Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | | Forums66 Topics128,060 Posts1,055,837 Members48,427 | | 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: Apr 2006 Posts: 506 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Apr 2006 Posts: 506 | In the USA Chevrolet Master Parts catalogs, 3835499 is listed as a 235 and also a 261.
That head casting number was used twice and has 2 different part numbers.
For the 261, in 1954, the part# 3703569 and also the 1950-52 235, part# 3835545
I'd be a little careful about the Hemmings head casting info site. In addition to 3835499, it contains other errors. Example, 1955 truck with a 216, also 1954 truck 3635499 with a 261(should be 3835499) ------------- The 1950 Master Parts Catalog listing for cylinder head:
1941-49 ALL (use 14 MM spark plugs) casting 3835409, part# 3835408 1950 ALL w/ 216 Eng. casting 3835517, part# 3835543 1950 ALL w/ 235 Eng. casting 3835499, part# 3835545
The 1951 Master Parts Catalog listing for cylinder head:
1941-49 ALL, 1950-51 ALL w/ 216 Eng. casting 3835517, part# 3835543 Note: When 3835543 is used for replacement on 1941-49 it will also be necessary to use 45 degree valves.
1950-51 ALL w/ 235 Eng. casting 3835499, part# 3835545 ------------- The 216 casting 3835517 is listed until 1953. The 235 casting 3835499 part# 3835545 was later changed to part# 3835908. Listed as 1950-52 ALL w/ 235.
-Tom
1950 Chevy 3100 w/ 1956 235
| | | |
Entire Thread
|
216, 235, or ???
| waldo53 | 08/14/2010 3:50 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| tclederman | 08/14/2010 6:40 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/14/2010 11:08 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| Hambone | 08/14/2010 12:14 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| waldo53 | 08/14/2010 5:31 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| tclederman | 08/14/2010 6:59 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/14/2010 7:23 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| waldo53 | 08/14/2010 9:23 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/14/2010 9:53 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| Frank50 | 08/15/2010 12:29 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/15/2010 2:52 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| waldo53 | 08/15/2010 3:32 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/15/2010 11:10 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| Frank50 | 08/15/2010 1:14 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| Oilrag | 08/15/2010 5:37 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/15/2010 8:23 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| Oilrag | 08/15/2010 11:49 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/16/2010 12:13 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| Oilrag | 08/16/2010 11:43 PM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| waldo53 | 08/17/2010 4:22 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/17/2010 11:49 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| truckernix | 08/26/2010 11:56 AM |
Re: 216, 235, or ???
| hoyt | 08/15/2010 3:29 AM | |
| |