Chevy Nova Forum banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,950 Posts
thats a different combination i've never seen. i didnt know the 4 cyl's were installed into the 3 gen novas.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,835 Posts
Looks like a pretty nice original car. Would be fun to have and just go out and drive. I like the oddballs.

We found a 4cyl 3rd gen in a Los Angeles junk yard two decades ago. Didn't realize then it was an option either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
682 Posts
A nice, unique car. Clean and detail the engine bay and drive it all over. Maybe convert to a TH350 for drivability in the future while still looking stock, but it would be the only one at ANY car show.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
13,985 Posts
1970 was the last year for 4 cylinder Novas in the U.S. In Canada, there were no 4 bangers after 1965. Even when all Nova and Acadian production moved to the U.S. in 1968, there were no 4 cylinder cars sent to Canada.

This car is rare, but not near near the top of most people's 'want' list. I sure wouldn't fork over $12,500 for it. A six cylinder is like driving a Cadillac after you've driven a four. I don't think mentioning it has 50 year old tires is a selling point!

Bob
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
914 Posts
Very Nice Car

It is all there, it is immaculate, it is a thing of beauty, and it beats throwing $400 into a pipe dream.
 

·
Registered
1969 Nova . . 2dr . . Chino Valley,Az USA
Joined
·
4,849 Posts
oh yeah ... in 69 -- the base engine was the 'RPO-L26 ... 230ci , 140hp , L6.
Then, the RPO-L22, 250 , 155hp , L6.

The L4 , 153ci , 90hp , four cyl. was also offered ..... BUT ..... wasn't ordered very much ! (I wonder why .... not .)

The ONE - and - ONLY NOVA L4 car that I have ever seen was back in
1964-65 --- my High School friend's Mother had one. A 62 or 63 Nova 4dr 'plain jane car with a powerglide .... it ran well (mostly because it was almost a new car) , but No Power.
I've never have seen (in Person) another L4 4cyl Nova in my lifetime ...
(I've heard of them , just have never seen another one).



And, here I think an early Nova with a 194 - 6 is pretty bad (compared to my L22 250 - 6 motor) ..... I'd still like to see it "Run Down th' Road , that would be cool ............ but, otherwise NO Thank-you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,750 Posts
I'd have to disagree with you on this one, Bob. If you were planning to show the car, original tires are a big plus. That's the kind of detail that breaks ties at car shows.

If it were mine, I'd buy a set of steelies and radials for everyday and keep the originals in a cool, dry, dark place to be put on for shows.

I don't think mentioning it has 50 year old tires is a selling point!

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,605 Posts
4.11 gear with a powerglide ?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,012 Posts
I have actually driven one with a PG, a '69 that was in Goleta, CA. I know Corvair was on the way out by the late '60's, but the 4-banger in the heavier 3rd generation shouldn't have been out there. Passing anything would be a hazard, even back in the day the car was new.

As for the tires, that's one thing I never did understand about judging and showing. I know they're original, but a hard as rock set of BFG's with sidewall cracks makes a car a better original show car than a safer set of reproduced bias ply tires? There has to be a limit when it comes to either safety, or even base roadworthiness. You wouldn't use gas from back in the day, or does that have to be Esso Ethyl too?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,749 Posts
Iron Duke

June 1968, Motor Trend magazine ran a comparison test between a '68 Nova 4 banger 3 on the tree, and a VW 1600 fast back ,4 cylinder fuel injected 66 hp with a 4 speed In the end, the writer recommended Nova buyers choose the 6 or 8 ..the VW out performed the Nova in most departments.. Both units sold for $2200.00
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,843 Posts
I am sure I mentioned it in another post back in 2006, but "I had one of those" in a 1962, 2 dr post.

They were popular engines for people who owned boats, and when Bruce and I upgraded to a inline 6, we sold the 4 banger to a boat owner.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
13,985 Posts
June 1968, Motor Trend magazine ran a comparison test between a '68 Nova 4 banger 3 on the tree, and a VW 1600 fast back ,4 cylinder fuel injected 66 hp with a 4 speed In the end, the writer recommended Nova buyers choose the 6 or 8 ..the VW out performed the Nova in most departments.. Both units sold for $2200.00
I also have this article. It's a real glimpse into how the imports were pulling away from our domestics in just about everyway. As you mention, these 2 cars were identical in price, but the VW had electronic fuel injection, independent front and rear suspension and front wheel disc brakes. They couldn't get the Chevy II up to 80 MPH, but they squeezed 86 MPH out of the 96.6 cubic inch VW with special mention of the lack of noise and vibration suffered in the Chevy II. The economy car image of the Chevy II also took a beating with an average trip mileage of under 29 mpg. The VW did 39 mpg and at one point hit 45 mpg!

Motor Trend's summation, "Chevy II hunters should choose nothing less than a six cylinder engine."

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,086 Posts
I remember reading about the 4 cylinder engines offered in Novas. I can't imagine how horribly slow that car must have been. Wonder what the 1/4 mile time would have been stock? Maybe 25 seconds or something?

I wouldn't have ordered one with anything under the 307 V8. I had that engine in my car when I first got it, and while not a big performer, it had some solid power and never felt underpowered. It also sounded nice with a set of headers and dual exhaust.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
13,985 Posts
I remember reading about the 4 cylinder engines offered in Novas. I can't imagine how horribly slow that car must have been. Wonder what the 1/4 mile time would have been stock? Maybe 25 seconds or something?
I couldn't find any road test of a 3rd generation 4 banger, probably because 4 cylinder road tests didn't sell magazines:). Car Life did tests on 1962 four cylinders. The 3 speed manual did 0-60 in 17 seconds and the 1/4 in 20.2. Third generation cars were somewhat heavier, so probably posted slightly higher times.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,950 Posts
so i'm betting if you drove one of those 3gens with a 4 cyl. you proble had a bumper sticker that said, i'm pedeling as fast as i can. a quarter mile in 20.2 now that's makin' some time. still though that one would be a fun one for town driving.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,012 Posts
That four was designed with the lighter ChevyII in mind, not the bigger 3rd generation. That car should never have had that engine, and would have a HP/weight ratio that puts it in a category where, if you can't get 30 mpg, forget it.

The VW fastback MPG numbers are pure mendacity. I haven't read the article, granted, but unless they were on cool, flat asphalt and allowed to maintain a steady 35-40 mph, that car would never get 39 much less 45 mpg. I owned two of those F.I. Type 3's (a '64 dual carb Notchback and a '68 square back) and there was no way they could get those numbers with the F.I. car, smog connected, normal driving course and conditions, and in stock form. Wouldn't be the first bogus numbers from a magazine road test.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
13,985 Posts
That four was designed with the lighter ChevyII in mind, not the bigger 3rd generation. That car should never have had that engine, and would have a HP/weight ratio that puts it in a category where, if you can't get 30 mpg, forget it.

The VW fastback MPG numbers are pure mendacity. I haven't read the article, granted, but unless they were on cool, flat asphalt and allowed to maintain a steady 35-40 mph, that car would never get 39 much less 45 mpg. I owned two of those F.I. Type 3's (a '64 dual carb Notchback and a '68 square back) and there was no way they could get those numbers with the F.I. car, smog connected, normal driving course and conditions, and in stock form. Wouldn't be the first bogus numbers from a magazine road test.
Canada dumped the 4 cylinder after 1965. Good decision for the reasons you mention.

As for the 1968 VW/Chevy II test, here are the figures. Total miles travelled: 406.4 in Norcal in the winter. Started at Angels Camp, over to Reno and ended at SF. They had chains on part of the time. Total fuel used: Chevy II 14.05 gals, VW 10.4 gals. Avg. mpg Chevy II 28.92, VW 39.07. Best mpg Chevy II 33.10, VW 45.21. Poorest mpg Chevy II 30.35, VW 36.80. Hi speed (65-75 mph) fuel consumption Chevy II 17.45 mpg, VW 30.00 mpg. Type of fuel used Chevy II: Regular, VW: Premium.

Bob
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top