I just came across this article, my apologies if it's been posted already (.i.e, if it's old news).


The company, which will show off its Fisker Karma next week at the Frankfurt Auto Show, said that the plug-in Karma will consume about 3.5 liters for every 100 kilometers of driving, according to calculations developed by the Society of Automotive Engineers. There are 3.785 liters per gallon, giving the Karma a rating of 100 kilometers per 0.925 gallons of gas, or 108.1 kilometers per gallon. In miles, that comes to around 67.6 miles per gallon. (It is unclear at the moment whether or not the figure includes the electricity required to charge the battery: We are checking.) The average car in the U.S. gets about 22.4 miles per gallon. The Karma is a serial hybrid: It drives on electricity for the first 50 miles, but a gas engine recharges the battery while the car drives.

The Karma uses GM's turbocharged, direct-inject 2.0L four-cylinder to run its generator. The drive train produces 408 horsepower and can propel the car to 60 mph in 5.8 seconds and onto to a top speed of 125 mph.

If the Karma can get 67.6 MPG, maybe the Volt can get 50 MPG? Of course, the article leaves a lot of unanswered questions, namely:


(1) Is this City, Highway or Combined.
(2) Does that value include the first 50 miles on electric (50 miles = 80 Km) -- does it use 3.5 litres to go the last 20 KM (12.427 miles/.925 Gallons = 13.4 MPG)


Hopefully, the answer is not (2).

Cheers!


http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/fiskers-karma-to-get-67.6-miles-per-gallon/

They should put the Volt / Karma in range extender mode and run the usual mileage tests and tell us how they do.

They should put the Volt / Karma in range extender mode and run the usual mileage tests and tell us how they do.

That would be nice wouldn't it? It will happen sooner or later (but probably later). I'm sure both manufactures will want to fine tune the S/W up to the last minute to maximize the MPG rating in charge sustaining mode for the EPA test. Thus, I'd expect them to keep the final numbers close hold until then. Still, it would be nice to know what it can achieve now with an asterisk to denote a development value! :-)

That would be nice wouldn't it? It will happen sooner or later (but probably later). I'm sure both manufactures will want to fine tune the S/W up to the last minute to maximize the MPG rating in charge sustaining mode for the EPA test. Thus, I'd expect them to keep the final numbers close hold until then. Still, it would be nice to know what it can achieve now with an asterisk to denote a development value! :-)



Um, you both realize it depends on the size of the battery and the amount of that battery that they use. Right? The more millage, the shorter the life (assuming both have the same size pack) or the more the pack will cost (and weigh).

The very expensive Karma can use the most expensive battery technology and as much of it as the vehicle dynamics allow.

Well we know there is no way on earth they are going to get 67 mpg in range extender mode excluding any AER miles. This number means nothing but PR.

Um, you both realize it depends on the size of the battery and the amount of that battery that they use. Right? The more millage, the shorter the life (assuming both have the same size pack) or the more the pack will cost (and weigh).

The very expensive Karma can use the most expensive battery technology and as much of it as the vehicle dynamics allow.

Has that been decided -- how the EPA is going to test? Will the MPG value be based on combined EV (battery) and ICE, or will they split the two out and keep them separate. I thought the court was still out? I was referring to pure MPG in CS mode. I get the fact I won't use any fuel in the Volt if I drive less than 40 miles, and if I only drive 50 miles my equivalent MPG will be quite high (100+ MPG), but want to know the true MPG in CS mode, just because I want to know. :-)

Um, you both realize it depends on the size of the battery and the amount of that battery that they use. Right? The more millage, the shorter the life (assuming both have the same size pack) or the more the pack will cost (and weigh).

The very expensive Karma can use the most expensive battery technology and as much of it as the vehicle dynamics allow.

BTW...I understand the Karma has a larger battery. I understand it to be in the neighborhood of 22 KWh. So I also assume they are using approximately 11 KWh to get the 50 mile EV range.

I want to see the CS mode mpg also, but at a sustained 40 mph :)

Happy New Year everyone!

The mileage should read 40 AER / 50 MPG CSM, so that we can calculate our own savings.

I want to see the CS mode mpg also, but at a sustained 40 mph :)

Happy New Year everyone!

Agreed, but I'd really like to know what it does @ 80MPH, cuz that's what we drive on the interstate out here!!!:D (SD, ND, MT)

The mileage should read 40 AER / 50 MPG CSM, so that we can calculate our own savings.

Seriously, they really need to post both. Anything is just totally meaningless numbers.

How many miles do you drive a day?

Subtract 40, divide the rest by 50.

So simple even most people in MizuRa can figure that out if they grab a calculator.

... giving the Karma a rating of 100 kilometers per 0.925 gallons of gas, or 108.1 kilometers per gallon. In miles, that comes to around 67.6 miles per gallon.That's terrible mileage for a Serial Plug-In Hybrid


The drive train produces 408 horsepower and can propel the car to 60 mph in 5.8 seconds and onto to a top speed of 125 mph.And this is the reason why the Karma's mileage is so terrible. To much power, way to much power.

_-=

That's pretty darn good mileage for 408 hp.

So, will the Karma be a vehicle for the masses?
Will it make a good family car?