If there’s something we enjoy at CC, it’s coming across models that used to be common and that have become the rarest of their species. Today’s find fits that mold perfectly; a ’66 4-door Chevy II Nova posted at the CC Cohort by Hyperpack, with (likely) an inline six and Powerglide. Those who lived those days know these practical family drivers were the norm but have basically vanished.
And as CC readers know, from time to time, we prefer for cars to tell their own story. We felt that this find merits such an approach.
CC: Glad you’re here. I’ve to admit it’s been difficult to find you…
NOVA: Let me guess. When it comes to ’66-’67 Novas, you had 2-door coupes, SS versions, and all that in your pages, right? Gosh, that’s the thing. We normal folk keep the world going. No one pays much attention to us, but lots depends on our work, you know? And yes, people enjoy the idea of “excitement”, with their eyes glowing at the concept. But having excitement daily is a different matter altogether. Fun is good, but endless fun? Ever tried it? Sensible, pragmatic, that’s what most people need to get their lives in order…
… and if you wanted dependable and honest service, that was me. And I was a Chevrolet! High resale value, and America’s favorite brand! Good grief. To think about the state of things today. What went wrong with the world in these last six decades?
CC: Uh, better move on to your specs. From the looks of it, seems like you’re pretty plain…
NOVA: Watch it, son! You say plain as if that’s a bad thing. The thing was options, and lots of them. In concept, I was the traditionalist, and in a way, the reinvention of the sensibly sized Chevrolet. A 3-box package, with a glassy greenhouse to nicely see the world around you. Boxy at that, with good space for real adults in there. None of that fastback nonsense that got popular a few years later. Who fits in the back of a Maverick? What did folk sitting there do with their heads? Geez…
… In any case, choices! The idea was I could be a sensibly priced model, an upper trim one, or one for cheapskates. Engine options? Six of them, from a lowly inline-4 (yes, I did offer one), to three displacements of inline sixes and two V8 sizes. All in various states of tune, from 90HP to 350HP –talk about range! That plus four body styles, and up to 15 colors. You wanted your Chevrolet? You could have it anyway you wanted, from the humble to the hot, to the fully loaded.
The point was that from a distance, all that everyone knew was that you drove a Chevrolet. A good buy! Did you own the cheap one or the higher trim one? No matter. You had bought a car that had value, and an inherent one that wasn’t attached to actual money. No matter how cheap, it was a Chevrolet; it showed you had brains. You were no weirdo buying a Stude (luckily disappearing by then), or one of those dubious buyers of foreign makes (admit it, you suspected something was deeply wrong about those folks). And don’t get me started on Ford buyers.
CC: Err, let me go back a bit. You said you were the reinvention of the sensibly sized Chevrolet? I would say that “reinvention” is doing a lot of lifting there. Weren’t you just a response to the Falcon after the Corvair didn’t sell as expected in the compact field?
NOVA: Ugh, the Corvair. That show off… Don’t get me going. And yes, the Falcon… let’s just say that from time to time, Ford got an idea here and there right. Didn’t it just feel like they were throwing stuff at the wall and see what stuck? In any case, we were Chevrolet! Big, mighty… Nothing wrong with letting Ford go after some wild goose chase. And if they found a golden one? We just put on our 400 gorilla suit and got you a Chevy equivalent –a superior Chevy equivalent! We weren’t worried. Heck, I even got my own platform for a few years at the start; the X-body.
CC: So, from the looks of things, you were one of the most numerous versions of the ’66? A 4-door sedan, inline-six, with a 2-speed Powerglide.
NOVA: It’s rather annoying, but that’s hard to track. Chevrolet didn’t break down numbers when it came to their body lines in those years. But well, the bowtie was a huge sprawling operation, so one can see why that was difficult to do. But yes, in ’66, the Nova inline six was the most common of the Chevy IIs, with 54,300 units sold between wagons, 2-doors and 4-doors.
CC: Not the most exciting of setups, you might say…
NOVA: Again, with the excitement! That’s the thing. Time passes, and all folks think about the ’60s are the Beatles, rock and roll, and all that nonsense. A world run by those clownish, obnoxious teens? No wonder it all went downhill. Back then? In reality, it was a world full of… what do you call them?
CC: Squares?
NOVA: Yes, that. Did I listen to Herb Alpert, Petula Clark, and Rosemary Clooney? Did I love watching The Sound of Music? Yes. Was that being a “square”? Whatever. Call it whatever you want, but we were grown ups running the world, and that’s what I, 4-door Nova, was there to do. As for our likes and lifestyles, you call them old-fashioned, we called it having taste.
Related CC reading:
Car Show Outtake: 1966 Chevrolet Chevy II Nova SS – An Opel Kadett Crossed With A Riviera
Another example? My dads 1969 Chevrolet Townsman wagon. White, blue stick to your butt on a hot day vinyl interior, a pathetic 2bbl 327/PG powertrain. Made moms 1968 Ford LTD Country Squire look like a Lincoln in comparison.
And for our younger readers who may not know, 1969 was the last year for the 327 Chevy small block. This iconic engine was available only in 2 bolt main, cast crank, 2 barrel version, rated at a whopping 210HP gross hp. You do the net calculations. I have. You want a 4BBL? You got the 350
“1969 was the last year for the 327 Chevy small block. This iconic engine was available only in 2 bolt main, cast crank, 2 barrel version, rated at a whopping 210HP gross hp. You do the net calculations.”
Yes, a sad note for that engine to bow out on. In the early 80s my cousin bought a 1968 Camaro with the base 327 such as described above and Powerglide. An insipid combination. It turns out that it had a reasonably snappy rear axle ratio but the tall 1st gear of the PG really eroded the get-up-and-go. Soon, a THM 350 was swapped out for the whirring PG, a factory dual exhaust was added ( pieces were still readily available then ), and, coupled with a sharp tuneup ( advanced the timing and enriched the carburetor jets ) that car was barely shy of certifiably FAST! No, it wasn’t a 14 second car, but in the low to mid range it pulled HARD. It actually chirped the tires on the 1-2 upshift.
I was almost ready to call you out on incorrect info because I was sure the 327-2barrel was rated at 235 HP, not 210. Upon checking, we are both right because the same engine was 235 in big Chevys, 210 in Camaros . Why? No idea.
I had an acquaintance who owned an almost identical Chevy II except that it had the 153ci 4 cylinder engine. It ran rougher than heck, but – in fairness – it was probably only slightly slower than my Mercury Comet equipped with a 200ci 6 cylinder and a Merc-O-Matic 2-speed automatic transmission. The Chevy II and the Comet were both unexciting but reliable appliances that served our needs with minimal hassles.
One minor quibble about the article — I’m pretty sure that the 4 cylinder engine was only rated at 90 HP.
Yes, 90 hp. Fixed now. Thanks.
Nice fable. I didn’t even notice the 2nd gen Nova at the time. Later I came to respect it as a clean design with some influence from GM’s Euro divisions.
I was there when this was new and yes, it was an amazingly popular automobile .
Cheap as possible and not really designed for long life but IMO very good cars indeed .
-Nate
Not sure of the pic date. Quite a bit of the car standing though. Even a “radio”!! “Fancy”!
All of those pictures were taken on 7/6/25.. so somewhat recently.
One of the fun facts is that the largest displacement engine is 2.1x the size of the smallest. That’s a pretty big spread, and one of the largest displacement differences I know.
Unless you’re willing to consider the Nova and Nova SS to be the same model. In 1969, you could get a 153 I-4 in a Nova and a 396 V-8 in a Nova SS.
Oooh, but I do detest the existence of the Chevy II, (even if it did look half-decent by ’66).
I resent its dull cast-iron straight six, its live axle, its conventionality, because it only came about as a panicked response to the dull (though handsome) 1960 Falcon. “Oh shit”, said GM, “that damn Corvair, exotic alloy flat sixes and IRS and svelte lowness of influential style, it’s all scared the volk, and we need to return to dull in seconds.” (I’m putting aside here for now the serious flaws of the Corvair, those of heating system and oversteer and almost front-bumper-mounted steering box, and anyway, all that was gone by the most gorgeous mass-made 4-door car America has ever done in ’65).
The Chev II is the car as a literal reflex, and I’m sorry, Rich, I don’t care for what it has to say. But I will give you credit for getting more out of the thing than I thought was possible.
Oh alright, then, and yes, a survivor is a survivor, begrudged or otherwise.
The original Falcon was a very well styled if obviously cheap to build design. The original Chevy II was obviously a Falcon copy, except with a lot of fussy lines and angles and details that made it look a lot worse. I thought the awkward facelift of this second style was even worse than the original and looked like it was done by interns. And GM made a lot of really good looking well styled cars at that time.
A simple unpretentious car of the type we have too few of to choose from today.
It would have been interesting shopping for a compact sedan back in 1966. Tough choices between them, even before I leave the Chevy showroom. The Chevy II/Nova is a nice 3/4-scale Impala, and easy/cheap to keep going with widely-available parts and mods. But the 2nd-gen Corvair also beckons, with gorgeous hardtop styling and a sporty demeanor, with an exotic layout and mechanicals, especially if you opt for the turbo, for about the same price.
I like either better than the ’66 Falcon, which tries too hard to wear Mustang styling cues and looks even dowdier because of it. I’d be seriously tempted by the Valiant, then in the last year of its 2nd generation. I generally like the Mopar powertrains better than GM’s or Ford’s, and they had maybe the best rep for reliability. Or I could choose the similar Dart which was a stretched version of the same car. Ramblers were still popular, and a Classic was a solid though boring choice, and some aspects of the car were a bit dated. But, reclining seats! Finally, I could take advantage of the Studebaker going-out-of-business sale and see if there were any bargains on a Lark. Same engines as the Chevy II, though smaller selection, but with a 3-speed automatic instead of a Powerglide, and front disk brakes. Nicer interior too, newly plushed up for ’66. But also kingpins and a non-step-down floorpan. No imports to look at; anything in this size class was much more expensive. Also nothing from Pontiac, Olds, Buick, or Mercury; all of those had contenders a few years earlier but they’d grown fatter in the interim.
I’d probably rank them with the Corvair first, followed by Lark, Chevy II, Valiant, Dart, Falcon, Rambler Classic, and Rambler American. But the 2nd through 5th choices could easily be shuffled depending on my mood at the time.
In addition to the car, I like the front license plate, which is a booster plate from the American Revolution Bicentennial Administration. Not something that’s seen much any longer.
I think my parents made the right decision to buy a Plymouth Valiant. The Salnt Six was a fin engine and the Torque Flite beat the Powerglide any day. Granted the Chevy was more stylish looking at the time.