It all depends how you look at it.
Assuming you are refering to readily available Uberti Colt replicas the main difference is in position and size of the rear sight, if you were looking at it from a shooter's point of view:
the Open Top's is better visible/faster alignable for my eyes, and is an integral part of the breech end of the barrel, whereas the RII's and RM's are a notch in the hammer, like on C&B pistols. If the ASM Richards were included in the equation the rear sight is an integral part of the conversion ring, with good visibility and alignability (is that a proper English word?).
OT and conversion replicas are available in .38 Special/Colt, .44 Colt, .44 Special, .45 Schofield and Colt (some).
Except for the afore mentioned rear sight OT's and RM Army's barrel assemblies are identical with the RM having an 8" and the OT a 7,5" barrel in the "ex factory" version.
OT's and RM's replicas are available with Army (RM 1860 Army) and Navy (RM 1851 Navy) grips, Richards and RII with Army grips only.
For CAS purposes accuracy of both OT's and conversions is great, pointability is excellent: you hit where you point the front sight!
From a collectors point of view and speaking in general technical terms conversions were C&B revolvers in a "previous life". They were "converted" to shoot cartridges by cutting off the rear end of the original cylinder, addition of a conversion ring with loading gate, and some type of ejector. On the other hand the OT was developed as a cartridge pistol in the fist place, hence there is no conversion ring. The OT is the predecessor of the famous Colt SAA M 1873.
Bootsie