I find some of your claims contentious:
- Lots of front end downforce from the vented "hood" and front diffusers with front wheel exits.
We must have differing opinions of the term "lots". The venting is not going to add much as it's low energy flow going into a relatively high pressure area. The diffuser is very mild from all the angles available so far.
- downforce optimal 40-45% angle of attack.
40º? what is a percent angle of attack?
- Extremely large floor surface area, probably 50-60% larger than the Valkyrie.
Larger flat area maybe? It wouldn't be fair to say that the Valkyrie has any less of the underbody actually working to create downforce, the tunnels are much much deeper, and much much longer.
- I'm sure the front air intakes also help cool the hub electric motors
The motors aren't in the hubs, also, no engineer actually looking for decent track performance would do that as that increases unsprung mass by a huge margin.
- Side mirror stalks designed to keeps flow attached to the side of the canopy.
I'll buy you a beer if you can prove that. Or whatever your poison. I really doubt those stalks are in any way beneficial, what with their closely spaced chunky wing sections, I suggest they add a not insignificant amount of drag, and offer nothing aerodynamically.
- this car will be ~7-10 seconds a lap faster than cars like the P1 and 918 despite having similar power.
Around Nordshleiffe? Or Brands Hatch? That is a seriously broad claim.
- No, it's not a Valkyrie, but that car has far less compromise for the road than this car. 70% of the people buying that car will struggle to even get in
I get so tired of this. Are people too stupid to know what to do with their bodies to get into human sized spaces? Does everyone buy cars based on their plans to someday show up at an event in a kilt?