Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The ones on my F150 are 20s.  I'd be fine with smaller, but that's just the way it came (I bought used).

The Chevy small block is rather legendary, still being used in a vastly modified form.  I'm not sure it has anything in common with the old 350 etc.

Today's small-block Chevy engine doesn't have much parts interchangeability with the 265 introduced in 1955.  The block casting is even different.  But the 350 was definitely a member of the small-block family.  It was a stroked 327.
The 302, 327, and 350 all had a 4" bore.  The 302 had a 3" stroke, the 327 had a 3.25" stroke, and the 350 had a 3.48" stroke.
The bore/stroke combinations were very similar to the same/similar-sized Ford small block.  The Ford 302 was 4"x3" and the 351 was 4"x3.5".
But they were a bit different the next size down.  Ford's 289 was 4"x2.75", while Chevy's 283 was 3.875"x3".
The 1957 Chevy 283, when equipped with Rochester fuel injection in the Corvette, produced 283 hp, one of the first American production V-8s to do that.

At the extreme today, on pickups that are meant to never drive off roads, you see something like 22" wheels with 35-series-or-lower tires, so it looks like there's just a strip of rubber about 1" thick around the enormous rim.

[img width=500 height=280.994]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/cz8HiMRpI6k/maxresdefault.jpg[/img]

At the extreme today, on pickups that are meant to never drive off roads, you see something like 22" wheels with 35-series-or-lower tires, so it looks like there's just a strip of rubber about 1" thick around the enormous rim.

[img width=500 height=280.987]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/cz8HiMRpI6k/maxresdefault.jpg[/img]

I just threw up in my mouth a little...

At the extreme today, on pickups that are meant to never drive off roads, you see something like 22" wheels with 35-series-or-lower tires, so it looks like there's just a strip of rubber about 1" thick around the enormous rim.

[img width=500 height=280.966]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/cz8HiMRpI6k/maxresdefault.jpg[/img]

I just threw up in my mouth a little...

Yeah, that's a "look" that I don't get, and never will. But folks should drive what they like.

I'm with you on anything that's off-road capable. You want sidewall. On my Jeep I would never put big wheels and low-sidewall tires... It defeats the purpose. The Jeep is riding on 17s and I'd consider smaller, although I understand the minimum might be 15" or 16" to leave enough room for the brakes.

But on the Flex, it's riding on 20s with a relatively modest profile tire, and I MUCH prefer the look on the Flex with bigger wheels. It would look silly with 17s, much less anything smaller than that.

I will likely never seriously offroad in my pickup.  I've driven it through some fairly sketchy sand with no issues, but I'm not much of a mudder.  So the 20s work fine, and provide a great road experience with a very modest sidewall tire and not overly agressive tread pattern.  I just like the look of a pickup with a smaller wheel and larger sidewall a little more, but like I said I'm not planning on changing anything.

This isn't my truck, but mine's exactly like this, everything stock from the factory.

Corvettes are much larger than they started out

Yup.  Lots of cars and vehicles are. 

Nothing exceeds like excess!

I don't like how modern trucks have such low ground clearance in front.  Hell, the front of them are like 5 feet in height.  When did trucks get so damn tall (and still, without the front ground clearance)?

My F250 has plenty of ground clearance. It also sits pretty high. It barely clears the garage door when I pull it in to change the oil and rotate the tires (which I did this weekend, my back still hurts). I'm 6 2" and can barely reach over the fender to take the oil cap off. This truck has no modifications and sits just like it did when it left the factory. If they get much taller, I'll have to build a bigger garage to do service it, or get a smaller truck (I don't see that happening).