Some folks are just obsessed about the incestuous relationship of the 1975 Chevy Nova to the Cadillac Seville. Good thing I’m not in that camp, but we like to indulge those that can’t seem to stop debating the issue. And folks seem to get a kick out of mashing the two up; the Noville Coupe we had here a couple of years ago generated a lot of spirited commenting. Well, here’s another to Noville to mull over, and this time the Frankenville is a four door. Why do folks go to such extremes to try to convince us that these two cars have something in common? Beats me.
This Noville photo was posted in the comments by Pedro.
And here’s our (in)famous Noville Coupe article.
At first I thought I was looking at some sort of Soviet-era GAZ Volga variation.
The mish mash of styling cues is so awkward that it almost looks like someone tried to turn a hearse into a sedan! It is painful to look at.
That’s the perfect description of what I’d been trying so hard to put into words ever since I saw this picture…thanks!
I can’t quite see why someone would do this. For the sedan, putting a Nova front clip on the Seville VASTLY cheapens it. Would you put a VW front clip on a Rolls-Royce? I mean, after all, doesn’t VW own R-R? Or do they own Bentley? I can never remember.
As for the referenced Noville coupe….that is vaguely interesting, but again, if you know Cadillac history and Chevy history you would see the coupe as a poor attempt at a 2 door Seville. This concept of a 2 door Seville would look more believable with a Cadillac front clip on a 78 Olds Cutlass Salon. The Nova coupe is not Broughamy enough to carry it off. At the very least, go for one of those Nova 2 door coupes with that extremely tacky “cabriolet-style” vinyl roof.
The Rolls Royce uses body by BMW if that is a clue..
VW owns Bentley. Rolls Royce is owned by BMW.
After a twelve pack consumption contest, this mash up made obvious sense.
Pretty sure this is a Nova with a Seville roof and rear quarters tacked on. Look at the rear door for your most obvious cue–the divider in the rear door glass would slant forward if that were actually a Seville door. The dividers slanted backward on a Nova door, which is what this is, with the shape of the door frame modified and the rear pane blanked.
(Also, being pedantic, the Cutlass Salon for ’78 was the aeroback. I assume you meant the notchback Cutlass Supreme? You’re right that it would look more natural than the coupe in the linked article, though everything might not line up so well.)
I’ve never thought the Cadillac Seville looked like a dressed up Chevy Nova. Its body has too many edges to be a Nova. Even if it did, so what?
The biggest issue with the Nova-based Seville was its (limited) success in the marketplace. I have no doubt the Seville’s sales success played a significant contributing factor in convincing GM corporate to give the ill-fated Cimarron the green-light for production.
So what, indeed.
I just looked at the noville coupe. It almost looks like a dodge aspen coupe.
The sedan doesn’t work well.
Ugly,but strangely attractive in a perverse way.. You just can`t stop looking-or should I say stare at it.
I am glad that my comment contribution from last night was well recognized and Thank you very much. Anyway here is the link where the inspiration of my comments came from: http://www.copart.com/us/Lot/15902165
Thanks….interesting interior shots…looks like the interior was modified a little.
Uhhhggg…Its like an automotive “Island of Dr. Moreau”….kill it.
I thought there was something “off” about that roofline and now I can see it….they didn’t use a Seville from the firewall back, but used the rear fenders and trunklid while the rest of the car is early-mid 70s Nova.
Is that vacuum cleaner hose with the box on the end some kind of road blow device? This vehicle seems to be another example of why meth, old cars and junkyards are such an evil combination.
It looks like a Flowbee. Nothing like driving down the highway and cutting your hair at the same time. Thing is – when you arrive at your destination you hope your friends notice your hair and not the car….
Curious. I understand that Cadillac started the Seville design with the Nova platform (or body design), but instead of just prying off the Body by Fisher tag and replacing it with a Body by Fleetwood, they actually redesigned the body into something more or less worthy. With the Cimarron they just pried off the Fisher tag and put a Fleetwood one on, along with a few Cadillac badges.
Actually Fred, the Seville said “Custom built for Cadillac by Fisher Body”
You do understand that Fisher Body is General Motors. And custom would imply a one off, not thousands of copies.
Body by Fisher, Interior by Fleetwood!
Unfortunately after World war 2 the Fleetwood people have probably been scattered far and wide.
estimated value of over 7k USD?
That’s 7k in Sand Dollars.
Looks like the photo of this car is compressed and compacted. Anyway the 3G Nova really had nothing in common with the 1G Seville since this aforementioned Seville was much more based on the 4G version albeit enlarged chassis. The 3G and 4G Nova other than victims of having identical looking chassis were actually different chassis altogether even though everything from behind the firewall from the floor pan to the leaf springs were the only ones identical. The 4G Nova used new front suspensions identical to those ones used on the 2G Camaro, 1973-77 Chevelle Malibu and Monte Carlo and the 1977-96 Downsized B-Bodied Impala and Caprice Classic combo. These revised front suspensions gave the redesigned 4G Nova a “big car” ride as a result
You’re right! I just looked at the link, and this thing is indeed built off a third-gen Nova, either a ’73 or ’74. This gets stranger and stranger…
I guess they left the width unchanged between the 3rd and 4th gen, otherwise they would have had to section the roof and trunklid, and that back glass would not have fit unless it’s a custom piece.
The Nova and Seville were nearly the same width @72 inches more or less.
The gen4 Nova was essentially the same under the skin as the gen3 except for the new front end, with the improved suspension shared with the Camaro. But the basic platform from the cowl back was essentially the same. Which is why the bodies match up.
They must mean 7 of those little magnetic “K” kids use when they’re learning to spell….
The worst thing about this is the hack job done to make the Nova rear doors fit the Seville roofline. If he found a Seville that was able to donate its rear quarters and roof, why didn’t he take the rear doors too? While the front doors of the two cars aren’t identical, it looks like where they meet in the middle is very close. Even if he’d had to shim the b-pillar slightly, I think they would have fit correctly along the car’s flank, and it wouldn’t have had that awkwardness going on at the C-pillar.
Then again, I don’t quite know what would possess someone to do this in the first place, except for maybe possession of a rear hit Nova, a front hit Seville, a sawzall, and too much free time. That Noville Coupe in the linked CC at least attempts to create a car that never existed, and the quality of the fab work is much better.
Is this on the same lot as the Soviet 56? It seems the same stylist was involved.
I don’t get why people are obsessed with (and usually mocking of ) the concept of the Seville being related to the Nova. (NTM Camaro and Firebird, while were on it.) The Idea that every Buick Electra/Park Avenue and Cadillac DeVille/Brougham I’ve owned were similarly related to the Bel Air/Impala/Caprice (True for all big RWD B/C/Ds after 1958). Never bothered me.
I do appreciate hard work, even weird work. If you have a couple old basketcases around the yard, WTH, weld ’em together! I once saw a circa 1987 Seville on a “monster” Jeep chassis. I wish a had a camera that day. It was so silly,it was awesome. (in an Ed Wood movie sorta way!).
Had Studebaker survived into the 70’s, I could see them building something like this.
The rear door glass that doesn’t follow the more squared-off cut lines around the roof and C-pillar already reminded me of a ’59 Lark