Grab our RSS Feed

AND

Fisker Karma EREV Expected to Get 67 MPG Combined Fuel Efficiency

September 9th, 2009 | Posted in: Competitors, E-REV, Efficiency

The Fisker Karma is the “other” extended range electric car deliveries of which are expected to begin in 2010. Only in Fisker’s case its May as opposed to November, and will be simultaneously global.

Although the Karma shares the same general engineering architecture as the Volt, the similarities end there. The car will have a 50 mile range in EV mode using 22 kwh of lithium-ion battery storage and after that a charge-sustaining mode with generated by a 260 hp GM Ecotec 2 liter engine. Fisker has not announced the total capacity of the battery pack.

The dramatically-styled sports car has up to 405 horsepower, 959 lb-ft of torque, and can do 0 to 60 in under 6 seconds. It will retail for $87,500.

As the Volt 230 MPG announcement drew a lot of attention to it, Fisker too has decided to announced some numbers of its own.

Using the European format they claim the car will emit 83g CO₂/km (less than the Prius’ 87 g CO2/km₎ and will have a fuel economy rating of 3.5L/100km. This translates to 67.2 MPG.

The Karma is configured to operate in what they call stealth mode (EV mode) that the driver can activate via a steering wheel mounted switch, or in sports mode which uses the gas generator continuously. The car’s default operation will be EV for the first 50 miles switching to generator after that. The car will have less performance in stealth mode, topping out at 95MPH (down from 125 MPH) and doing 0 to 60 in 7 seconds.

According to Fisker spokesperson Russel Datz, the announced 67 mpg number is combined city and highway, and was arrived at using the SAE J1711 standard and the SAE J2841 standard which takes population behavior (utility factor) and nightly charging but not petroleum equivalence of electricity into account. Electric usage will be reported separately.

In the case of the Volt, the 230 MPG was determined by measuring the average driving behavior of a typical population who would be recharging nightly, and seeing how many city miles they would accumulate while burning one gallon of gas. Highway and combined numbers were not released.

Datz said in city driving, the Karma would be rated around 150 MPG. Similar to GM, he wouldn’t not disclose the MPG of the Karma in charge sustaining mode.

Per Fisker’s press release:

Fueling the Karma could cost just 0.02 euro/km ($0.03/mile), consuming as little as 21 kilowatt hours per 100km in its electric-only Stealth mode, according to SAE methodology. However, a real-world annual average would be closer to 0.05 euro/km ($0.07/mile) based on a mix of Stealth and Sport (gasoline) mode use. Actual economy and emission results will vary depending on individual driving habits and usage requirements.

Source (Fisker)

Posted by: Lyle

237 Responses to “Fisker Karma EREV Expected to Get 67 MPG Combined Fuel Efficiency”

+11 Rashiid Amul Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:17 am

This car is so fine looking.

67.5 MPG sounds more realistic than 230 MPG.

$87,500 price tag obviously puts this car out of reach for most buyers.

I wish them well and hope they succeed. We need as many EREVs on the road as possible, regardless of who is making them. GM really started a revolution. Nicely done, GM. Nicely done.

(Quote)
+5 nuclearboy Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:20 am

I really like the idea of a high end car using the EREV type of drive train. This just gives EREV a little more publicity and makes the Volt look like a good deal for some.

You read about the KARMA in Car and Driver and may actually purchase the Volt at your Chevy dealer.

(Quote)
+1 Jason Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:31 am

The Fisker offering is a competition threat to the Tesla Roadster rather than the Volt. It will be interesting to see, on the high end, whether EREV or BEV will win consumer dollars. My money is too limited to truly pick a side, but I’d go with the Fisker Karma on style or the Tesla on technology; which would translate to a Tesla purchase on my part. This is only because my rare trip out of range could be handled by a simple ICE or hybrid rental.

Anyone hearing news about the cityZenn??? Eestor developments???

(Quote)
Jay Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:33 am

Well not much out of the would-be motor heads when a competitor with a better looking product shows up. I hope this is a real sign of things to come, a hybrid with some style and performance. I wonder what a dealership will cost. Again, hope the production model looks as good inside and it appears outwardly?

(Quote)
+1 nasaman Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:37 am

I agree completely, Rashiid! And it’s interesting that like the Tesla Roadster, the Fisker Karma was also born in California. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it taking sales away from both Tesla and the ‘Vette ZR1, as well as perhaps even some sales away from the Volt.

I particularly like the fact the driver can choose the high-performance sport mode OR the pure-EV stealth mode instantly from the steering wheel! But I’m skeptical they can actually get these into “global” production by next May —6 months ahead of the Volt!

(Quote)
+1 RB Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:38 am

Rashiid said “so fine looking”. I wholeheartedly agree. It seems unlikely that there is a Fisker Karma in my future, but in my dreams….

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:40 am

There’s a long list of dealerships already, so whatever they cost it must be workable. As Fisker is new, perhaps the price to become a dealer is relatively low.

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:40 am

87,500 – 7500 right? So 80K.

I like the fact you can go stealth or sports mode (think about this GM).

Lyle – please eplain your sentence:
“Using the European format they claim the car will emit 83g CO2/km (less than the Prius’ 83 g CO2/km)”

As far as looks, it looks nice except for the front end (my opinion). And why 4 doors on a sports car? Is that to get the Gov rebate?

(Quote)
+5 Jim I Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:40 am

I wonder how many of these will be available in the first year’s production for the worldwide release starting in May, 2010? If this is like Tesla, with a yearly production rate so far of about 1,000 vehicles, it is just a rich mans toy.

Even a first year production of 10,000 Volts will dwarf these other cars. And by year three, when production goes over 100,000 vehicles per year, is when the Volt will go mainstream.

Is the Karma Expensive? At $87.500, it sure is. But it is still cheaper than a Corvette ZR1, which now starts at just under $104,000…………

It is still a Volt for me!!!!

(Quote)
+1 Dave K. Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:46 am

Achieving sports car performance @ 67 mpg combined is simply amazing. Wonder what Fisker’s manufacturing expectancy is for the first year?

Can’t wait to see these on the road. Will look hot in black cherry.

=D~

(Quote)
+4 FME III Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:49 am

I total agree with your skepticism on the schedule , Nasaman.

As for the car’s fuel efficiency, the only numbers that count are: 1. range in EV mode. 2. MPG in charge-sustaining mode. All else is an exercise in hypothetical numbers — and as any statistician will attest, you can make numbers say anything you want.

(Quote)
+2 FME III Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:56 am

I agree that the Fisker may be more of a competitive threat to Tesla — not only the roadster, but the Model S. It’s clear from the reviews of the Tesla roadster that the Fisker will be a much more comfortable vehicle.

Pure EV believers may still opt for Tesla, but when you think about how Tesla lashed together its battery pack out of laptop cells, it would seem (IMHO) to be an inferior technology.

Until Tesla gets rid of that pack architecture I won’t consider a Model S.

(Quote)
RB Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:56 am

It’s interesting how 67 mpg actually sounds better to me than does 230 mpg. The former sounds like it might mean something in real life, while the latter, though obviously a higher number, is equally obviously a number contrived through some special case. Of course both are sort of made up numbers based on the cars being mostly electric rather than gas.

(Quote)
Alex S Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:10 am

Wow! Now that’s a fine looking car. One of the best designs i ever seen, if not the best. Now this is a real carmaker! I wish them the best of luck, and they got my respect for this great design.

(Quote)
Shock Me Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:16 am

Very sweet looking ride. If it drives and rides well I would likely use twice the gasoline I do now just for pleasure cruises on the highway.

Me shoves more money in the Volt pile and wonders what the payments would be if me goes hog wild and makes a 50% down payment on a Karma instead. Naw let the bank buy its own Karma and get me a Volt!

(Quote)
+8 Zel Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:19 am

As far as I have seen, EESTOR (EESTOR.US) is still vaporware. I have hopes it will come true.

Would love to have a Fisky, but I am maxed out on a Volt as my High end purchase.

Zel

And Remember GM:

Jacksonville Fl, 54 mile commute round trip, 110v 20a plug at work to recharge and designated parking spot. Just saying I will volunteer. Really.

Plugging for a Plug-In!

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:21 am

Certainly the different ways you formulate the 67mpg figure differ completely from the Voltec 230 mpg figure.

But high performance capacity demands high energy consumption. Both gasoline as well as electricity are consumed at a far higher rate just to have that performance potential there without ever even using it.

For most of us that drive normally 99.99999% of the time (seven nines), just needing to merge with traffic from an onramp, the Volt is certainly for us, and, the ways we drive.

But while the Karma certainly has *some* GM reliability available to it (the ICE), one can not generalize that the rest of it has the same reliability criteria that is being designed and proven all throughout Voltec, which is the case for a “first edition” of 10,000 quantity production right out the door in the first place.

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:22 am

The schedule is realistic, because most of the propulsion hardware has been in production for the military. They aren’t reinventing the wheel here, so they can be first to market with an EREV, right behind the first to market BEV from Tesla Motors.

(Quote)
+1 Jason M. Hendler Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:24 am

At the low quantities Tesla Motors puts out, I doubt the Karma takes business from them. Tesla is currently making a 2 seat sporty roadster BEV, and Fisker is making a 5 seat luxury sedan EREV – they are completely separate markets.

(Quote)
+1 Jason M. Hendler Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:25 am

GM is lending support to Fisker, providing the gasoline ICE range extender. Quantum Technologies is a supplier to GM and the military, so Detroit isn’t fighting them, they are helping them.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:27 am

kdawg,
Even minus the rebate that still uncomfortably close to two volts! Nice looking though. Maybe they mean that if they release one in Canada it’ll be “international”.
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
+1 Murray Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:27 am

They had these roped off at the NY auto show…they are just as fine looking in person. They are the lengthy-est sports car I have ever seen but it totally works…the inside (from about 10ft away) actually looked like a luxury car on the 2 show models they had there.

I wish Fisker all the luck in the world.

(Quote)
+3 Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:34 am

RB,
That begs the question of why they chose to compare apples to oranges. Other than marketing BUZZ, I wonder if the fisker’s dual use mode just does knock it from 230 downward? Just curious.
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
+2 Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:36 am

Shoot a few to England and Canada and it’s international and “global”.
Beautiful car though.
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
+2 nasaman Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:39 am

The Karma actually has only 4 seats like the Volt. Here’s a photo of the posh 2 back seats and center console….

http://green.autoblog.com/gallery/fisker-karma-0/med/#8

(Quote)
zipdrive Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:42 am

This just in from Road and Track mag:

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1054/what-will-a-chevy-volt-really-cost-to-run/

(Quote)
-6 Fred Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:53 am

Of course your ASSuming that the volt will be $40K.

(Quote)
-1 Jon Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:53 am

67 sounds low to me. 67 Can be achieved in charge sustaining mode alone. Some diesel cars in Europe (regular cars, not funky calculation factoring in electric miles) already get as good mileage. I would expect the number that takes into account electric miles to be higher.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:01 am

fred,
I know about ASSuming. I just figured that with tax and title, etc….
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
+1 CDAVIS Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:06 am

______________________________________________________
Sexy looking car!
______________________________________________________

(Quote)
Shock Me Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:10 am

A cautionary tale. Tiered pricing to discourage electrical usage? How perverse is that for a profit-making energy provider? If I had a powerplant I would offer a flat rate or discounts for greater consumption (especially at night).

(Quote)
zipdrive Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:12 am

The article also misses the important point of getting off foreign oil as a primary goal.

(Quote)
-2 Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:14 am

They use a LOT of suppositions including no time of day metering. I’d have thought that they’d have done a better job. JMO
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
nuclearboy Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:17 am

The article ends by giving one the impression that the Prius is cheaper to operate for someone who only drives 40 miles per day and uses no gas in the Volt.

Of course they had to assume that electricity is $.31/kWhr to get to this point.

What a one sided article. How about a table that goes both ways (not that there is anything wrong with that). They showed tiered pricing up to 31 cents per kWhr. How about including the price per mile for those of us with time of day rates that go down well under 10 cents per kWhr at night.

Many more of these articles will come out. I hope some of the future ones are more fair minded in their display of the numbers.

(Quote)
Van Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:19 am

If the important numbers are AER and gas mileage in charge sustaining mode, it seems to be the Fisker’s important numbers are 50 miles AER and 67 MPG in charge sustaining mode.

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:20 am

It will be very interesting to see how the Ampera fares using that same European economy metric (yes, I know that’s a pun ).

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:22 am

Here’s one for the “car people” who disparaged the production-intent Volt’s departure from the initial concept. As always, style costs.

No competition for Volt, but I bet the ZR1 will suffer some lost sales; depending on the intended (or actual) Karma unit volumes.

(Quote)
+2 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:27 am

… if 67 MPG is in charge sustaining mode.

“Similar to GM, [Russel Datz] would not disclose the MPG of the Karma in charge sustaining mode.”

It’s interesting that most of us seem to find that number plausible for Charge Sustaining Mode with a 2 liter engine in a giant sports car with 0 – 60 times in the single digits, but find it a doubtful figure for a much more modest engine in a more modestly-performing Volt.

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:28 am

If the testing method on the Karma is indeed as the same shown on the “Hymotion Prius – Accelerated Testing”, in the referenced SAE J1711, with some assumptions and simple math we can make an estimate at the Karma’s mpg in RE mode.

Assuming:

1. The Karma met all of the cycles at 50 miles aer and then the genset kicked in (i.e. never kicked in at cycles 10,20,40,40,40)
2. The ICE is NOT coming on in cycles below 50 miles (to “condition” the battery, etc.).
3. Battery is recharged to full capacity inbetween cycles.

Then:

Total distance travelled in RE mode would be 1090 mi.
Total gasoline used would be 5440mi/67.2mpg = 80.95 g

Karma Mpg in RE mode would be 1090mi/80.95g = 13.5 mpg

(Quote)
+1 Herm Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:33 am

It has a lot more drag than a Volt, thus it cant get the 230mpg rating. Note that the Volt can do 100 mph using its 50kw generator, yet the Karma can only do 95 mph using its bigger genset..

its maddening when Fisker does not give out enough detail for us to pick over and criticize them with.

(Quote)
+1 texas Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:37 am

Gorgeous! Friggen gorgeous.

Another E-REV designer that won’t give out the charge sustaining mpg. Coincidence? No, it’s more inefficient than a mechanically coupled system. Soon the numbers will be out and can’t be fooled.

It’s not the end of the world. If anyone does mostly highway driving get a PHEV like a plug-in Prius or such. My guess is each design will have their pluses and minuses. For me, it’s the E-REV. The Volt and this Karma make a great pair and should give the E-REV a great name.

(Quote)
+1 Herm Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:37 am

useless article.. you want pertinent and up-to-date Volt info come to this web site.

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:38 am

Um, they can only get 95 mph without the genset:

“The car will have less performance in stealth mode [battery only], topping out at 95MPH (down from 125 MPH) and doing 0 to 60 in 7 seconds [instead of under 6].”

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:39 am

Herm,
Maddening and wise at the same time. GM has chosen to go the “transparent” route which has often been used to beat them up. Don’t get me wrong though. If GM hadn’t gone this route, their history would still be haunting them (and we wouldn’t have a site like this).
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
The P.E. Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:40 am

This really underscores the need for a “standardized” method of calculating efficiency which is meaningful and easy to comprehend. I suspect that the ASE’s and the ASME etc. of the world are trying hard to develop the “official” method.

The “Iusetoomanyquotes” P.E.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:46 am

Fisker gives out very little technical info compared to GM and the Volt..

Well the Mercedes serial BEV that was posted here a couple of days ago uses the rear ICE to both sustain the battery charge and drive the rear wheels.. the electric motor runs the front wheels. The BYD serial BEV also has a mode that the ice drives the wheels also.. the Renault Elect’road also has that mode.

So there you go if you want to eke the last little bit of charge sustaining mode MPG. Is it worth the added complication?.. probably not.

(Quote)
+2 texas Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:48 am

I disagree. I expect the mileage in charge sustaining mode to be very low (due to the inefficiency of the design) but that most drivers will get far better numbers. How many people drive mostly highway? If they do, they should get a clean diesel or a good PHEV (with series / parallel or parallel design).

So, potential owners should first test out each of their choices on their usual routes before deciding which gives the best economics and driving enjoyment. It’s just too complicated for a simple city / highway set of mpg numbers. Some drivers will only use a few gallons of gas a year while others will get non-hybrid-like numbers (if driving mostly highway miles). People should be aware of what these cars can and cannot do. Otherwise they might be disappointed that they are not getting 230 mpg.

Automakers should be as honest and up-front as possible or the critics are going to have a field day.

(Quote)
Jim in PA Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:51 am

LOL. It is a beauty of a car, but it shouldn’t be called the Karma, it should be called the Beluga… as in whale. Is that grille for catching air or for filtering plankton? Am I the only one who sees this?

(Quote)
+1 texas Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:52 am

Yes, those stealth and sports manual switch modes are a great idea! It’s amazing how things can be so obvious once they are invented.

(Quote)
+1 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:56 am

I’m in Canada!

Pick me!

I can’t afford one of course, but I’m willing to have an advertisment on the side!

(Quote)
Jim in PA Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:58 am

If someone does mostly highway driving they shouldn’t waste their money on a traditional hybrid since most of the energy recovery mechanisms won’t kick in. It is well established that real world highway numbers for the Prius are down around 40+ mpg. I can almost get that with a $16,000 Cobalt, and I can certainly achieve it with a VW diesel.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:58 am

125mph max speed, they recently demonstrated 100mph at Laguna Seca without using the genset.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:59 am

260 hp turbo sport engine… 67 mpg would be incredible if they actually hit that.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:59 am

It is just too bad that this GREAT looking car is going to be so expensive. When compared to the Volt, I don’t see where the extra value is in the Karma. Now, if it cost the same as the Volt, I would be all over it because of its looks. The Volt looks like a Model T up against the Karma. There is just no comparison between the two of them as to looks. The Karma wins hands down. GM needs to take notes on designing a world class looking car. Now if it can stand up to the “daily grind” and function as good as it looks, the Karma will sell very well. Lots of upper crust buyers will want one.

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:01 am

Add,

If the Karma averaged the following AER’s, then RE mpg would be:

40 mi AER: 16.8 RE mpg = (1090 mi + 270 mi)/ 80.95 g
30 mi AER: 25.7 RE mpg = (1090 mi + 990 mi)/ 80.95 g

(Quote)
+1 Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:03 am

Muddy,
LOL, for a Volt, I’d put a loudspeaker on the roof of the vehicle that shouts “This cheap old fart didn’t buy me! – Buy one at MacIntire Chevy!”
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
EVNow Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:03 am

These 3 statements don’t compute
1. The car will have a 50 mile range in EV mode using 22 kwh of lithium-ion battery storage
2. Fisker has not announced the total capacity of the battery pack.
3. consuming as little as 21 kilowatt hours per 100km in its electric-only Stealth mode

(Quote)
Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:04 am

I currently drive the 100% ICE version of the Karma!

I drive a Solstice GXP, the Karma is a stretched version of the Solstice. Lay some pictures side by side and you’ll see that they share the same bolt patterns, suspension, switch gear/electrical lay out, engine, even the body panels are similar.

The LNF (turbo 2.0 cylinder), is an excellent engine. Awesome mileage and huge torque numbers at low RPMS which will be perfect for a generator. I have my engine tuned for 40 MPG and about 320 horsepower.
The one issue I see is noise, that engine is loud even at idle. It sounds like a big sewing machine. The automated cams are loud but most of the noise comes from the direct injection. The high pressure common rail injection system runs off an electrical pump and a cam driven-pump. The click click of the injectors makes the engine sound like a diesel. There’s also the turbo noises too, the hissing from the open waste gate is noticeable, especially since that engine can hit full boost at low RPMS.

With or with out a loud engine the Fisker Karma should be a great car for $80,000. Hopefully they eventually will go with a drive line that can handle 850’Ibs of torque and end up with a high three second 0-60 time.

As for me I’ll stick with my $30K, 4.5 second 0-60, 35-40 MPG roadster. The Fisker sure is pretty though, even with the “Why so serious” grin.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:05 am

Off topic, sort of…

GM demo’s the new HCCI engine.

http://autos.ca.msn.com/editors-picks/article.aspx?cp-documentid=21586857

Based on the very same 2.2 that the Karma is using!

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:07 am

Unlike the Volt, we don’t have any “inside” information on the Karma production schedule and where they stand in relation to it. They may very well be “on schedule” for a May 2010 release. How do we know any different?

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:11 am

The shot looking up from below emphasizes the grill much more than it would appear to someone standing beside it on the street.

When I think of some other gawky-looking electric concepts, I can’t really fault it for this.

(Quote)
+1 N Riley Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:13 am

Tag,

That one sale in Canada is to Statik who said he would buy whatever was available first that he could get serviced within its EV range. Or something like that. $87,500 would not even phase Statik. The guy’s rolling in dough. Right, Statik? Great looking car and anyone, including any of us, would look great driving it. But not many of us can probably afford it. I know I would not even try. This car is for the high class buyers. Good luck to them and to Fisker.

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:17 am

Will look hot in just about any color. IMO.

(Quote)
CorvetteGuy Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:17 am

Attention Mr. Lutz,

Please take note of the number of times the Fisker is described as: “Gorgeous! Friggen gorgeous”, or “Sexy”, or “Beautiful” in today’s postings.

If any of these readers had $90K of disposable income they would pass right by the Corvettes and head straight to the Karmas.

You of all people should know “the look” is what is going to sell the VOLT because high MPG’s alone will not do it. Even the Prius and the Insight have a slightly ‘George Jetson’ look about them. Many people just like wedgies, I guess.

Anyway, I hope you are planning to surprise us all by launching the Cadillac Converj wwwwaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy early to get some real excitement and interest in Voltec – nology.

Then maybe the ’spill-over’ effect will help boost VOLT sales to the masses.

(Quote)
+1 Ray Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:19 am

Alberta Canada here. Send one over !! and a Volt too.. I currently have the 2010 Fusion Hybrid (loving it !) and I could do daily testing on all three… Imagine ! Side by side testing of the 3 hottest electric/hybrid types…
What do you say folks ? I have room in my driveway..

(Quote)
+1 N Riley Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:22 am

They may be completely separate markets, but I believe the Karma will take a lot of sales from Tesla. Some of the Tesla owners want a two seat sports car and they don’t care about having more than their brief case as a passenger. Some, how many is probably more than half, would like the capability of carrying more than a brief case some or most of the time. These buyers will opt for the Karma in droves as opposed to the current Tesla offerings. The Model S Tesla should compete more directly with the Karma and it will be an interesting battle. If Fisker can get their cost down before the Model S is available, it will prove to be even more interesting. IMO.

(Quote)
+1 Loboc Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:24 am

This guy has a really crappy electric rate.

Mine is 10.4 cents/KWh with no tiering at all. My electric rate goes DOWN if I average more. The rate is locked in for 6 months. Other providers in my area have lower rates, but, you can’t lock in.

http://streamenergy.net/energy_home_texas.asp

Gasoline is not ‘locked in’ at all and can easily bounce back up to $4 in a couple of months.

I don’t want to break even. I want to stop paying for foreign oil and I want a Volt! I don’t want a powder-blue butt-ugly Prius.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:33 am

N. Riley,
You’re right about statik’s buy “first available” stance. Does this one carry 5? If so that’s his car! If you’re listening statik, Congrats!
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
+3 DonC Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:38 am

To meet the schedule Fisker is more or less skipping the IVR process. Granted Valmet Automotive — the Finnish company which has built a million cars, mostly for Saab but also for Porshe — will be handling the manufacturing, but skipping the validation step has potential for opening the door to otherwise avoidable defects.

My guess is that the release date will slip.

(Quote)
Dr.Science #11 on the list Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:39 am

Style wise, it looks as smug as Lewis Carrol’s Cheshire cat.

(Quote)
+3 PeteVE Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:41 am

i thought it was stated last month that EESTOR was to be demonstrated at the end of Sept. so yes, you can claim vaporware, but only be limiting yourself. i have soo much hope for this tech as it would finally be the break-through this world needs.

i’m an engineer and so i can understand that unforeseen hurdles can come up.

optimism

(Quote)
+3 DonC Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:48 am

when you think about how Tesla lashed together its battery pack out of laptop cells, it would seem (IMHO) to be an inferior technology.

Point well taken. But the Model S will be about the 4th generation of the technology. We’ll see how well the Tesla battery pack holds up. So far, rather than connection failures, the issue seems to be that they can’t adequately cool the cells (the Mini-E has the same issue for the same reason). Given that the packs won’t last more than five years or so, maybe all those connections won’t turn out to be such a big deal, though having all those cells makes maintenance and support — like cooling — problematic.

(Quote)
Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:54 am

No that is not the same engine, here’s the info on the LNF:
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2008/Whats%20New/Ecotec/08_LNF.doc
This is the last year for the LNF with the death of the Solstice/Sky, Cobalt SS/HHR SS. It really is an awesome engine, highest horsepower per liter engine that GM has ever mass-produced. The best of both worlds with mileage and horsepower: twin scroll turbo, infinitely-variable intake/exhaust cams, direct injection, piston oil jets, etc…
260′Ibs of torque at 2,500 RPMs:
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2008/HPT%20Library/Ecotec/2008%20LNF/2008_20L_LNF_Solstice.pdf

(Quote)
EVO Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:56 am

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Splitting city/highway driving 50%/50%, a city rating of 150 MPG and combined rating of 67.5 MPG means that the highway rating must be -15 MPG.

Congratulations to Fisker for getting the first negative fuel economy rating in history.

The overarching lesson in all this is that going really fast for long sustained distances on interstate highways is bad for efficiency. If you want better fuel economy or more range, stay off them, see the countryside, stop and say hello to your fellow citizens and spend a buck or two.

MPG is still useless. All electric drive is super efficient, period. Stay off the generator as much as possible and Bob’s your uncle.

(Quote)
+1 DonC Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:56 am

It’s interesting how 67 mpg actually sounds better to me than does 230 mpg.

I had the precise opposite reaction. My first thought was “why didn’t Fisker just release the City numbers?” After 230 MPG the 67 MPG number just struck me as lame. Perhaps I was expecting a really high number for the Volt so 230 MPG, while high, didn’t strike me as unbelievable. With my driving I might get over 500 MPG and my wife, with a lot of freeway driving, might get 200 MPG. But I’d never use the Volt for long trips since we have better alternatives for that.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:58 am

If GM lasts long enough to make the < $25K Volt, this will have had a lot to do with it.

Successful HCCI will almost certainly allow a 50mpg+ Cruze when applied to it’s 4cylinder ‘world engine,’ and will have the added bonus of kicking those arrogant German B@$t^%ds in the nuts.

I know you are a Diesel fan MRB, thanks for posting.

‘Bye bye, Audi!

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:59 am

Referencing the lack of interest to my posts at 14, I guess nobody here is interested in efficiency, when I thought that was the name of the game. . . . . . I’ll rattle on to the fence posts for a bit anyway.

The Karma’s efficiency is shlt:

- A series/parallel Hymotion prius with a 5kwh battery pack (with almost no optimizing software) is getting better efficiency ratings than the series hybrid karma which has a battery pack almost 5 times the size.
- The Karma’s city/hwy combined rating in RE mode is likely not more than 17 mpg.

Those batteries will not last forever. They cost a lot to purchase at initial build, and they’ll cost a lot to replace at some point (5, 7, 10 years into the future).

This glimpse into the Karma’s efficiency is likely pertinent to the viability of series hybrids, including the volt.

(Quote)
vladg Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:01 am

Wow! What a great numbers crunching! So if gasoline is $2.80/gallon and electricity is $.31/Kw and Prius is really a 48 mpg and someone drives 1200 miles a month – then Prius is 0.02 cheaper per mile to drive.
You know what it calculates to? Dennis Simanaitis lives in California. The state where government officials love Toyota and hate Detroit. So I am really really surprised Prius numbers are that low. I’d expect Prius to beat Volt at least three to one.

In my state, which proudly occupies the second row in residential electricity cost table, the base price is “only” $.20/KwH and gasoline price is around $2.70/gallon (and subject to grow soon). That makes Volt operation cost of 4 cents/mile and if I can make a deal with my provider to use night rate of $.15/KwH it goes down to 3 cents/mile.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:02 am

Paging Ed Begley Jr. Ed Begley Jr, please come to the smugness courtesy phone …

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:04 am

Reading anything about Volt (including here), anyone would think that the $40,000 figure is etched in stone. In fact, the price has not been released. We could be in for a surprise (good or bad, but hopefully good).

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:08 am

I’m, too lazy too go over the article again, but isn’t 67 mpg the combined mileage? GM was confident the Volt would get over 100 mpg for combined, but still no word on results to this date. I think I will look over the article again since they give combined mileage in mpg and use some “European efficiency” measures also.

(Quote)
Loboc Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:09 am

The 67MPG number is combined city+highway. The Volt’s 230 is city only. Combined is probably closer to what most people will get.

But really. Anything over 100MPG and we are talking a small difference in real cost. The difference between 230 and 100MPG is only like $200 bucks a year at $3/gal.

Buying a $40k car it really doesn’t matter if I spend $350 bucks or $150 bucks on gas per year. Do we really think that someone that buys a Karma is worried about gas mileage?

(Quote)
-5 Comcastic Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:10 am

So the Volt is really a poor man’s Karma.

Actually no poor man can afford the Volt’s $40,000+ price tag.

At least someone knows how to do EREV right.

Pretty low performance numbers though, I think Tesla will run 0-60 in less than 4 seconds which is speed that Volt owners can only dream about.

I enjoy reading Volt wannabe owners just drooling over this car with envy. Go Fisker.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:13 am

Jackson,
You’re right about the price. It won’t be released until a few months before the car is, so we could be really pleasantly surprised. I’ve BEEN saying that they have been under-promising and over-performing, so maybe this is just another case of the same.
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:13 am

Jackson maybe I’m missing something, but that represents a very large sales universe with two small dots that have little relationship to each other. OTH maybe I just can’t see it because I’m not in the market for either vehicle!

(Quote)
+4 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:14 am

Such dates have been set and were passed before. For the specific case of EEStor, most of us are from Missouri (at least honorarily).

I’d like for the technology to be true as claimed, and for a moment, let’s pretend that it is: How long did it take Lithium Ion to graduate from it’s first military uses to cellphones and laptops, to automobiles? You know, technically, the ramp up to LG Chem’s large format Li/Ion is still in the future.

I think it is highly likely that EEStor will initially be too expensive to be the primary motive force behind an automobile. If you can make X tons of the ultra-pure Unicorn powder ™, you produce more units with smaller devices than with larger ones. I think high-drain small devices will see the light of day long before a production Zenn (they’d be fools not to make a prototype or two, but initially, it would cost more than the Tesla).

As a ’surge reservoir,’ it has a golden future ahead for all electric-drive vehicles. A 1kwh or less EEStor device would take the power demands off of the Lithium Ion storage cells: it could accept regeneration at any braking rate, and supply tire-smoking performance without stressing the primary battery. Without the need to provide such power, the Li/Ion cells could be made more cheaply. It would even allow Charge-Sustain mode to have greater efficiency by allowing the generator to maintain a true average of the driving demand, since there would be no limit to the it’s cycle-life.

This state of affairs might persist for many years before the all-EEStor car becomes economic enough. I’ll not hold my breath.

(Quote)
-11 Brutus Beefcake Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:15 am

(click to show comment)

I agree that EREV is very old technology. Absolutely nothing revolutionary about it. Been in use for decades. Looks like Fisker knows what it is doing. It’s called Superior Engineering.

Fisker +1

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:17 am

The customer will complete the IVR process

(Quote)
-10 Brutus Beefcake Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:17 am

(click to show comment)

EREV has been in use for decades. Hardly revolutionary. Is that GM Sheep odor emanating about your person ?

(Quote)
-2 Brutus Beefcake Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:21 am

No Luck needed. They have plenty of orders already.

(Quote)
Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:21 am

That beauty has a big cost with drag.
With the Karma being based on the Solstice it probably has a horrible coefficient of drag. You can’t really get away from such a large frontal area. Wide is bad, the Solstice that the Karma is built on has a CD of .45! The Karma is longer with a tilted windshield and no rear flying buttresses, it should be better but not by much.

(Quote)
-6 Brutus Beefcake Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:22 am

And you prolly believe that the Volt actually get more than 200 MPG. Ha ha hee hee. You so funny.

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:25 am

The Catfish II from Nissan is a better looking BEV IMO

(Quote)
-10 Brutus Beefcake Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:26 am

(click to show comment)

EEStor totally rocks. They have recently granted some production licenses. It’s coming…much sooner than the dumb-ass doubters that hang around this site want to believe.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:29 am

I guess all I’m saying is that there is probably a good market for a performance EREV with sporty looks; and the Fisker will cost less than the Corvette.

(Quote)
+1 jeffhre Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:30 am

I felt the car was great looking when Fisker first introduced it, but now the whole cheshire cat grin look is getting very stale looking to me. Maybe in person it wouldn’t dominate the cars looks so much to me.

(Quote)
-9 Crack Whore Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:36 am

This car is so far beyond a Volt it not even funny.

GM should ignore this car and focus on real competition. It goes by the name of Prius.

The Volt hybrid will have its hands full just trying to put a dent into sales of the mighty plug-in Toyota Prius.

Fisker +1
Prius +5
Volt -2

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:37 am

This more resembles a post you might see on this site than it does an actual article. I read it as being more “musings” than anything else.

(Quote)
-2 statik Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:39 am

Yeah, but remember those future replacement batteries will be even better than the old ones. So this car will actually get better with time. woot.

/ double woot

(Quote)
+1 Noel Park Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:40 am

Re the grin, I agree.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:41 am

DonC
“Musings” is the perfect term for it. A shame it’s published.
Thanks,
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
Herm Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:43 am

Plenty of people that can afford both cars will not want to be seen in such a flashy car as a Karma.. instead they will choose a Volt.. Comcastic not everyone is a teenager, I know, its hard to believe.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:45 am

In fact, the Karma has 4 seats with a center console in back just like the Volt.

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:45 am

Jim in PA:

Nope, I’m right there with you.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:47 am

zipdrive,
Thanks for the article citation. It’s a great example of discussion fodder at this site. Seriously, it’s excellent to know what’s out there, because we’re A) always anxious to learn and B) need to know what misinformation is out there.
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:50 am

Thanks nasaman,
That really IS a POSH rear seat!
Be well,
Tagamet
/BTW, POSH stands for “port out, starboard home” in ocean liner days.

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
-1 Noel Park Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:52 am

I hate to be out of step (LOL), but I don’t care for the looks. 4 doors in a sort of stretched GT coupe body style just does not appeal to me. Never mind the aforementioned grille.

Many have said that they would not buy the first year of any new technology such as the Volt. With the Fisker, I would suggest about 5 years. First, early adopters will clearly be the beta testers here. Second, I have limited confidence that Fisker will be around very long, so watch out for $80K orphans.

Of course I’m not in the market for 80K gee whiz cars. My goal is minimum fuel useage in a GM product, period.

Short version: Fisker? 10-88.

(Quote)
Vincent Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:53 am

959 lb/ft torque is beyond HUGE.
0 to 60 with that should be 4 seconds territory. Something isn’t right with the numbers.
Sweet looking vehicle.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:00 am

I certainly hope that’s the case.

(Quote)
-7 Thug McCalister Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:01 am

Who cares about all this EREV vs. BEV and Serial vs Parallel dribble being spewed all over this site. It is perfectly clear that this is the best EV to date. Mark It. Until further notice this is the car to beat. The bar has been raised.

Be advised future Volt owners: Do Not Park your new ghetto volt anywhere near this fine driving machine. It simple would not look good for you.
This car brings much shame on the Volt.

(Quote)
+1 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:02 am

You ARE a busy TROLL today aren’t you?

Time for you to go back under your bridge.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:05 am

Lyle did a great journalistic job in getting the City MPG number for the Karma. If the Karma number for City driving is 150 MPG then, if the City/Combined relationship is the same for the Volt as for the Karma, which is probably not true, then the Volt Combined number would be 103 MPG.

The problem is that I can’t make sense of the numbers. Usually Combined MPG is weighted 55/45 City/Highway. But even if they were weighted 50/50, you can’t have one number be 150 and have the average be 67 unless the second number is negative, which isn’t possible here. So my guess is that the 150 MPG number given to Lyle is bogus. Any other ideas?

(Quote)
Jaime Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:06 am

You might actually have a better shot at getting a Karma, based on production numbers for the Volt

(Quote)
+3 MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:06 am

We would welcome a real product with open arms Mr Troll.

A weak press release doesn’t cut it though, a real world independantly verified test would be fantastic.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:12 am

You may be right Bradyb, I thought it was the same bottom end, but could be wrong.

Certainly in the same engine family though.

(Quote)
Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:13 am

It’s called protecting the drive train. The Fisker probably is running a CTS rear diff, maybe a CTS-V rear diff. A V rear diff could really only handle about 550-600 pounds of torque. The Solstice that the Karma is based on uses just a standard CTS rear diff, they don’t hold up too well with a LS2 V8 swap.

If the Fisker is using GM’s dual mode tranny (the same as the Tahoe or plug –in Vue) that tranny would not be rated for 800’Ibs of torque.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:14 am

It certainly seems to be the best of both worlds.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:16 am

Fake statik alert.

(Quote)
+2 Jaime Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:16 am

This is no shocker, of course a Prius is cheaper to own and drive than the Volt. Its long been known on this site that the Volt will never be a cost saver, and you will never recoup the purchase cost of a Volt over a cheaper car.

Volt fans have accepted this fact and want the Volt for other reasons, but saving money or being cheap to drive is not one of them.

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:17 am

Comcastic is the latest ‘name’ for our under bridge dweller.

(Quote)
+2 Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:19 am

Fisker is GM’s customer, they’re buying the car from GM and assembling it. I hope they sell a ton, it might improve the economy of scale for the Volt or other two-mode GM hybrids. The Karma will be the only vehicle utilizing the LNF (Turbo 2.0L Ecotec) motor with the death of Pontiac and GM Performance. GM spent a lot money on that engine, I hope they get some ROI from Fisker.

(Quote)
Jscott1000 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:24 am

This is such a simple concept…why do the marketing gurus insist on these hypothetical meaningless MPG numbers based on statistics?

Maybe once these cars hit the market the automotive press, (including Lyle) will force the manufacturers to report the two numbers that we care about most, (AER and MPG in charge sustaining mode).

(Quote)
KristenV Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:26 am

TODAY Chevrolet’s Project Driveway Tweetup in Arlington, VA

http://tweetvite.com/event/projectdriveway

Chevrolet is bringing its Equinox fuel cell electric vehicles to Arlington to show folks what it’s like to drive hydrogen. The vehicles run on electricity created by an on-board fuel cell stack and the only emissions are water vapor. Chevy has been operating these vehicles in the DC area as part of Project Driveway, the largest fuel cell demonstration fleet in the world.

Come by to learn about hydrogen as an alternative to gasoline, take a ride in a fuel cell electric Equinox and chat with drivers from the Project Driveway program about their experiences. After spending some time with the Equinox, we’ll enjoy drinks and appetizers at Sette Bello (http://www.settebellorestaurant.com/). The restaurant is near Clarendon Metro Stop. Free parking across the street on N. Highland at LAZ Parking Mid-Atlantic.

Wednesday, September 9 from 6:00pm – 8:30pm
Sette Bello
3101 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22201

For more information, send us a tweet to @gmblogs, @kerryc or @philcolley.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:28 am

And with the PICC software mod found here…
http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=21189
The Prius gets even more on EV range and better overall efficiency.

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:30 am

…or jus’ a bit of ’statik kling’

(Quote)
old man Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:40 am

Herm

I agree with you. I have no interest in a car that would make this old man look like he thinks a car will turn him into a stud.

No offense ment to any other older folks. Thats just my PERSONAL opinion regarding me.

(Quote)
stuart22 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:40 am

The Karma is definitely striking from a squirrel’s eye view as per the photo above. But it looks like it’s going to be a chore getting in and out of it due to its low-slung cabin. Owners best ought to consider doing some leg squats in order to prepare the muscles that’ll be working hard raising and lowering our fat asses in and out of its seats.

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:41 am

I’d start by studying the card labeled “Hymotion Prius – Accelerated Testing” on p. 23 of the SAE J1711 that Lyle has linked:

That’s where my estimated mpg in RE mode for the Karma are coming from.

The 150 mpg city could be cherry picked from anywhere in the data. (i.e. for city mpg Fisker might only be looking at urban cycles up to (and incl) 60 miles — which would yield 165 mpg using 40 mi AER and 17 mpg CS).

I’m thinking the only real piece of info is the 67.2 mpg on the test which I’m assuming was the same cycles as listed on the p.23 ref.. If it is, — then by guestimating at the AER we can come up with charge sustaining mpg. My guess is in the 17-20 mpg category (with about a 40-37 mile AER).

(Quote)
WopOnTour Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:42 am

I dont understand why Fiskar thinks they need a 260HP turbocharged Ecotec (LNF) in an EREV. I’ve driven a Saturn Sky Redline with that exact same engine and IMO would be OVERKILL to have to spin-up that turbo and 2-litre mill up just for charge sustain mode. A 2-mode hybrid maybe, but an EREV? What are they thinking? This thing would get barely 30mpg in high demand charge sustain scenarios.

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:49 am

Yep, there you go.

170 mpg hwy on 25 mile cycles with a 6.1 kwh pack.

There’s a even a note somewhere in all that SAE stuff that mentions how the optimum software setup is when you arrive back to your charging station (i.e. garage) all of the battery has been used up. This is why customizing the software to either have it learn your typical trips or have the driver plug in his route for the day would make so much difference.

- This item also underscores why I think the series hybrid is going to have so much trouble competing with a series/parallel plug-in hybrid. You can downsize the battery on a SPPH to fit your needs and still get awesome mpg. You can’t downsize the volt’s battery– not if it’s getting the CS mpg I think it’s going to.

(Quote)
Paul Stoller Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:55 am

No, don’t smell any sheep, but I certainly do detect a powerful smell of troll.

(Quote)
Mike L Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 11:57 am

Many energy providers have traditionally had tiered pricing that lowers prices as consumption increases. The goal for that is increased sales.

However, the trend is indeed to move to tiered pricing that goes upward with use to encourage conservation. The goal there is to slow down the speed at which we need to build substantial new amounts of generation capacity.

There’s a lot up in the air right now that makes building generation undesirable — pending EPA regulation of carbon, potential new rules from climate legislation, the need for new transmission infrastructure for renewables, etc.

So, yeah, don’t be surprised if your pocketbook is used as a way to encourage you to use less electricity.

(Quote)
+1 CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:00 pm

Fukin Troll….
I’ll pull my hubcaps off and park right next to your Karma, So close you can’t open your door.

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

The main reason? — Generator Efficiency Losses.

http://powerelectrical.blogspot.com/2007/03/generator-losses-copperhysteresis-eddy.html

That, and they didn’t want a “limp home” mode.

(Quote)
+2 nuclearboy Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:01 pm

The cool thing about the Volt over the prius is that the Volt is silent and quick off the line in EV mode. You can use it to run over trolls in the road before they can even turn their head.

(Quote)
Van Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:07 pm

Yes, I know they did not call it “charge sustaining mode” but a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. They did compare it to the Prius 50 MPG, so the idea seems charge sustaining mode as that is how the Prius operates all the time.

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:07 pm

One other feature that should not be overlooked on the LEaf is the ability to graphically display on a GPS map the curcumference of you EV capability.

“competing with a series/parallel plug-in hybrid….”

You have to ask yourself this question now about the Prius. Because the Prius charges it’s batt pack from the ICE, Is it really a Prallel Hybrid? or Series Hybrid that stores energy?
Hmmmmmmm…….

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:21 pm

Ok. Now you’re just trying to mess me up.

I think as long as there’s a mechanical connection form ice to wheels, we’ll have to call it a series/parallel.

It’s when you get into those series/parallel – series (with a separate electric drive, like the bmw concept) that it really gets confusing.

On the Leaf/BEV. I think there’s significant technological change since the EV1 days that will be a notable factor in reducing range anxiety. The proliferation of GPS and connectivity (bluetooth, network data speed, smart phones, etc) will give the BEV driver lots more info and options that weren’t available 10 years ago.

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:25 pm

I agree. It’s a strikingly gorgeous car, but I don’t want a strikingly gorgeous car. I want a car that is reasonably attractive, but won’t attract too much attention. I want it to look normal. And the Volt will do that for me.

Also, in terms of quality and reliability, I’d trust GM or any major manufacturer over a newcomer like Fisker Karma.

(Quote)
Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

260′Ibs of torque at 2,500 RPMs with the LNF engine, that’s why.

(Quote)
+1 Murray Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:40 pm

Would it look hot in Robin’s Egg Blue ???

(Quote)
-1 texas Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:48 pm

I don’t care about MPG in pure charge sustaining mode. Every Volt owner and fan will also not care. Why? It’s going to suck. Trust me.

(Quote)
+1 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 12:55 pm

you can tell the foriegn accent in the that last sentences (no slight to foreigners)

“It simple would not look good for you.This car brings much shame on the Volt”

NO SOUP FOR YOU!!

you want egg roll?

of course on a $ 2 $ competitve front, the karma’s competitor from GM would be the Converj (Bring it MAximum Bob!! I want)

BTW capt Jack..I’ll take the other side….

(Quote)
Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:01 pm

not envy..admiration…kinda like you seeing and drooling overhot women..then going home to your troll wife…

(Quote)
LauraM Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:01 pm

In other news, Ray Young, the cheif financial officer at GM is supposedly leaving. I have no idea if this is good, bad, or somewhere in between. They’re looking for a replacement outside of GM.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aIc9AfVYOmj4

The important thing, IMHO, is that the board–for good or ill has become extremely involved in day-to-day decision making. And they’re doing their best to shake things up. They’re scrutinizing several other executives. And they are the ones making things difficult for the German goverment with regard to Magna’s Opel bid.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125236928548591133.html

http://www.detnews.com/article/20090909/AUTO01/909090370/GM-s-CFO-likely-out

Also, Bejing auto is financing the Saab purchase in exchange for a minority share, and they listed their “interest” in Saab’s (I.e. GM’s) technology as a reason for the purchase.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125249335025595217.html

(Quote)
-1 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:03 pm

It’s called Superior Engineering.

yep..buy a GM car (solstice), put a lotus body on it and change the drive…real fine engineering work there lou…

(Quote)
Schmeltz Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:09 pm

Ray Young is leaving? Hey, might be a good job opening for Statik if he’s interested???

(Quote)
+3 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:21 pm

He’s right

“…the dumb-ass doubters that …”

He is the dumb ass, and we are doubters…

(Quote)
+2 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:21 pm

nope..the sheep odour is emanating from your manhood…do up your zipper and it should be reduced noticably

(Quote)
+3 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:23 pm

I disagree..there is a lot of admiration here..we will accept competition, and praise the deserving…

we do NOT however like stupid troll comments…

(Quote)
Tall Pete Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:24 pm

You’re right about that. If they keep the numbers low (at 87K$, they should be), the recalls will not be too harmful.

Testing will be done by the customers paying a lot of dough for the privilege… the expectation is lower for a new car company. GM doesn’t stand equal on that.

(Quote)
+1 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:25 pm

Now this is a real carmaker

no..this is a niche car maker…they are buying almost everything from others (including GM) and installing style and a drive syste.

they are however a car designer…

It is a NICE car…

(rather have the converj)

(Quote)
+1 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

You have to ask yourself this question now about the Prius. Because the Prius charges it’s batt pack from the ICE, Is it really a Prallel Hybrid? or Series Hybrid that stores energy?

Answer: ugly

(Quote)
Streetlight Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 1:27 pm

The key to ER success is range and the engine (ICE) selected by Fisker is an excellent choice. Fisker’s ER ICE being capable (a belief based on the article) of charging to 100% (80% actual or whatever) the Li-ion SOC stand-alone addresses a serious barrier any pure EV’s faces — range. That being the case, VOLT has to take notice. In this late 2009 era of instant awareness and response to competition, I would think VOLT is pulling all stops to have an ER ICE capable of stand-alone charge to a reasonable, if not 100%, SOC. As Fisker has shown, a modest GM engine can accomplish the mission. Hardly is under 300 HP being overpowered.

(Quote)
Jaime Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 2:13 pm

Why? Because its fun! Torque rules. Sure I want efficiency, but its nice to be able to smoke the tires coming out of a turn – when needed.

(Quote)
Gary Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 2:24 pm

California officials may start to hate Toyota since they announced that they’re closing the NUMMI manufacturing plant.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 2:30 pm

I saw one of those cars in New York a few years ago at an eco-car event. I asked the GM rep where the hydrogen was going to come from. He gave me some cock and bull about it being created as leftovers from existing industrial processes.

Just when you hope GM has gotten a clue, we get another plug for Project No Hydrogen Available in your Driveway (No bad on you, Kristen; we need to get the bad news too).

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 2:35 pm

I hope that as costs fall moving forward, GM will reconsider their “40 miles and not one foot further” AER decision. My ears really perked up at “50 miles AER.”

I believe strongly that there will be a market for a less-flashy-than-Fisker EREV with greater AER (if only to get 40 real AER miles at freeway speeds with the A/C on full and the radio blaring).

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 2:42 pm

You and Caucus1 are needlessly pessimistic. I expect that the truth will shock both of you.

I do have to concede that Fiskar’s refusal to disclose Charge-Sustain mode doesn’t bode well for my point of view, that GM is sitting on a great secret, for now.

On the other hand, how much support is Fiskar getting from GM? Enough to keep quiet on this point?

(Quote)
+2 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 2:43 pm

“Every Volt owner and fan will also not care. ”

yep. but not for your reason… but because I will not use gas….this will be my work vehicle..I exrtapolated my driving and I should use about 20-60 litres (5-15 gallos) a YEAR…

(Quote)
kdawg Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 2:52 pm

I dont like the front either.

Also, is this thing RWD? I assume it is. If so, another reason I wont buy it. RWD not so good for Michigan winters.

(Quote)
DaveP Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:02 pm

Well, that would also solve the concern about blind people not being able to tell your car is approaching.
But really, the rest of us would probably rather you just settled for advertising with one of those big vinyl car wraps or something.

(Quote)
Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:07 pm

My Solstice keeps me thin, If I get any fatter I won’t fit in it.

(Quote)
Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:09 pm

Definetly, same block, heads, and valve cover from the looks of it.

(Quote)
Bradyb Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:10 pm

Why So Serious?!

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:11 pm

This is one of those times where I like to wear a “Tag” hat…

I think this may well be the plan.

(Quote)
+1 Mitch Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:16 pm

not to make fun of asians…but when I read that out loud and use the old cartoon charlie chan chinese accent, it reads like you are at some asian site being a paid troll…

LOL try it.. “you prolly” raff too…

(Quote)
DaveP Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:18 pm

Or Bob Tie Pink?

(Quote)
MuddyRoverRob Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:24 pm

it’ll definately have a ’special’ head with a modified VVT mechanisim to allow the HCCI cycle to operate. But from what I see it should bolt right up to a standard engine block.
(Upgrades required to the bottom end? Unknown.)

Wouldn’t THAT be a nice feather in the Volts cap to show up with this engine tech in the genset…

OK, thats dreaming a bit.

(Quote)
+1 DaveP Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:44 pm

What kind of battery tech is the Karma using? I was just talking with somebody a couple weeks ago who was saying they might have stretched a bit to buy a Tesla but wouldn’t because they didn’t want such a short-lived battery adding another $20k to the cost in 3-5 years. This person normally is buying cars at just under $100k, so the Karma would be right in line for him.
So, is the Karma taking sales from Tesla? Not in that case, I guess, but I think they sure could since there’s such a limited amount of performance electric cars available. It’s less an issue of roadster vs. sedan as it is “What can I even get that is electric that I can afford?” Heck at this point, it’s not even high performance vs. normal car like performance since there’s currently so little available. It’ll be interesting to see what happens as the availability of electrics increases dramatically in the next few years. It kind of looks like there’s going to be a lot of products wrestling around in about a $40k space. Fisker may have a very clever positioning between that space and the Tesla roadster space.

(Quote)
jeffhre Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:45 pm

PeteVE

“i’m an engineer and so i can understand that unforeseen hurdles can come up.”

Yes, unforeseen and tangible hurdles would indicate progress

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 3:45 pm

This suggests that the 95 mph maximum “stealth mode” speed is a software limit which was turned off at Laguna. There’s no mechanical reason why the car couldn’t go just as fast on batteries alone, but I’m guessing the range drops by almost 50% at that speed.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:00 pm

The only torque that matters for tire smoking in corners is what’s available from the electric motor. There is no direct connection between the wheels and the engine. Without software limits for “Stealth Mode,” there ought to be no difference between what you can do with or without the engine running.

If you put a turbo on the engine, fine; but all you’re doing is turning a generator at a fairly constant speed. Maybe you need that much more boost to turn the big generator you need to get the power you want; but a larger, properly-tuned and regular-aspirated engine should do that with greater efficiency (but it would be larger and heavier, which is probably why they didn’t go for that, in a car with “sporty” appeal).

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:04 pm

… for Gen III, maybe. It’s not what they said; but I can hope you’re right as well as the next Volt fan …

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:06 pm

DaveP
LOL, well when you put it that way, a vinyl wrapper sounds pretty good.
Thanks,
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
-3 Thug Henderson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:07 pm

Doofus Alert:

You obviously have no engineering skills at all. Do yourself a favor and leave the engineering to the professionals. Out.

(Quote)
-1 Thug Henderson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:10 pm

It’s about dang time they start thinner the herd of incompetent executives at this dysfunctional organization. What took them this long is the real question. In 11 more week the sh#@ will really hit the fan. I can’t wait.

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:10 pm

Mercedes 10 kwh Plug in Hybrid compares favorably to Karma on efficiency numbers (? … method of testing is unknown at this time)

“In terms of efficiency, the Vision S 500 plug-in hybrid will consume just 3.2L/100km (73.5 mpg) while emitting 74 grams of CO2/100km. This easily beats the Fisker Karma’s estimated rating of 3.5L/100km (67.2 mpg) and 83 grams of CO2/km.”

Mercedes-Benz Vision S 500 Plug-in HYBRID Concept – First Official Details
http://www.worldcarfans.com/109090921596/mercedes-benz-vision-s-500-plug-in-hybrid-concept–first

It would seem that SAE J1711 is the most likely method for testing a plug in hybrid, but it has undergone several renditions over the years, and I gather that it is not “oficially official” at this point, whatever that means.

Lyle, perhaps an interview with someone at SAE on the subject someday would help us all understand better.

(Quote)
+1 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:18 pm

I get very discouraged seeing the effects of such misinformation in other blog threads (on top of the “Government Motors” / “EV1 killer” comments).

It may well be that NEWGMCO will fail because of lies, half-truths, anti-US carmaker bias and a general unwillingness to give them any opportunity to move beyond the past.

These days, it seems like it’s only the spin that matters, and facts be hanged.

(Quote)
-1 Thug Henderson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:27 pm

You funny guy for good joke you are. LOL.
Minimum Bobby need to move over for the Karma. New Sherif in town. Bob need to get out of town quick. Best leave before high noon. Now git. This space now property of Fisker.

(Quote)
Fourier Transformer Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:30 pm

I take Fisker or Tesla over Volt.
Volt is no match for these sportscars.
Volt is grandma grocery getter…that’s it.

(Quote)
+1 RockyMountainHigh Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:31 pm

Fisker is using Enerdel batteries. Probably lithium titanate oxide prismatic cells.

(Quote)
-1 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:32 pm

We’re getting too many thugs on this site…

(Quote)
-1 Disco Biscuit Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:33 pm

Watch your language. Even trolls have feelings.
Beware: trolls run in packs. The last thing you want is a Troll Flood Attack.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:34 pm

Didn’t you used to have a different last name? I find it hard to believe that you could’ve found someone to marry you.

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:35 pm

Seems more like an army of one.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:35 pm

Ah so. So solly. No tickee no shirtee.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:37 pm

Somebody call Popeye Spinachcan.

(Quote)
Breaking News Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 4:43 pm

The new iPods are now available and Mr. Jobs is back.

Oh Yeah, and STEVE JOBS IS BACK !

He now has the energy of a 20-something-year-old and sporting his liver to boot. Life is good these days for Apple.

Zune That.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 5:05 pm

Muddy,
You say “dreaming” like it was a bad thing!!!
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
StevePA Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 5:05 pm

Jim – LOL on the grill / plankton imagery. The car is beautiful, but the grill is a bit over the top. Good one.

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 5:11 pm

Rashid ,

I usually agree with you, but not this time. 67 mpg does not sound or appear reasonable at all.

This auto ought to be obtaining several hundred mpge by the J1711 standard and would. But Fisker is wise enough to realize its cars will not be operated in a normal fashion.

As a toy of the wealthy to be seen owning; and even perhaps to drive, it will never be driven long distances or even distances sufficient to engage the EREV engine generator, unless they switch and override the operation of electric propulsion until charge sustaining mode to “sport mode” and that is what the Fisker will always be in. During that portion of operation, “Super-Sport mode” I can certainly believe their 67 mpge. But its well named. it is definitely not normal charge-sustaining mode.

As a toy it will be thrifty and sporty for 50 miles, as the full battery boosts performance of the 2.0 liter i-4 Ecotec.

Regarding “mass production”, the Tesla-Lotus was announced as going into mass production in early 2006 and who am I to gainsay that. It was significant that the 25th Tesla-Lotus was not delivered until late 2008-early 2009, three years later. “mass production” is a relative term, I guess. Like the fabled Red Queen any word they chose means exactly what they wish it to mean and nothing more; and especially not the conventional meaning most of all…

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 5:20 pm

I didn’t know the Volt was a Sports car nor was it compared to one. Whatcha smokin hommie?

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 5:25 pm

Perhaps a 1941 Ford?

Ford Hemp Car
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rgDyEO_8cI

(Quote)
CaptJackSparrow Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 5:30 pm

As long as he stays dry…… lol

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 5:46 pm

Of course, the trouble with those kind of cars is that they can lead to a limited vocabulary, man.

Cheech and Chong’s Up in Smoke – The Short Version, Man!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIwhnJ5K810

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:11 pm

“…as that is how the Prius operates all the time.”

No it isn’t at all. If you don’t know that then you shouldn’t post about it.

There is a significant difference between charge-sustaining-mode and charging-mode. The Prius operates in charging-mode. That is the the only way it can recharge the battery.

When will people learn that NOT EVERY MILE IS THE SAME for a Volt? Repeat it again ’till it sinks it.
“Not every mile is the same”… for a Volt. Some miles are preferable for other reasons. Like sticking it to OPEC OIL Sheiks or OIL Commissars. Some miles cost MORE than others. Like for the COST for the fuel to drive them.

It may be that way for an ordinary ICE, or a BEV, or even for a Prius, But not for the miserly Volt. But there is a conscious reason to the madness.

Volt favors and burns up certain kinds of miles first; namely the cheapest ones. These are the ones you purchase from the wall circuit. Only then does it burn-up charging-mode miles, like a Prius. But it even cheats there too, It tries to burn up only 20% of charging-mode miles by using charge-sustaining mode miles first.

The Volt designers designed in this miserly approach of not treating all the miles the same as they are CLEARLY NOT. Even the forsuggeta government bureaucrats figured that out.

Why can’t y’all?

(Quote)
Red Hat Gnome Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 6:47 pm

Give me a ZR1 Vette with 635 Ponies and 0 to 60 in 3.5 seconds any day over the “Fister”. Tesla with a million solder joints on thousands of lap top batteries…now that is a joke.
The Volt. It’s nice at 1/2 the price.

(Quote)
LRGVProVolt Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:02 pm

The problem with teenagers will be greater than that of blind people. Even having good hearing doesn’t seem to stop them from darting out into the street with a look whats coming later attitude.

(Quote)
Koz Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:05 pm

Makes sense for GM to keep Opel/Vauxhaul if they can, IMO.

(Quote)
250volts Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:11 pm

Jeeeeezzzzzzz pleeeeeeeaz crawl back under your friggin’ rock!!!

(Quote)
Koz Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:12 pm

I think the answer lies in their sport mode. They add the generator power to the battery power for better performance. This requires the generator output to be able to match the car’s power demands in real time in this mode. This is contrasted to the Volt’s only mode of feathering the throttle between power bands.

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:14 pm

This is by far the most significant announcement of the day, week or month.

This is a member of the Ecotec Family II with some very minor, say two-bits or maybe twenty cents worth of changes. Like ten cents for a cam grind difference. And a dime to substitute a “more powerful” CPU chip for the engine computer.

its not like any engine computer is a fast CPU in any way. Have they graduated to 16 bit technology even? The expensive stuff, the software seemed to be there already. it was good enough to let a press guy drive and he found little wrong.

Also present there was the “more powerful computer chip” and the cam grind, already present. All in all about two-bits worth of cost, to increase the mileage for all Ecotecs with DI and VVT by 15%.upward in normal driving situations.

When used as an EREV generator drive, the HCCI residency time is much longer. Probably leads to a 25% BSFC increase as that is the band it will be in 95% of the time.

Time do some REAL American Graffiti singing…

Bye bye Mr. Diesel Oh My,
Drove my Chevy to the levy
With my cutie, H, C, C eye,
Bye Bye Mr Nyschen Bye Bye,
Bye Bye Mr Audi Bye Bye

(Quote)
Koz Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:15 pm

It looks much better in profile, IMO, especially the convertible version.

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:24 pm

“…will give the BEV driver a lot more info and options that weren’t available 10 year ago.”

like a lot of colorful displays to tell him in different ways, and to see he is SCREWED. And a lot of options…

…to call a Tow Truck.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:26 pm

Capt,

Arrrgh! (TMI).
Be well,
Tagamet

Let’s Just Get The Volts’ Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS

(Quote)
stas peterson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 7:28 pm

Comcastic,

Does your Prius get 0-60 in under a dozen seconds?

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:25 pm

It is well established that real-world highway numbers for the Prius are down around 40+ mpg.
_____________________

That’s interesting spin. Yes, it is well established. But no one is interested in the older generations anymore.

THE 2010 MODEL IS QUITE DIFFERENT.

Mid-50’s is what this newest generation delivers. And that’s with a plug.

The plug-in model set to debut in Frankfurt next week can drive in highway speeds in electric-only mode.

I strongly suggest you start treating Prius as an ally in the fight against traditional vehicles.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:36 pm

Answer: SERIES-PARALLEL

A parallel hybrid is one like Insight, quite different in components and operation than Prius.

Prius already delivers the series ability in some instances and will even more so next week, with the debut of the plug-in model… which offers electric-only mode at highway speed.

Get use to the market offering a variety of choices.

The goal is to replace traditional vehicles with significantly more efficient vehicles, not necessarily any one particular design. That’s whatever can reach the middle-market in large quantity.

(Quote)
-3 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:53 pm

An ally? What have you done with the real john1701a?

I think most of us have been willing to acknowledge the Prius as an ally, it is you, Charlie H and Dagwood55 who have been unwilling to make room at the table, even on it’s own fan site, for Volt or indeed anything not Prius-like — with increasingly strident desperation.

Since I now have your attention: Though I have purchased a Toyota within the last 6 years (and considered a Prius as recently as 3 years ago), I will never do so again; mainly because of you pro-Toyo fanbois constantly dogging us here at gm-volt.com. When I became physically unable to push in the clutch on my beloved old Saturn 100+ times a day in bumper-to-bumper traffic, I considered many vehicles to replace it, but I purposely did not darken the door of a Toyota dealer. Because of you. DO YOU HEAR ME, JOHN?!!! You have cost Toyota a sale.

I didn’t vote for Ron Paul in the last election. I was occasionally challenged based on his positions, but my disregard of this candidate was based on something actually very simple. I learned all I needed to know about Ron Paul from his supporters (Any similarity to real people or situations is strictly intentional).

I beats me, frankly, why most of the board here won’t treat you as a troll. You show up here when the GM news is worst, to crow. You show up when the news is best, to pooh pooh. You constantly view every development here, great or small, through your Prius-colored glasses. No doubt you see yourself as preaching to those who have fallen from the true Toyo faith, and can surely be reasoned back on the straight and narrow Prius way. Your ministrations are not wanted.

Why have I singled you out, particularly, as the recipient of this rant? Probably because you come here pretending to be a constructive friend, but your actions consistently put you in the camp of the likes of our no-name troll, Charlie H, Dagwood55 and countless others we would be better off without.

At this point, you should really consider whether or not you need to keep coming here. You are not helping your cause.

(Quote)
Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 8:53 pm

!Wow, very insightful, thoughtful, calculated . . . you must be an engineer or something!

I was thinking more along the lines of an iphone running this app integrated with the gps and real time traffic information communicating via bluetooth to an EV’s Battery Management System.

http://www.rechargeamerica.net/progs/stateofcharge/stateofcharge.html

(Quote)
Loboc Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:11 pm

That is so…. my stomach hurts.

(Quote)
Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:15 pm

We’re sorry, the website you have contacted has absolutely nothing whatever to do with the subject matter of your comment. If you feel you have received this reply in error, please check your URL and try again.

(Quote)
-1 Jackson Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:19 pm

john1701a

Please see my reply to your post at #1.

(Quote)
+1 texas Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:42 pm

lol. Keep dreaming that the sustained mpg is going to be great. I am just looking at the base science of the system. The efficiencies just add up. No emotion or passion was considered. I’m also not even worried about it. Like I said, if you do mostly highway driving, get a different drivetrain. I think this market is rather small and easy to satisfy with proven diesel technology.

Think about this… If this drivetrain was more or even as efficient as a mechanically linked drivetrain why don’t our long-haul semis use it? Our diesel electric trains and many other kinds of specialized vehicles have been using this generator / motor drivetrains concept for decades. It’s not new.

It works great for trains because of the simplicity of the transmission and the massive amounts of torque that can be generated. These things can be fixed quickly and the motor will run for millions of miles and have very few moving parts to fix. Would that be great for semi trucks? Drivers would not have to shift though their complex transmissions? Just step on the gas and go, anywhere? Even more easy to fix, just pull out the diesel and gen set and drop in a rebuilt one. Simple! No nasty transmissions to deal with. You can add a small battery to give you that extra boost and even charge with regen and make the system even more cost effective. Why don’t they do it? Because the loss of efficiency is more expensive than the gain in functionality and ease of maintenance. It’s simply a cost issue.

Current trucks are cheaper to run because they use less fuel. If you don’t agree, why not show us why you think it has not been done, even though serial electric drivetrains have been designed into many trains, buses and other specialized equipment. Cost of the generators and motors? Would that really be that much more than a standard semi transmission and all the expensive maintenance it needs plus all the fuel savings? Remember, it would also have economy of scale because of the huge volumes of semi trucks used throughout the world.

See, your theories are falling short, crumbling, dissipating… Sorry, it’s just reality. Plain and simple. It’s OK, it will work out fine for most drivers, especially city drivers that have less than 40 mile commutes to work (20 if they can’t charge up at work).

(Quote)
Kubel Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:43 pm

Nice to see the company put out some realistic figures, rather than the intelligence insulting 230MPG number that GM released. I can’t say I like the design. It looks almost as thrown together as the Volt concept.

(Quote)
+1 texas Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:50 pm

Do you really want a site where everyone agrees with everyone on everything? I don’t. I like when strong debate happens. It’s what keeps everyone thinking and digging deep for the truth.

(Quote)
Ed M Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 9:58 pm

I doubt it would take anything away from the Volt. An extra $47,500 would certainly buy a lot of customization for a Volt. Who knows some rodder may customize a Volt to look more like the concept model, add some extra batteries for more power and put in a larger charge sustaining engine, wouldn’t that be neat. 0 to 60 in 3 seconds ?

(Quote)
koz Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:02 pm

No opportunities for posterior references either when everyone agrees

48mpg hwy, 52mpg city EPA Cycles=40 miles AER/8kwh

(Quote)
+1 Carcus1 Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:03 pm

To your point:

From what I’ve read, trains went from Diesel-mechanical to Diesel electric because the transmission maintenance was much less (not because of efficiency). Recently ,advances in transmission design have resulted in more reliability and there has been a switch back in some lighter weight trains in order to gain back some efficiency. — can’t find the exact reference to this now, but here is some related:

“Reduced transmission losses will clearly be the dominant factor for the energy advantage of diesel-mechanic stock. Compared to diesel-hydraulic stock, there are additional effects through optimised load management of the engine.

The overall energy efficiency advantage of diesel-mechanic stock over electric and hydraulic transmission is between 10 and 15 %.”

Energy Efficiencies Technologies for Railways
http://www.railway-energy.org/tfee/index.php?ID=220&TECHNOLOGYID=98&SEL=100&EXPANDALL=3

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:05 pm

What kind of strange reply is that?

At minimum, there should have been a purpose stated. Reaching millions quickly with an affordable high-efficiency vehicle is mine.

Let go of that one-size-fits all mindset. Volt can be that, as well as a desired longer range model. Offering a choice of configurations won’t dilute EREV. Don’t fear that. The more high-mileage options available, the sooner traditional vehicle production will shrink.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:10 pm

Again, please state a purpose.

(Quote)
texas Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 5:53 am

Yup, that makes perfect sense that they would go back to the transmission if the old problems are fixed.

(Quote)
Dave K. Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 6:10 am

Google fight:

Chevy Volt vs Fisker Karma

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=chevy+volt&word2=fisker+karma

=D~

(Quote)
Dan Petit Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 7:02 am

Hey Tag at 7:34 am yesterday the 9th,

Tag!!! You just nailed it for everyone. I think Fisker is being honest here. 67 mpg composite (hi performance/normal) formulations seem to be honest and accurate, with its sometimes-extreme-energy-demands bringing in a very way lower figure than the Volt 230, honestly-inclusive of the high performance modes.

Of course, 67 mpg overall in a high-performance-potency vehicle is **outstanding-of-itself**, and, for high performance, that would indeed set the bar *****far***** higher than anything else high performance. That of itself would seem to be an efficiency and technical competition point that all other high performance vehicles ought to be contrasted. (Not “compared” for similarity, but contrasted for technical efficiency differentiations).

What that honesty also does is it reinforces to us that GM has gone all out for the maximization of all types of cost efficiencies for us in Volt as best they can, and, most of all, not leaving out the
**situational efficiency**
based on what 78% of the public DOES; not drive (much) more than 40 miles a day. While, at the same time, taking very practical care to not leave the situation requiring a second vehicle, which is terribly inefficient for a huge percentage of the population.

(Quote)
-1 Jackson Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 8:34 am

You got on my last nerve because “Let[ting] go of that one-size-fits all mindset” is the one thing that you yourself have been consistently unable to do. How many times have you read “The more the merrier,” “If you drive like that maybe a Prius would suit you better,” and other such statements here? Then you attack us for being unwilling to consider the Prius as an ally in the move to reduce oil consumption. How delusional is that? Sheesh.

(Quote)
-2 Jackson Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 8:42 am

The purpose is that, as a pot, you shouldn’t be calling the kettle black. The purpose is that you should look in the mirror. The purpose is that you’re more than just “intellectual opposition” whether you realize it or not, you’re an “against-er.”

We are willing to accept the Prius as an ally, always have been. To be fair, your statements on this thread are the closest thing to conciliation we’re ever likely to see from you. All you’ve ever done here previously is to explain with maddening patience why the Volt is a pointless exercise, when there are perfectly good Priuses available.

Use the same metrics on yourself that you apply to the rest of us, and I’ll be less likely to treat you like a troll.

(Quote)
-1 Jackson Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 8:46 am

This is beyond disagreeing. This is the pot calling the kettle black. He chides us for not being willing to accept the Prius as an ally, when he himself had done everything he can do at a keyboard to consistently pooh-pooh the Volt.

He also happened to be the proverbial “straw.” I can explode without warning, on occasion.

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 9:10 am

What does that have to do with YOUR purpose?

My statements on this thread are the same as what I’ve been saying for 2.5 years now. It’s great that they are finally being noticed. But that has nothing to do with you.

What do YOU want for Voltec?

Evading the issues of price, volume, and configuration is not constructive.
.

(Quote)
-1 Jackson Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 9:23 am

All these objections could have been made for the Prius prior to it’s first release. You would have defended the idea in the face of price and availability, had you been involved at that time.

It is our purpose here to talk about the configuration of Voltec.

Your unwillingness to allow for any new idea to get past this stage shows you for the Toyo fanboi you are.

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 10:28 am

OMG, I’m starting to agree with ol’ Thug, LOL. It’s nice and cool down here under the bridge guys. Lutz?

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 10:30 am

Gas was dirt cheap back then, less than $1 per gallon.

That automaker didn’t owe taxpayers a massive amount of money.

That automaker wasn’t disregarding the needs of middle-market by offering only a high-end model.

And what’s with the “our” purpose? YOUR purpose is what I have repeatedly asked for. It appears to be just an effort to make outside opinions appear to be trolling in a extremely vague way.

Next week’s announcement must be causing more of a stir than you care to admit. If Toyota offers a 5kWh configuration, what can’t GM too?

(Quote)
Noel Park Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 10:31 am

Not gonna happen though. There’s an article up right now on the MSN news page confirming that the Magna/Russian bank deal is going forward.

It has a pretty interesting take on the overcapacity of Opel. Plants in Germany, Belgium, Poland, Spain, Portugal and Britain (Vauxhall).

(Quote)
-1 Jackson Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 12:58 pm

No, this isn’t about what I want for Voltec. You are on a gm-volt fan site promoting the hell out of the Toyota Prius, and doing everything you can to dismiss the Volt. Where you say something is at least as important as what is said.

“YOUR purpose is what I have repeatedly asked for”

What? If you shift the focus of this discussion to something irrelevant, do you win a cookie? If I were on your site regularly disparaging the Prius, you might have some justification for such a demand, but not here. Even so:

I’m on the gm-volt site hoping to help launch the Voltec system, as a new and potentially better way of shifting the US off of petroleum for transportation.

I’ve had a lifelong interest in electric cars, and the Volt looks like the best thing going towards that end, so far. As the Prius approaches it’s asymptotic limits, Voltec, at it’s very outset, has a far more sweeping potential future. It is not an electrically assisted gas car, it’s a gas assisted electric car. It ought to be a lot more fun to drive than a Prius. But this is a lot less important than a lifelong interest in electric cars.

The Prius didn’t make economic sense, at first, especially when gas was so cheap, as you point out. You had to go on a waiting list for months to get one, even after it came to market. The Volt faces the same hurdles, but you seem to think that it should not be allowed due to what? ‘Government Motors?’ You are fully aware, I’m sure, that Toyota has and continues to benefit from the largesse of the Japanese government; but you can’t vote or pay taxes there … can you?

There. I recommend the chocolate chip.

PS: What announcement?

(Quote)
john1701a Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

So, you can draw all the personal attention to me you want and I’m not allowed to ask anything about you. Whatever.

Claiming my request for GM to offer an additional configuration of Volt is somehow an attempt to dismiss Volt altogether doesn’t make any sense anyway.

(Quote)
-1 Jackson Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 1:48 pm

You’re not reading a one-post response-thread. I’ve been reading your posts for about 2 years. Even a clever commercial gets stale when it’s repeated that long, and yours hasn’t been all that clever.

I’m not sure what you mean by “request” unless it is this:

“Next week’s announcement must be causing more of a stir than you care to admit. If Toyota offers a 5kWh configuration, what can’t GM too?”

… which appeared quite late in the present thread. To which I must repeatedly ask: What announcement?

The Volt carries a 16kwh pack of which 8kwh is used. Are you requesting a Volt with a smaller AER? That may come in time, but I suspect the move will actually be towards greater AER.

As to drawing personal attention, this isn’t the current thread. No, it wouldn’t be appropriate to hijack a new thread for this. This is just between us (and maybe Lyle or a couple of others). Don’t keep acting like the innocent, aggrieved victim. You really can’t admit that you’re nothing but a pro-Toyo fanboi, can you?

(Quote)
-1 Jackson Says:
September 10th, 2009 at 2:14 pm

Okay, you must be referring to this:

http://green.autoblog.com/2009/09/10/frankfurt-preview-more-on-toyotas-new-lithium-ion-plug-in-priu/

It just popped up on the current thread. By the way, you ought to hop over there and just look at how us evil, exclusive, unfair Volt fans are responding to this announcement.

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory November 18, 2009
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1038564_thnk-picks-indiana-for-u-s-factory) […]
Jason M. Hendler
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010 November 18, 2009
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010: _Link_... […]
Jason M. Hendler
Any news about the NiMH battery? November 18, 2009
Now that there are new owners of the patent, is there any indication that they will allow its use for electric cars? Like many others, I believe that... […]
Desertstraw
energy requirments of modern electric vehicles November 18, 2009
does anyone know any credible sources of information concerning the electricity requirements of modern electric vehicles per mile of travel and the... […]
crubkings
30% reduction November 18, 2009
The Belgian governement decided that if you buy a car with less then 60g/km emmision you get a 15% tax reduction and you can write it off for 100% if... […]
filiep

Fisker Karma EREV Expected to Get 67 MPG Combined Fuel Efficiency

237 Responses to “Fisker Karma EREV Expected to Get 67 MPG Combined Fuel Efficiency”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts