| |
Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | | Forums66 Topics128,100 Posts1,056,510 Members48,448 | | Most Online14,466 Apr 26th, 2026 | | AD Chevy Trucks Over 6,000 pictures Brad Allen has an awesome collection of Chevrolet factory pictures that he has set up from film strips. Check them out!
Lots of work on Brad's part ... pure enjoyment (and references) for you!
| | THANKS!
For helping keep this great
old truck web site
on the Internet for over 30 years! and not clogged down with Ads! Again, thanks! | | | | Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,270 Bubba - Curmudgeon | | Bubba - Curmudgeon Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,270 | It depends on which 235 you and the seller are referring to.
It should bolt to any head but the intake port diameters changed over the years. The 216 and early 235s had smaller head-to-intake-manifold port diameters. Some people have posted that they have used an older intake manifold with the newer 235/261 heads.
Also, I think the distance between the carburetor bolts on a 216 and a later 235/261 (1954-1962/63) is different. Since 235s were available from 41-62, most likely the seller is talking about an earlier 235. I do not know when the 235 carb-bolt distance changed (maybe in 1950).
Ask for a measurement of center-to-center carb-bolt distance and compare it to yours (if this is important to you and your carbs).
| | | |
Entire Thread
|
vintage intake...216,235,.....261?
| 1955first6500 | 09/27/2008 9:52 PM |
Re: vintage intake...216,235,.....261?
| tclederman | 09/27/2008 10:41 PM |
Re: vintage intake...216,235,.....261?
| hoyt | 09/28/2008 10:24 PM |
Re: vintage intake...216,235,.....261?
| 1955first6500 | 09/29/2008 12:25 AM |
Re: vintage intake...216,235,.....261?
| 53moneypit | 09/30/2008 12:22 AM |
Re: vintage intake...216,235,.....261?
| hoyt | 10/01/2008 3:29 AM | |
| |
| |