Print 37 comment(s) - last by Keeir.. on Oct 31 at 2:29 PM

The $96,000 Fisker Karma is an exotic luxury sedan with a length of 16.5 feet, a width that surpasses 6 feet, a weight of over 2.5 tons, and it has a 403-horsepower powerplant

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently gave the Fisker Karma hybrid a lower-than-expected 52 mpg-equivalent rating in combined city and highway driving. The massive weight of the Karma was blamed for the poor EPA rating, and now, the EPA has determined that the 2012 Fisker Karma range-extended plug-in hybrid is a subcompact.

The $96,000 Fisker Karma is an exotic luxury sedan with a length of 16.5 feet and a width that surpasses 6 feet. It's weight is over 2.5 tons, and it has a 403-horsepower electric powerplant. So why did the EPA categorize it as a subcompact? The interior volume of the Karma doesn't quite make the cutoff of 100 cubic-feet that distinguishes between a compact and a subcompact.

The auto industry typically uses overall length to determine the class of a vehicle, but the EPA uses interior volume to do so. This means that the Karma cannot be compared to other hybrids such as Chevrolet's Volt range-extended plug-in hybrid because it's considered a compact vehicle. The Prius is classified as a midsize.

Fisker said the classification of the Karma wouldn’t affect sales because those willing to spend $96,000 on the car "know what they are getting." Fisker also called the EPA's fuel economy rating the "worst case scenario," and still insists that the Karma will provide 50 miles on a single charge.

Another Fisker employee was a bit more annoyed with the EPA rating and subcompact classification, saying that comparing the Karma to other subcompacts like the Chevy Sonic "gives you a good idea of how much faith you should put in these fuel economy ratings."

The 52 mpg-equivalent rated by the EPA includes 32 miles of all-electric range and 20 mpg when its gasoline engine/generator kicks in to provide electricity once the battery pack is drained.

Source: Auto Observer

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: LOL...
By Flunk on 10/28/2011 10:36:22 AM , Rating: 1
This car has less internal space than a Nissan Versa (which is $10,000), it's significantly less fuel efficient and it weighs as much as an SUV. What a turkey car, you don't just have to rich to buy this. You have to be a complete idiot as well.

RE: LOL...
By AssBall on 10/28/2011 11:01:25 AM , Rating: 1
Once again the EPA tries to dupe the American public with false pretenses. You think we'd be used to it by now, but it still stings knowing what a corrupt and hindering entity the EPA has become.

RE: LOL...
By Ryrod on 10/28/2011 2:26:18 PM , Rating: 5
How is it the EPA's fault that this car sucks when it comes to weight and MPG? It's not like the EPA designed the car for Fisker. All the EPA did was test the car according to its normal procedures, just like any other hybrid vehicle.

The EPA being "corrupt" has nothing to do with Fisker being incapable of producing a car that is both lighter than a SUV and gets better gas mileage than a SUV.

RE: LOL...
By AssBall on 10/28/11, Rating: -1
RE: LOL...
By Ryrod on 10/28/2011 3:23:03 PM , Rating: 2
The EPA are a bunch of lobbiests [sic] and liars.

The EPA just reported the numbers regarding fuel economy based upon a standardized test. They haven't lied about those. And at least the EPA is attempting to act altruistically, compared to actual lobbyists who only act in the self-interest of the people who pay them.

It is their fault that tax money went into funding this POS car and Tesla, and the Volt.

No, actually it's not. The DOE is the department that loaned money to Fisker and Chevy to produce these vehicles.

DOE has been giving out loans, grants, and subsidies (LGSs) for a long time. These LGSs go to various companies and educational institutions to promote innovation for the private market. Funding has gone to companies ans institutions for clean coal, nuclear power, wind, solar, grid optimization, battery technology, and even oil companies.

So if you want the government to get out of science and innovation, I understand. However, the EPA is not to blame in this case (even if it does always make a great scapegoat for anything people disagree with).

RE: LOL...
By AssBall on 10/28/2011 4:49:33 PM , Rating: 2
Science and innovation are great. Expensive regulations and AGW paranoia are not.

RE: LOL...
By CharonPDX on 10/28/2011 3:18:55 PM , Rating: 2
Um, yeah... The EPA is just following what their standards say. It's a "line in the sand" specification, not a judgment call.

Vehicle less than 100 cu. ft.? Subcompact. Vehicle tested (by MANUFACTURER) following our test comes up with 52 eMPG? That's what they print.

RE: LOL...
By 91TTZ on 10/28/2011 11:51:16 AM , Rating: 5
We shall call it "The Homer"

RE: LOL...
By BZDTemp on 10/28/2011 2:54:06 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure if you or corduroygt is the one sounding most stupid but it's clear neither of you don't get what a car like the Karma is about (or your attempt of irony sucks).

The Karma is not a van or a bus it's a luxury item. Tell me what sort of interior space do you think there is in a Porsche or Aston Martin?

RE: LOL...
By corduroygt on 10/28/2011 4:12:57 PM , Rating: 2
They're cars that go faster to 0-60 than the 5.9 seconds of the Karma, as well as drive and handle a lot better because they weigh a lot less.

What we don't like is paying tax dollars to prop up companies who only serve pretentious rich environmentalist ***holes...

RE: LOL...
By Keeir on 10/28/2011 4:28:45 PM , Rating: 2

Please provide me a source that says the Karma handles significantly worse than other 100,000 automobiles. I agree with your premise but you jumping there too fast.

Also, the government loan was for the PROJECT NINA car. This Karma is financed through private money.

RE: LOL...
By corduroygt on 10/28/2011 8:41:55 PM , Rating: 2
Please provide me a source that says the Karma handles significantly worse than other 100,000 automobiles. I agree with your premise but you jumping there too fast.
"the physics conspire against it keeping pace with other $100K sports sedans."

2012 BMW 528i = 23/34 mpg, 28 combined. Add the M-sport kit and its looks are very good, too. All for half the price of this, matches it to 0-60 and pulls ahead at higher velocities. Handles better since it's 1500 lbs lighter. More interior volume and more comfort as well. You also have no worries about plugging it in to be more efficient. Like the Prius, it's very efficient, all the time, regardless of the user's charging habits.

RE: LOL...
By Totally on 10/29/11, Rating: 0
RE: LOL...
By BZDTemp on 10/29/2011 1:00:39 PM , Rating: 2
You need to check facts before making claims!

Fisker Karma 5,300 lbs.
Aston Martin Rapide 4383 lbs.
Porsche Panamera 5,379 lbs. (base verion)

Now the Panamera uses 6s for the 0-60 so it's actually slower but to be fair the Aston uses only 5 secónds, however the starting price for it is $200K so there is that.

And with regards to the tax dollars then none of those has gone into the Karma, so you're wrong there as well.

RE: LOL...
By corduroygt on 10/29/2011 6:04:59 PM , Rating: 2
Panamera V6 version weighs 3880 lbs. The 5379 lbs is the GVWR, so you should do your research before calling someone out.

Not to mention that any model Panamera is going to show this pig its taillights above 60mph, and for 95K, you can get the V8 version which will be faster throughout.

RE: LOL...
By FlyBri on 10/28/2011 6:26:00 PM , Rating: 2
@Flunk -- Riiiight, because the Nissan Versa and the Karma are such similar cars, offer similar amenities, look similar, etc. -- Give me a break. The Karma is a LUXURY car, in case you didn't notice (and it seems you haven't even opened your eyes and looked at the car, because if you did, it'd be pretty obvious). People don't go around comparing a Kia to an Aston Martin. The fact you're even comparing the Karma to a Versa is a joke in and of itself. The idiot isn't the one buying the's you.

"If you look at the last five years, if you look at what major innovations have occurred in computing technology, every single one of them came from AMD. Not a single innovation came from Intel." -- AMD CEO Hector Ruiz in 2007

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki