I4 > V4

>I4 > V4
>I6 > V6
I8 > V8?

Only if it's a 9 main bearing inline 8 of which there are very few of. The majority had problems snapping their long ass crankshafts when you tried to make any power with them because they were not supported well enough with only 4 or 5 main bearings.

Modern metallurgy could also probably resolve that

...

I5 > V5
V6 > I6
V8 > I8

honestly, at this point i'd support any manufacturer bringing back an interesting engine format. the less ubiquitous the turbo i4 and v6 engines, the better.

>V6 > I6
objectively wrong

V6 is too long and too heavy, doesn't offer any performance advantages, only muh smoothness

Then why haven't there ever been a supercar with an I6? Why does every manufacturer use V6s?

The i8 is too long to be practical

i10 > v10

...

So is my dick but girls love it.

whatever you need to tell yourself pindick

>Then why haven't there ever been a supercar with an I6?

...

It's mainly a packaging thing - V6 is shorter and wider, so it's easier to fit in a car than an I6. I6 only really fits with front engine / rear drive applications, and that's not common anymore.
Most supercars are 8+ cylinder anyway...

not super enough

m8 the Jag XK was basically the first supercar.

You mean I6?

...

Straight 8 would be cool on modern cars, but you'd have to say hello to a long ass front end.

Why not Transversely mounted inline 8s
If Volvo could make a transverse i6, and someone made a transverse v16, seems it should be possible to do, just take power off the middle of the crankshaft like a bike engine rather than off the end

...