Fisker Karma TV ads hit the LA airwaves
By Nilay Patel 
posted March 14th 2009 9:01AM
posted March 14th 2009 9:01AM
posted March 14th 2009 9:01AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
pahila
doosra ;) (pun:murali)
Nobody cares, gas prices are cheap now anyways.
Heard of GLOBAL WARMING? Nah I didn't think so....
GLOBAL WARMING IS A MYTH!!!!
FURTHER STUDY IS NEEDED!
God how can you say that? it is almost hurtful your lack of concern.
Whether or not global warming is real, action needs to be taken just in case. It makes more sense risk-wise:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF_anaVcCXg
How long do you want to bet they'll stay cheap?
I don't trust the idea of global warming after the cold winters I've had, but I certainly agree with people that greenhouse gas emissions are still at a high level. Global Warming....not, Greenhouse Gas emissions...yes
@David
Extreme weather is not a sign of a balanced ecosystem is it? It is believed that this cooler winter and hotter summers, tsunamis, hurricanes, tornadoes and so on are signs of a bigger problem. Perhaps all you guys are right, maybe this is a waste of my time and of scientists resources, after all many argue that our chance to turn global warming is long gone. Watch towards the end of this video:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/david_deutsch_on_our_place_in_the_cosmos.html
Globle Wobble?
Just throw some more ice cubes in the ocean...
@iKurt Mark III
@KAIKAI
You both better Shut the F up than prove once again that Apple fanboys are ignorant jerks, who only care about their shiny polished toys with a fruit logo on it.
@ leo. i think you got the wrong idea here...
0-60 in 6.0 seconds?
Wow, I think my city buses can do better than that!
It's 0.1 seconds slower 0-60 than the Genesis Coupe. Take that how you will. ;)
0 - 60 in whatever doesnt really matter in LA freeway traffic anyway
And a mind blowing .8 seconds faster than the Hyundai Sonata.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4c2aSliUi8w
Actually, it has been unofficially clocked at 5.7 seconds which is just faster than a Mercedes C350 sport and about 0.5 slower than a 335i while being faster than an A4 3.2 and 0.2 slower than an A5 3.2. It's not competing with your Hyundai or your mom's Camry, but even if it was, it gets up to 100mpg, which is, last I checked, better than theirs.
Its a gorgeous car and I hope the best for Fisker and co. I at least hope he fares better than a certain JZ DeLorean...
Yeah, seriously. My car cost $30k, gets 30MPG, and goes 0-60 in 5.5s. Won't the Karma be like $100k? At least at that price the Tesla goes 0-60 in 4 seconds flat, which is MUCH faster and up there with the fastest of cars. Dude above comparing it to a hyundai? Ummm, this isn't a hyundai, and if i spend $100k on a car i DON'T want hyundai to be the closest comparison!
-Taylor
Taylor - First you should count the doors, then make a comparison. A Corvette Z06 is faster than my 550i. Let's race to dinner with your significant other and another couple.
Do the same comparison between the Karma and the Tesla roadster...
PJI
Taylor, why don't you tell us exactly what you drive so we can decide if you've made a valid comparison?
Here's where I think the Karma slots in:
Fisker Karma - est. $90,000 - 5.8 seconds 0-60mph
Mercedes S550 - $90,000 - 5.5 seconds 0-60mph
BMW 740i - est $80,000 - 5.6 seconds 0-60mph
Audi A8 - est $80,000 - 5.9 seconds 0-60mph
Now your prices might vary, and different sources post different times, but it is easy to see that the Fisker Karma is accurately priced, powered, and equipped to fit in the luxury sport-sedan category. Positive points can be added for sheer newness (rich people always want the newest thing), the eco-friendly drivetrain and interior, and the fantastic design by Henrik Fisker.
Luckily for Tesla they actually produce a sportscar.
This is pretty sub-par stuff. Still can't believe that the last tagline reads "Eco Chic".
When the original Tesla was announced, it was important to make an electric car sexy because people just didn't care. Few short years later things have changed. I think most people now are aware of the need for better "fuel savings", whether it's by means of a well made hybrid, an electric car, or something else. In addition, I think those that care, saw that it is indeed possible to make a sexy and sporty electric car, i.e. the point was made. So now, I think it's about time all these companies started working on proper electric vehicles for the people who can't afford "teslas", instead of continuing these "we wanna make a 'cool' electric car (oh but it's gonna cost more than your house)" shenanigans.
Oh and by the way, only people I've seen capable of shooting a proper car ad are the folks at Top Gear. They can make the most boring, ho-hum, hatchback look sexy as hell. Seriously, car companies should start contracting the Top Gear crew for their ads, that is if they wanna be successful of course.
Damn Straight! When is someone gonna build me a no-frills, smartcar sized, plug-in electric car, that can go 60mph, with a range of 80 miles, for under $12K?
I've had my love affair with muscle cars, I've driven pickup trucks that get 6mpg, yeah right now I don't care about gas prices, but lately the shitty used cars I've been buying have breaking down on me. Why? too many moving parts, give a me a bare bones, electric car, dc motors require no maintenance, NO MAINTENANCE, think about it. If I can get a car that will get me to work and back, maybe to one other place on an overnight charge, at a reasonable price, I would buy it in a heartbeat. If I had a daily-driver that cost little to nothing to operate, then maybe I could afford to save up for a good restored classic american car for long road trips.
Oh well, I won't be ranting about this so much in a couple weeks when I can drive the motorcycle again.
You have a point, but no one's going to buy a fugly car either. Besides the Tesla and this, pretty much the entire EV/plugin market has been completely fugly, meaning that hardly anyone would be caught dead driving one.
I got to say I'm a bit let down by the new pattern of the solar panel, I like the previous one better, it was far more sophisticated.
1. The electric sportscar is a tiny niche that it's fully filled by the Tesla. Drop it until they can be as affordable as say, a gasoline counterpart.
2. Why does the (uber expensive) push to go green have to overlap with a damn recession!?
Well, more consumer spending does help the economy, and at the same time it helps the environment.
New tech is expensive. It's easy for everyone to say "oh why don't you just make an el cheapo EV everyone can afford, rather than making these expensive sports cars?" But they are running a business, they need some initial profit or their company will fold before things have even started. Even if the technology is technically possible to be made affordable, it'll require mass production, and these small companies just don't have the capital to do mass production.
So they can't just "drop it" until they can make it affordable. Making these more expensive cars are critical to the goal of eventually reaching affordable models.
And we are on Engadget. We should be the crowd that understands things start expensive and eventually reaches affordable.
eco chic? oh god, that made this commercial 10% less interesting. (even if this car is actually chic and eco)
Ok that's nice, so where's the cheap electric car that this country needs right now?
It's coming soon. http://www.milesev.com
HAHAHAHAH!!!!
You actually think Obomber wants cheap reliable electric cars?
Are you mad?
They are already finding ways to tax people on distance rather that energy!
FACK!, they might even start to tax bicycles and foot power.
@iGoon#2
You are spot on: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/21/obama-nixes-mileage-tax/ lol.
That's a sedan, not a coupe.
what an ugly badge. look's like wolverine's claws minus the middle one.
I love the "extreme weather" argument. So...heavy rain? Global warming. No rain? Global warming. High wind? Global warming. No wind? Global warming. Cold winter? Global warming. Warm winter? Global warming.
Global warming is a scam and fully 50% of the scientific community says it is BS (the 50% that aren't receiving gov't grants). Weather is cyclical, and the average temperature of the Earth hasn't changed more than 1 degree in more than a billion years. Dig it up, this information is all over the place, I'm not going to bother with the link game.
YES, emissions need to be monitored. YES, recycling programs are good for everyone.
But "Global warming" is a greenwash religion that is out of control. Come to your senses people.
Oh please.
Where did you pull that 50% number from? Your arse is generating so much hot air it's probably responsible for 50% of global warming all by itself... and yeah, I made up that 50% statistic. Sound like a familiar strategy?
If you found links that support your claim, they're lies. If you found links that support your claim that were written by climate scientists (as opposed to economists, geologists, scientologists, or somebody else who knows fuck all about the issue except where to find the money-teat), they're still lies and I'll be surprised. Sure, there are lies all over the place. Welcome to the internet.
I guess I expected readers of a technology blog to be intelligent, but I'm continuously disappointed. I'm not saying you have to agree with proposed actions on climate change but the argument has moved on - long ago. Intelligent sceptics are no longer saying there are no increases in CO2, because that's now known to be false. They're no longer saying the increases in CO2 aren't human-generated, because that's now known to be false. They're no longer saying that increased CO2 doesn't result in warming, because that's... you get the picture.
If you want to argue against taking action on climate change, or against the opinions of those who propose strong action, there are plenty of remaining arguments that don't contradict the basic facts. Please try using those instead.
To start with, some of the possible effects of global warming are not really certain, and individual events can't be attributed to global warming. Severe heatwaves across Europe killed tens of thousands of people a few years back. But we periodically get heatwaves anyhow - global warming might make them more likely (or it might not, depending on the region and other details - 'global' warming is the known reality, not as in 'it will uniformly get warmer in every single place' but as in 'on average the world will get warmer'). A hot summer is still just a hot summer in the same way that a fairly cold winter is still just a fairly cold winter. And go ahead and be sceptical about claims that Hurricane Whatever was 'caused' by global warming. It wasn't - at most it was 'made a bit more likely/a bit more powerful' by global warming and I don't think even that is really convincingly established yet.
Or you could take the altogether safer route and make arguments that don't get involved with the science - something that everyone is qualified to do even if they don't have any understanding of that science. For instance, you could argue that it's better to spend on adaptation (sea defences where necessary, changes in agricultural practice, etc) since China and India are going to keep increasing emissions even if the West stops doing so.
And while I'm posting a rant... I see you're signed up to the 'global warming conspiracy' theory. That's an interesting one. Let's play follow-the-money: where are the vested interests here? Well, the world's largest manufacturer of wind turbines is Denmark's Vestas. 2008 revenue €6bn, profits €500m. Compare that to ExxonMobil at $477bn revenue, $45bn profits. If scientists want to promote a particular scenario purely in order to get grants, which scenario should they be promoting? Guess.
Yes! My arse! Way to start off with a credible, scientific claim. You can take the sarcastic douchery route, and spend all day formulating your lengthy comeback, but global warming is still a greenwash scam.
From your post, so far we've learned:
a) You enjoy limey slang
b) All my links (though I didn't post any) are lies
c) You expect Engadget posters to be intelligent = agree with you, drink the Kool-Aid
d) Increased CO2 over urban areas (which comprise less than 5% of the entire planet surface) is somehow affecting the rest of the planet in a way that will KILL PEOPLE SOON!
d) Europeans die in heatwaves because of global warming, not shortsightedness, bad health or being ill-prepared
We've also learned that nothing short of taking your dumbass to the South Pole to examine glacial melting will change your mind, since the Internet is full of lies (does that include your post?), common sense is out of the question, so why bother?
Cheers mate.
First off, I work at Tesla, and we welcome the competition (although as a plug in hybrid, this car isn't quite in the same market as our fully electric cars). The more people that are aware of alternatives to gas powered vehicles, the better. Please note that this is just my opinion, so don't go copy/paste this and say you have a new official quote from Tesla
Secondly, (and again this is just my personal opinion), I think this car is kinda ugly. I especially don't like the nose. It reminds me of a character from "Finding Nemo."
As you were. Oh, and PCs rule and Apple sucks. (did I get that right? just trying to fit in...)
It's not so much that PCs rule and Apple sucks... it's just that lots of Apple fans tend to be blindly supportive, opinionated and very vocal.
Apple fanatics are the equivalent of BMW drivers. A lot of them are simply buying the brand, more than the features offered by said manufacturer.
Tim. First of all, I want to thank you for your Tesla car. It is good move to the clean future. Secondly, my opinion consists of three parts:
1. Karma's design is much more beauty than Tesla's. I think 90% will say the same (for me this is just like first gen. Lotus Elise vs Maserati Quatroporte). I love both this cars, but in the matter of beauty...the obvious choise
2. Karma is not you opponent, unless you are developing now some new Tesla 4-seater luxury car ;-)
3. Apple rules ;-)
P.S. I am not working at Fisker. I am even not living in the USA. Cheers.
Tim. First of all, I want to thank you for your Tesla car. It is good move to the clean future. Secondly, my opinion consists of three parts:
1. Karma's design is much more beauty than Tesla's. I think 90% will say the same (for me this is just like first gen. Lotus Elise vs Maserati Quatroporte). I love both this cars, but in the matter of beauty...the obvious choise
2. Karma is not you opponent, unless you are developing now some new Tesla 4-seater luxury car ;-)
3. Apple rules ;-)
P.S. I am not working at Fisker. I am even not living in the USA. Cheers.
P.S.S. Come on, guys, this is beauty, state of the art technology car, which can carry about 4 seaters AND can do 60 for 6 sec. Why are you compare this with BMW 3 series or so... They are just not in the same category.
letstakeawalk is right. Read his comment above
They lost me at "coming soon'. Don't these guys realize that the eco/electric/new-wave car market is so polluted with "coming soon", that they'd be better of keeping their mouth shut. After years of BS hype I am not interested until they are *selling* real cars. Thank you Tesla for being the first exception to the rule (but you certainly had more than your share of BS press releases too). You can't compare Fiskar to anything because there are NO DAMN CARS. I still can't see why Fiskar (or Tesla) spend even a dollar on PR. Every car they'll be making for over a year is already sold. The only explanation that makes dollar sense is that the PR is to scam investors. I hope that's not true, but if I were running either company I would spend zero on PR until the time came when I actually had to go find customers.
Oh, and BTW, the Fiskar Karma *is* butt ugly. They took the worst from the new BMW styling (and there's plenty of "worst" to take). The front looks like the Joker's mouth.
Made in Finland
Yes, made in Finland, with American technology. Just like about everything else made in Finland. Happy?
Made in Finland
Soon GM and Chrysler can move their production here as well because they sell so few cars and make their money from taxpayers pockets like most companys there at the moment...
Happy?