Fisker Karma

daz

daz

daz

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
24,081
Location
Bucks
fisker_karma_f34_09-fr-as_1_815.jpg


Fisker Karma plug-in hybrids are rolling off an assembly line in Finland, a major milestone for Fisker Automotive and cars with cords.

Construction of the first production models started today at Valmet Automotive’s factory in Uusikaupunki, Finland. Fisker has a contract with Valmet to build the cars, and the first of the super-luxe plug-ins are slated for delivery within a month or so. But don’t expect to see a lot of them on the road anytime soon.

“We’re going to be ramping up very slowly, very carefully to ensure quality,” Fisker Automotive spokesman Roger Ormisher told Automotive News Europe. “This year we want to get over 7,000 deliveries.”

That’s a small number in the auto industry, but a big step forward for the Southern California startup. Founder Henrik Fisker, who has designed cars for the likes of BMW and Aston Martin, unveiled the Karma just three years ago. He has since then lined up a $528.7 million federal loan and boatloads of capital to get it built.

He’s also succeeded in bringing the car to market just as the nascent EV segment is taking off. The car follows the Tesla Roadster, Nissan Leaf and Chevrolet Volt and arrives before cars like the Ford Focus Electric and Mitsubishi i-MiEV. With a starting price of $88,000, the Karma is a niche within a niche, but Fisker already is looking ahead to its next car, a mid-sized sedan it hopes to sell for $39,900 after the $7,500 federal EV tax credit.

The Karma is as advanced as it is gorgeous and it works much like the Volt. The 20 kilowatt-hour lithium-nanophosphate battery has a claimed range of 50 miles. When the battery winds down, a 2.4-liter turbocharged engine — sourced from General Motors — drives a 175 kilowatt generator that keeps the juice flowing to the wheels. Fisker claims the car gets “an annual average” of 100 mpg and emits just 83 grams of CO2 per kilometer. That’s less than a Toyota Prius. The battery recharges in six to eight hours at 220 volts.

Propulsion comes from a pair of motors good for 403 horsepower and 901 foot-pounds of torque. Impressive numbers, but the Karma weighs more than 4,000 pounds, so zero to 60 comes in 5.9 seconds when driving in “sport mode.” Still, the car has received some favorable reviews. Car & Driver called it “a beautiful, luxurious machine that goes easy on the guilt.” Road & Track called it “genuinely lithe, taut, tossable and fun” and noted, “it’s also plenty quick.”
Click to expand...

Amazing to see the progression with electric/hybrid vehicles. Not a bad looker either. :cool:

1300NM torque :eek:

Where are the UK companies building this kind of thing? :(
 
It does look good - kind of like someone squished an aston. Although from that angle, the front end reminds me of the cartoon car from 'who framed roger rabbit'...

The tech advancements are quite impressive but Im still not sure about electric/hybrid for anything more than a family/small car just yet. Dont know why, just seems odd.
 
Last edited:
daz said:
Where are the UK companies building this kind of thing? :(
Click to expand...

Surely thats in easy answer ... and not backed by millions of federal loan.


Hybrid_Range_Rover_Sport_8211_Range_e_will_come_in_2013.jpg



Jaguar-XJ-Limo-Green-big.png


Both prototypes for the technology.....

jaguar-cx-75.jpg


The Karma does looke a rather splendid car. The Tesla Model S sits in a similar area such that we will end up with a luxury Leaf vs Volt as a Range Extended EV competes with a pure battery EV.
 
Last edited:
Impressive technology in the Fisker, but at the moment the biggest issue is the price point of electric vehicles. It's alright having the world's most advanced, efficient propulsion system but if no-one can afford it or wants to plump for it over a petrol/diesel then there's little point.
 
Well Tesla have said they want a £30,000 electric car on the shelves so while initial prices are high, with competition and other makers getting up to speed...that price isn't far off surely.

901lb/ft from standstill though, and all in one gear, you wouldn't have a chance to adjust your neck that's already almost bent back!

!!!

I think the technology is great, it means once these are common, people will have very fast electric cars for every day monies.
 
I'm not sure I'd want one gear in a car either, it's going to strip a lot of the involvement out of driving. Plus a motor is going to be quite intrusive at 10,000-12,000 rpm isn't it?
 
Khaaan! said:
901lb/ft from standstill though, and all in one gear, you wouldn't have a chance to adjust your neck that's already almost bent back!
Click to expand...

I wonder what the final drive is on it, a lot of cars already exceed that torque at the wheels in first remember. Of course its traction limited but the fact you dont need to slip a clutch and bring, at some point, a lot of torque is applied breaking traction. So with two motors you can avoid that and the traction control is per wheel so you can really optimise it, including yaw correction.

EV's still need a gearbox to give improvements in performance AND efficiency. just the costs and the development of everything else is delaying that at the moment, much like the use of heat pumps are waiting for the powertrain costs to drop before its cost effective to develop those technologies.
 
CAR mag had a review on it this month, though they stated that it was using a 2ltr turbo GM petrol engine.
I have to say that the engine choice does surprise me. Bearing in mind that it weighs something like 2200kg, I'm surprised that they didn't use either:
- A six (e.g. a BMW unit), which would give it an appropriate level of smoothness with the engine running for not that much impact upon economy, or
- If they were really focusing on economy a small TD unit. Sure, it would be more noisy and less refined, but as I understand it, the Fisker can go quite a distance on batteries alone. That suggests to me that you could have the TD engine turned off a low speed or when stopped, and that's when diesel units are most obviously unrefined. Get a diesel car above say 30mph, and in many cases, the engine NVH is swamped by the rest of the car.
 
It still acheives an annual average of 100MPG though so how much more economical do they want it to be?

The engine, going by the article, just drives the generator which drives the motors anyway so I suppose that's why. So a big 6 would indeed be a bit of a waste.
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
- A six (e.g. a BMW unit), which would give it an appropriate level of smoothness with the engine running for not that much impact upon economy, or
.
Click to expand...

Lot of packaging constraints with a six though, long engines. Refinement shouldn't be too much of an issue anyway as the engine is not driving the car, simply running up to a steady speed (presumably) and then driving the generator. Isolate it well and it'll be practically unnoticable I'd have thought.
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
- A six (e.g. a BMW unit), which would give it an appropriate level of smoothness with the engine running for not that much impact upon economy, or
Click to expand...

That would be a silly choice from the packaging perspective, especially if it is transversely mounted. They want high power density; a turbocharged petrol is good for this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom