Just to point out a few things that are driving engine designs that may or may not be known or understood by everyone.
In the early days of the emissions awakening in the early 60's the biggest offending systems were addressed first like crank case venting.
Example, draft tubes were replaced by closed crankcase systems and combustion was starting to be leaned out with the availability of high quality fuels etc.
Fast forward to the 1970's when the 305's were born, the "small bore 350". Engineers in the 1970's realized that bore was the enemy. For the second time in history bore size was the bad guy.
Bore size before that was taxed in Europe so small bore engines with long strokes were preferred and small bores and long strokes are also more forgiving when there was no universal fuel standards and fuels varied wildly, but that's another thing.
So the flat heads were being replaced by the wedges. Wedges offered more charge energy by not solely relying on the squish band to generate the needed chamber mixture motion to allow the rise of compression ratios and thus more complete combustion.
These wedge chambers typically produced a relatively organized "swirl" or semi swirl mixture motion that allowed ignition advance to be reduced. So they found that smaller bores helped retain more of the kinetic charge energy as well as shorter flame propagation times. This was all good for emissions. This thinking kept marching forward and more and more swirl mixture motion was being designed into the combustion process right up to the LT engines. But as velocity increases problems were becoming more and more apparent with swirl chambers. Some of these issues were wetted areas of the intake port the chamber and the cylinder wall from centrifugal forces etc. Anytime you cause the reduction of homogenization of the air fuel charge you are increasing the BSFC and increasing emissions as well as contaminating the oil system and increasing ring and cylinder wear. GM did a great job of advancing the wedge chamber to its current state with the LT engines. Most manufactures abandoned the wedge decades ago in favor of tumble. Tumble (pent roof chambers) are much more scalable to bore size and eliminate many swirl combustion issues and valve window area to bore ratios of the wedge chambers.
With the implementation of direct injection the wedge was once again saved, for a while. But GM knew they were near the performance and more importantly the emissions limits of two valve swirl combustion.
GM finally decided to go all in on tumble across the board for the Gen6 V8 engines that will be rolling out very soon. They now had the ability to really step up the HP game.
Bore to valve areas were now much more condusive to making power as well as lower BSFC numbers and catalyst loads dropped.
Bore was no longer the enemy and over square (big bore short stroke) engines like the LT6 were now possible that would pass emissions standards and produce acceptable low and mid range torque numbers. Of course the VVT systems and the ability to build in high static CR numbers helped that considerably as well.
So the long story short is,,,, just because some other manufacturers used different bore stroke ratios in the past and cylinder displacements low (think v12) doesn't mean its the best choice in engine designs with current technology.
Just hang in there, the best ICE is yet to come for the Corvette !!!
Americans LOVE torque and when we want to we do it better than anyone else, EVER !!!!!