Some sort of SMC, like Vettes have been for a long time now.

I liked the C6 better than the C7 looks-wise. The C7 had too many lines and creases and black-out panels. Trying too hard. The C8 backs off a bit and re-introduces some curves, but still a bit busy.

I think crash bars usually get replaced, not repaired.

It all depends on how you package the engine bay. Timing chain gets rid of the need to swap belts, which is the biggest reason for engine-out service for older exotic cars.

This works, but only mitigates the F/R weight balance. Having mass at either extreme of the car worsens the polar moment of inertia. You want to have the biggest masses between the wheels (the cabin and the engine) for best performance.

In addition to what’s already been said here, timing chains last a long time if properly lubricated (and assuming the ancillary components such as tensioners and guides don’t break).  You probably wouldn’t even have to change a chain even if you daily the car.

I like this take.

It’s not really any different from a Porsche, or any other expensive car.

This is probably before all the crash regulations, bean counters and marketing checkboxes came in. Because that mockup looks like the beginnings of a legit exotic car.

Yeah, this is ‘Murican affordability stomping right into the final frontier of supercars—a dedicated architecture with the engine behind the driver.

Ferrari’s V8 was tuned for peak power at high RPM, while the Corvette has always been about a thick torque band in the midrange.

Mid-engine
NA V8
Dry sump
3-ish seconds to 60
US$60-70k

I’m a huge Ferrari fan, but hey Ferrari where you at???  Your V8s don’t even sound that good after the 488!

All structucal CF is just some variation of CFRP.  The fibre layers have to be baked in a cake of resin to attain the required stiffness--the fibres themselves only offer reinforcement in specified directions.

I’ve never owned a Lotus but my 4C is barrels of fun to drive.

An impact strong enough to crack or otherwise compromise a tub is very likely to total a conventional steel-monocoque car anyway.

Can’t speak for the i3, but the 4C is very low-volume.  Just several thousand ever produced, and people still don’t know whether production is still actually ongoing or stopped.

This was certainly a good point back in the days of simpler body-on-frame cars, but these days if you’ve bent the central structure of your car it’s pretty much gone regardless.

Production of large carbon fibre structures is very difficult to scale up due to the manual labour involved. Robots are now better at welding than humans are, but they still aren’t as good at laying pre-preg sheets, delicate bagging, subjective visual inspections, etc.

A lot of Tesla fanboys have never been car enthusiasts, and easily misconstrue anything Tesla does as an industry first. They do not understand that as Tesla tries to scale up, they will have to face all the design, production and quality problems that other car manufacturers have spent the past century perfecting.

This is readily explained as I am an engine-out alumnus: