Originally Posted by
rekmeyata
You just mentioned the stupidest reason in the world to go with Ferrari vs whatever. Ferrari and the such are high speed race cars and the manufactures are making those cars as light as possible to make them as fast as possible...one thing though...they didn't make them to last as long, that isn't their point. And crash worthiness of carbon fiber used in cars is very good, why is that? Because they have developed honeycomb designs that can hold up to forces better than the old way using crumple zones...we don't have that luxury on our bikes because it would drive up the weight and the cost.
Mclaren/Lambo and the like are, in fact, designing cars with carbon bodies and monocoque chassis that will last as long or longer than their metallic equivalents. They don't strictly build race cars out of carbon any more, and there is nothing in the owner's manual of, say, an Aventador or MP4-12C that warns an owner that their chassis will fail from carbon fatigue at some point. They will remain stiff and functional for decades, as designed. There are trade offs to using carbon in an auto chassis versus aluminum (cost and production time being the biggest ones), but longevity is not one of them. Even the first generation of F1 cars made largely out of CF in the early 80s are still raced in historic events without issue. These auto engineers know a thing or two about lifespans, and CF can in fact last for decades. Just look at the carbon bits in aircraft like the A300. This whole post is so misinformed...