones I was talking about.

gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme

[Magnumcharger]

I've only seen one Charger convertible where the person building it was trying to keep the roof line of a hardtop Charger. It was from the northwest & had supposedly been owned by a Chrysler engineer, then sold before it was ever finished. I am pretty sure a member on this site bought it & still owns it.

That Chrysler engineer was Richard Sias, and this is the car you're referring to.

[Old Moparz]

I've only seen one Charger convertible where the person building it was trying to keep the roof line of a hardtop Charger. It was from the northwest & had supposedly been owned by a Chrysler engineer, then sold before it was ever finished. I am pretty sure a member on this site bought it & still owns it.

That Chrysler engineer was Richard Sias, and this is the car you're referring to.

Yeah, that's the same car, just different photos. It was for sale on the internet for a couple of years & then one day it finally sold. I have yet to see a pic with the top in the up position. It may be why the project was never completed. 

[8WHEELER]

That 68 was in my garage for three years, after Bob bought it from Richard Sias, and the top was never put up.

It had the power motors installed and everything, but there was no other electrical to put the top up.

Dan