ELJ> Note, I DID say 1955 model 265, had thicker block, 56 on was not the
 ELJ> same, now, how do I know this, DID it, pulled a 265 from a wrecked 55
 ELJ> chevy, had er punched out, that sucker in a lil Nova was bad for a lil
 ELJ> thing, reved quick, did this back in '69, I must say, even being a
 ELJ> Stang luver, that them Chevy small blocks are SO easy to work with.
Hmmmm......now another question.......where on that block were the engine 
mounts?
All 265's came with no side mounts cast into the block. They were bolted
to the front of the engine just to either side of the balancer. If the 
engine was a 265, it had front mounts. The 283 in 1957 had the same engine
mount arrangement. If mounted it in a car chassis of the mid 60's, it had 
to have side mounted engine mounts. Did the engine have the three bolt 
attern
mounting cast into the sides of the block? If so, it was a 1958 or later 
block, 283 at least, since 327's already had 4" bore.  
It would have been difficult to mount a 265 block in any later GM chassis.
(Excluding the Corvette and trucks). Also, why would GM change the wall 
thickness of the castings to a thinner wall in 1956 when the plans were to 
go bigger bore?
Jus' wonderin',
Cheers,
Tom
... But you misunderstand, I am the MASTER. . .
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
--- GOMail v2.0 [94-0125]
---------------