Safe to bore a 383 60 over?

The "Thin wall" claim has been in many published releases from Ma Mopar. I don't know if it was printed in any factory service manual but in Mopar approved rebuild manuals, it has been printed there.
Mopar Muscle and Mopar Action magazine writers both have done stories where they sonic checked cylinder wall thicknesses on a variety of big blocks.
Both of them arrived at the same conclusion. Mopar Action's article elaborated a bit, stating that the false "thin wall" claim may have been a disguised warning due to a slightly inferior metal used in later blocks, a lower nickel content in the casting.
I know. It's a carry over from the earliest editions. That's what they were doing. Comparing to earlier engines. And in that case, they're right. I will say this. I have a 1974 225 slant 6 block. The thinnest I found on any of its cylinders was one of the non thrust sides. It came in at like .339". So it's certainly NOT a thin wall casting. lol