Our new car, 1965 nova.

[speedfreek500]

Well i didnt get to goto SDAC so the wife and i bought a new to us car. Its a 1965 chev nova II with a strait 6 and a 2 speed power glide transmission. It was bought new in Calgary and lived it life in BC, there is no rust at all and even has the orignal paint for day one. It crying for a turbo but this car is in mint all orignal condition i cant bring myself to mod it in any way.
:love:

http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/emma3.jpg
http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/emma2.jpg
http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/emma1.jpg

[GLHS60]

Beautiful little 1965 Chevrolet, Chevy II, Nova sedan. As you mentioned the wheels don't suit the car but that is an easy change. Carb style draw through Tutbo setup from an 1980 Turbo Trans Am is almost a bolt on. Third picture seems to have a shadow of a Gay Prider lurking around the straight 194 six.:nod:

Trivia: What is the front suspension design flaw on the 1962-1967 Chevy II / Acadian?? :eyebrows:

Thanks
Randy




Well i didnt get to goto SDAC so the wife and i bought a new to us car. Its a 1965 chev nova II with a strait 6 and a 2 speed power glide transmission. It was bought new in Calgary and lived it life in BC, there is no rust at all and even has the orignal paint for day one. It crying for a turbo but this car is in mint all orignal condition i cant bring myself to mod it in any way.
:love:

http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/emma3.jpg
http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/emma2.jpg
http://i757.photobucket.com/albums/xx212/speedfreek500/emma1.jpg

[RoadWarrior222]

Trivia: What is the front suspension design flaw on the 1962-1967 Chevy II / Acadian?? :eyebrows:

Probably 800lb of straight 6 instead of 500lb of SBC for one thing :D

[black86glhs]

The steering setup.

[GLHS60]

Not even close, 194 six weighs about 440 lbs to a small blocks 575.

Thanks
Randy



Probably 800lb of straight 6 instead of 500lb of SBC for one thing :D

[speedfreek500]

The bump steer is pretty bad, it has the same set-up as the wifes 1968 mustang. I did notice when i put it on the hoist the toe went in about 2 inches! When i let it down i could see the toe get back into spec. I also did notice it had negitive caster because of the no power steering, i guess GM wanted a car to turn very easy when parking or going slow.

[RoadWarrior222]

Not even close, 194 six weighs about 440 lbs to a small blocks 575.


ThWhat am I thinking then , the truck 6? thought there was one that was almost as much of a heavy beast as the /6

[GLHS60]

The previous generation inline six, the Stovebolt, out weighed the small block for sure at about 630 lbs. It was last used in 1962 model year full size cars and pickups.

Thanks
Randy






What am I thinking then , the truck 6? thought there was one that was almost as much of a heavy beast as the /6

[Keito]

Curious, what kind of gas milage would a drivetrain combo like this get?

[speedfreek500]

Curious, what kind of gas milage would a drivetrain combo like this get?

Its not that bad on gas, i put in 40 liters and have gone 130 miles and still have lots left in the tank.

We dont drive it that much i do not know what a full tank would get yet.

[turbovanman²]

This is deja vu, a customer has a 66, same engine and trans combo, but its rollered black, I am helping him fix it up. Just put a new styel 80 amp alt on it, rewired it so it doesn't melt the wiring, lol, and a bunch of other things, sweet ride, :nod:

[speedfreek500]

The fuel miliage is alot better than i thought it would be, it isn`t the best but it runs so good. Thanks to (Randy Glhs 60), i lent him the car when i went on hollidays and got it back running better than when he got it.

He said the valves were set too tight, plugs werent gapped correct and he also set the carb. Thanks Randy for doing such a great job on it!

[wheming]

Trivia: What is the front suspension design flaw on the 1962-1967 Chevy II / Acadian?? :eyebrows:

Thanks
Randy

It is one of the crappiest suspension designs ever. Where do i start!
Firstly, look at those lower control arms. They are just a stamped beam. Just 2 points. Then they decide to triangulate with a freakin strut rod that bends if yo hit a hard enough bump!
Secondly, look at the upper control arm. Why the hell is it angled back towards the rear? What brainchild newbie engineer decided that was a good idea? So now every time the suspension compresses, it changes your alignment!
Thirdly the steering has so many pivot points to wear out that the steering gets sloppy quick. But that is a typical steering set up used before rack and pinion became the new standard.

There are several suspension conversions out there. One uses a strut from a 80's camaro, but that doesn't address the crappy lower control arms.
There are kits that fix that though, as well as complete Heidt's kits.

The good news is your 65 has the 5 lug spindles, so if the previous owner hasn't done a disc brake conversion, it is relatively easy. I did my 64's front brakes to disc for a few hundred. It just required redrilling and tapping one bolthole on the spindle and milling down the upper bolt area for the caliper mounting bracket to bolt to.


I used to have a webpage for mine but since swapping ISP's it has been deleted.



my android sent this for me using Tapatalk...

[GLHS60]

Good guess Wayne and all valid points but the real design flaw is the inner tie rods do not pivot with the lower control causing extreme bump steer. Years ago I helped a friend make a custom drag link that relocated the inner tie rods so their pivot point is in the same point as the lower control arm pivot point and this allowed the suspension to travel without the toe constantly changing.

Thanks

Randy




It is one of the crappiest suspension designs ever. Where do i start!
Firstly, look at those lower control arms. They are just a stamped beam. Just 2 points. Then they decide to triangulate with a freakin strut rod that bends if yo hit a hard enough bump!
Secondly, look at the upper control arm. Why the hell is it angled back towards the rear? What brainchild newbie engineer decided that was a good idea? So now every time the suspension compresses, it changes your alignment!
Thirdly the steering has so many pivot points to wear out that the steering gets sloppy quick. But that is a typical steering set up used before rack and pinion became the new standard.

There are several suspension conversions out there. One uses a strut from a 80's camaro, but that doesn't address the crappy lower control arms.
There are kits that fix that though, as well as complete Heidt's kits.

The good news is your 65 has the 5 lug spindles, so if the previous owner hasn't done a disc brake conversion, it is relatively easy. I did my 64's front brakes to disc for a few hundred. It just required redrilling and tapping one bolthole on the spindle and milling down the upper bolt area for the caliper mounting bracket to bolt to.


I used to have a webpage for mine but since swapping ISP's it has been deleted.



my android sent this for me using Tapatalk...

[black86glhs]

I wish I could remember the trick that guys were doing back in the 80's to help the bump steer. I called it earlier by the way.....lol. That was back before the rack kits. Darn it, I forget.
Honestly, Like a 4000+ pound mopar with with a similar design was a great idea? You look back at many of the designs and wonder how more people didn't end up in ditches.