Below is almost 15 years of answers to your question. I chose 17" like many wanting access to more options and performance. I chose 4.5" backspace which works well. I assume since you're looking for a bigger wheel I only inserted my 17" research.

17” Tires:

I have 17X8 with 4 1/2" backspacing or 0 offset on my 65 coupe. I run 225/50X17 Yokohama S-drive tires. TXSTICK

You CAN go to 245, if you test and measure everything. 235 is safe for sure. I have 16x8 with 4 1/2 inch backspace at all four corners and it's close with 245/50 tires, and was no problem with 245/45 tires. Going to a 17" wheel just means shorter sidewalls, or more test fitting. Bcwaller

I've run my 67 with 245/45/17 Nitto NT01 tires on 17x7x4.75 backspacing PS Engineering Trans Am wheels for years of auto crossing. No flares. Rear parking brake brackets have been moved. Currently running 235/45/17 Kumho Ecsta LE Sport tires LouieM

Under stock fenders a 225-235 width fits with 4.0 and 4.25 backspace if the rear parking brake mounts are relocated. 63 340HP

I run these wheels on my 67 in 17X7 size with 4.75 backspacing with stock fenders and the parking brake brackets moved to tops of the rear trailing arms. LouieM

Cragar 610 S/S thrust style 17X8, 4 1/2" BS with 225/50 Yokohama S-Drive 225/50X17 tires.

I run 245/45/17 tires on 17x7x4.75BS wheels. The parking brake brackets have been moved from the side to the top of the trailing arms. LouieM 3-21-13

a little bigger wheel (as I did 17x7, 4" bs) then 225/55-17 fit perfectly and maintain stock overall dia. Mikado463

I have 17x7 4 inch back space American lightweight wheels 19 pounds. Car is lowered about 1 1/2 inch. Tire is a Kumho ESCTA SPT 225/50 ZR 17. RJ1

I have 255/50 17 with 4" bs on my 65 on the front. But I also have small flares. I would bet that tire size with 4 1/2" bs would fit. 255/50 17 is 27" in diameter. Same as stock diameter. Also 235/55 tie size is 27.1" diameter. If the 255 does not fit pretty sure 235 will. Sky65

Rear tires are 275/50. Wheels are 17X9 5" BS. Sky65

On my '65 I have 17x7 TT2's (0 offset, 4" bs) mated with Goodyear 225/55 F1s. The tires are 26.8 inches high and 9.2 inches wide ("stock" is 27.42 and 7.65). They just clear the emergency brake bracket and cable in the rear redred65cpe 7-12-08

I have the 17X8 4 1/2" BS Cragar 610 with 225/50 tires. Tires clear the E-brake cable by about 1/4".

I run a 225/55/17. It is very close to the height of the stock 205/70/15 tire on my 64. Daz_au

17x8 is a very tight fit without mods. I would use 17x7 with 4 inch backspace.
Here is my 67 with 17x7 and 225/55R17 redlines from Diamondback tires. 1965fuelie

I have 235/50/R17 front and rear on mine. Can't remember the offset on the wheels, but can look it up if you need it. EDIT: Decided to look up the wheel specs. I have 17X7 ARH AR105 TORQ-THRUST M wheels, 0" offset and 4" backspacing. The wheels and tires fit fine on my car. Patrick03

I have 17X7, 4.5 BS wheels on all corners with 225/55/17 tires. I found 4 inch BS too tight for my liking in the rear with 225/55/17 tires. 225/50/17 would have worked in the rear with 4 BS, but I prefered the 55 series with more sidewall.

I'm running Indy 500 225/50R17 front and 235/50R17 rear. Probably can run 235/50s front and back. They're are on 17x7 wheels with 4.5" BS. Lotsacubes.

 

Actually, most of the other car furums, Chevelles, Camaros, are much worse, they just ignore any newcomer, in many cases, probably assuming they are just trolls, or don't want to bothered with some non-cognoscenti..

Doug

 

I dont mean forums (Im members of plenty) I mean out in the real world. and actually I would argue being ignored is better than a shitty comment- like ppl already said if you got nothing nice to say just shut up

 

Bad grammar.

 

[QUOTEBelow is almost 15 years of answers to your question. I chose 17" like many wanting access to more options and performance. I chose 4.5" backspace which works well. I assume since you're looking for a bigger wheel I only inserted my 17" research.][/QUOTE]

I know your response is for C2 owners and I'm not trying to hijack the thread, but I had a problem finding 17" wheels with 4.5" backspace. Seemed like every time I found a wheel I liked (even common styles) the backspace was 4.00" or 4.25", unless I wanted to pay big $$ for custom backspacing.....which I wouldn't do.

I settled for 4.25" BS with 17" x 7" wheels and 225 x 60 x 17R tires and it worked out good, but would have preferred 4.5" BS.

BTW, nice write up and if you could post a photo or two that would be much appreciated. I'm thinking of changing again.

 

Well this post has been an interesting read - but it does seem to have gone a bit off topic a few times. So does anyone else think we scared off that brand new OP?

 

BTW, nice write up and if you could post a photo or two that would be much appreciated. I'm thinking of changing again.[/QUOTE]

These are Boze wheels. I wanted to be different and add a touch of modern to classic.

 

I agree 100+%, but I wouldn’t place it in the C2 section, as it has Nothing to do with C2 Corvettes….. put it in some generic category, and try to name it as positive/least offensive as possible I suppose.

 

I couldn't agree more with FLYNAVY30. Like any other Forum we can't afford for people to get the impression that all of us are equivalent to the lowest common denominator. I have had similar experiences here since I have only been a member for a year. Yes, the vast majority of folks have gone out of their way to help me and give great advice. But it is always a few rotten apples that seem to be the first ones to respond. Kind of sad, really. Nothing better to do I suppose.

Take it from me....being nice pays off. I sent an email out about a C2 Cookout and look what happened!!!

 

C2 resto mods have nothing to do with C2s???....I'm very confused.....

 

Well, I guess it’s a matter of perspective, obviously, some of us have reverence for these iconic Corvettes that we’ve treasured, admired, properly/correctly maintained and protected for the last 50-60 years, others, let’s call them “bad apples”? (you brought the term to the discussion) ……... I better stop there.

I’d categorize some of the remarks as an attempt to mentor the unenlightened individual, before irreparable damage is done.

 

"Very little to do with" would be more accurate. The only thing they have in common is the shape.

 

Thats not even close to being an accurate statement, but regardless, I whole heartedly agree that much like the C3 forum has "Tech" and "General", it would be nice if we had say a "Modified" and "Original" section. That way intelligent conversations could be had about modifications, devoid of the usual condescending comments.

 

it’s a car do you get that? It’s just a car, I don’t kneel to it and pray, it’s clear you have no use for them, and that’s fine , however there is a great number of folks who do, I think I may be done with this forum.

 

If you put in a new frame, engine, tranny, diff, suspension, wheels, and re-do the interior what is left of the original car except the shape?
Don't know if I read it here or somewhere else but its like the guy saying "I"m still using my grandfathers axe! It's on its fourth handle and second head."

 

To each their own, I believe there’s room for us all here .

I’ll just say that I personally find it depressing, and even in a way offensive….. this whole crossbreeding thing (yeah, some of us consider C2s pure-thoroughbreds). Moving those type of discussions to another forum would be appreciated…. but that’s just me… obviously we don’t all think alike

 

Theres many a resto-mod running around with original frames and motors. Though I suppose at this point, we're splitting hairs over the definition of a "resto-mod". Either way, I'm pretty sure theres an entire NCRS forum for those whos interests only include 100% original cars. I'm not over there posting about how silly I think it is to purposely recreate assembly line imperfections when restoring a vehicle. Because I get thats what some people are into, and theres nothing wrong with that.

 

There are no dumb questions but there are often shitty answers and this is one of them. You are one of our younger members and comments like this drive away the younger guys that the hobby hopes to attract. I am just a car guy who currently has a few Corvettes but have had a lot of different classic cars in my lifetime and know only too well the attitude that other car guys have towards Corvette guys. The think we are elitist snobs and comments and the general lack of quality responses to questions from potential new members will do nothing but reinforce their idea of who we are as a whole.

 

I think Duke pretty much hit the nail on the head when he said the following;

“….. I'm not a total purist. Most of my cars have mild modifications, not noticeable to casual observation, but noticeable to NCRS type judging, but they all retain their vintages flavor with maybe a bit better power and handling than when they were new. “

Peace

 

Agree
The definition here seems to be its not a true resto mod without a frame swap, so I was going by that. Cars that are modified but still retain C2 DNA are a different story.