Fisker Fires Force Recalls Again

It's not the people it's the car. It's 100% pointless outside of its green cred, its not hugely luxurious or fast, its good looking but not exactly above and beyond other exotics, there is no point for that car to exist other than rich douchebags who want to show off being green.
 
Eh, it's a rolling R&D platform. Nothing wrong with something experimental being commercialized early, except for the fire thing. Might as well make money off of excitable rich greenies while they work out the kinks.
 
prizrak said:
It's not the people it's the car. It's 100% pointless outside of its green cred, its not hugely luxurious or fast, its good looking but not exactly above and beyond other exotics, there is no point for that car to exist other than rich douchebags who want to show off being green.
Click to expand...

Why do you have to be a rich douchebag to want an electric car? Why do you have to be a rich douchebag to want an electric luxury sport sedan? And why does this car have to be the most luxurious, the most exotic, or the fastest to be desirable?
 
SpitfireMK461 said:
Why do you have to be a rich douchebag to want an electric car? Why do you have to be a rich douchebag to want an electric luxury sport sedan? And why does this car have to be the most luxurious, the most exotic, or the fastest to be desirable?
Click to expand...
As the old joke goes you don't have to but it helps.

It's very simple, it is NOT an electric car it's a serial hybrid (like the Volt). It is NOT fast at all (from their own site: Top Speed (Limited) 125mph, Acceleration 0-60 mph 6.3 sec), I haven't sat in one but from what I seen it's no more luxury/comfort than anything 7 series. It is marketed SPECIFICALLY as a sustainable/eco friendly vehicle (again their own site says that), which it is NOT (it has an ICE and an electric motor and a ton of batteries, that is not good for the environment). The car is all show no go, it's just there to show people that you are "responsible".

And finally if one wants an electric sports car/sedan there is the Tesla, which is actually 100% electric and was built to perform from the get go. Oh and it didn't take gov't loans and then build cars that set themselves on fire overseas...
 
prizrak said:
And finally if one wants an electric sports car/sedan there is the Tesla, which is actually 100% electric and was built to perform from the get go. Oh and it didn't take gov't loans and then build cars that set themselves on fire overseas...
Click to expand...

No it just produces junk and or vaporware built on someone else's chassis; ruining it with weight, and that likes to brick itself more often than an android phone. It's even more of a weeniemobile than the Karma. If nothing else at least the Karma has more range AND useability than the Tesla, which can best be compared to a fat person scooter in both distances to travel and storage space.

And 0-60 in 6.3 while not a supercar is still pretty good. It's about the same as an older SL500, and no one ever said those were slow.
 
Last edited:
HatePersonified said:
No it just produces junk and or vaporware built on someone else's chassis; ruining it with weight, and that likes to brick itself more often than an android phone. It's even more of a weeniemobile than the Karma. If nothing else at least the Karma has more range AND useability than the Tesla, which can best be compared to a fat person scooter in both distances to travel and storage space.
Click to expand...
It might be a crap car but it's not really marketed as a green mobile, it's just marketed as an electric sports car, which it is...

And 0-60 in 6.3 while not a supercar is still pretty good. It's about the same as an older SL500, and no one ever said those were slow.
Click to expand...
That's current V6 Camry specs....
 
Last edited:
HatePersonified said:
And 0-60 in 6.3 while not a supercar is still pretty good. It's about the same as an older SL500, and no one ever said those were slow.
Click to expand...

Here's a hint - the older SL500 was slow by modern standards. It was a heavy grand tourer.

A 1996 XJS with the 'small' 4.0L I6 (no blower) did 0-60 in 6.7 with the autotragic, and nobody called those fast.
 
Last edited:
Re: Fisker Fires Force Recalls Again

HatePersonified said:
No it just produces junk and or vaporware built on someone else's chassis; ruining it with weight, and that likes to brick itself more often than an android phone. It's even more of a weeniemobile than the Karma. If nothing else at least the Karma has more range AND useability than the Tesla, which can best be compared to a fat person scooter in both distances to travel and storage space.

And 0-60 in 6.3 while not a supercar is still pretty good. It's about the same as an older SL500, and no one ever said those were slow.
Click to expand...

The Model S has seating for 7...it's not small in the slightest. More importantly it wasn't hit with the ugly stick like the Karma.
 
I've seen enough of these around town.... they look better in pictures than in person. My bias is showing, I realize, but I don't care. Just file this car in the category of Jay Leno's terrific quote from a TG episode (the one with the Honda FCX Clarity) about how people buy it because "we want everyone to see the good work we are doing anonymously" (I may have cocked that quote up a bit).
 
HatePersonified said:
No it just produces junk and or vaporware built on someone else's chassis; ruining it with weight, and that likes to brick itself more often than an android phone. It's even more of a weeniemobile than the Karma. If nothing else at least the Karma has more range AND useability than the Tesla, which can best be compared to a fat person scooter in both distances to travel and storage space.

And 0-60 in 6.3 while not a supercar is still pretty good. It's about the same as an older SL500, and no one ever said those were slow.
Click to expand...


The Model S has the more trunk (and frunk space) than my Subaru. Due to the drivetrain and battery pack being in a skateboard configuration, it has great amount of space. Model S is also rated for 293 or so MPGe and as the technology progresses the distances will increase.
 
Bhatman said:
The Model S has the more trunk (and frunk space) than my Subaru. Due to the drivetrain and battery pack being in a skateboard configuration, it has great amount of space. Model S is also rated for 293 or so MPGe and as the technology progresses the distances will increase.
Click to expand...
Rated, schmated. Nothing that runs on batteries runs for very long.... and that's just items with one tiny battery, let alone a great hulking thing like a car, with thousands of the little bastards. Until a battery powered box can run for 500 km, then fill up in a matter of minutes, like oh, say, an internal combustion engine, we're going backwards, and these things will never amount to more than toys for fashionistas and stupid members of the general public. I'll believe Tesla's claim when it's independently verified.
 
What does it matter how long the battery lasts when you are someone who doesn't drive the car enough each day to use it up?
 
SpitfireMK461 said:
What does it matter how long the battery lasts when you are someone who doesn't drive the car enough each day to use it up?
Click to expand...
For the people who only need an urban runaround, it doesn't. But there are plenty others who have long daily commutes for which every trip in these cars will be a nail-biter. And forget every using them as long road trip cars. Like I said, unless that major problem is addressed, these will never overtake the common IC engine car.
 
British/Columbian said:
Rated, schmated. Nothing that runs on batteries runs for very long.... and that's just items with one tiny battery, let alone a great hulking thing like a car, with thousands of the little bastards. Until a battery powered box can run for 500 km, then fill up in a matter of minutes, like oh, say, an internal combustion engine, we're going backwards, and these things will never amount to more than toys for fashionistas and stupid members of the general public. I'll believe Tesla's claim when it's independently verified.
Click to expand...
They really do need to stop with this battery malarky and get on the hydrogen fuel cell thing pretty much yesterday. Same benefits of being electric none of the downsides...

SpitfireMK461 said:
What does it matter how long the battery lasts when you are someone who doesn't drive the car enough each day to use it up?
Click to expand...
That's fine for fun cars like the Tesla but I think B/C was talking more along the lines of general public.
British/Columbian said:
For the people who only need an urban runaround, it doesn't. But there are plenty others who have long daily commutes for which every trip in these cars will be a nail-biter. And forget every using them as long road trip cars. Like I said, unless that major problem is addressed, these will never overtake the common IC engine car.
Click to expand...
Even then you might be pushing it, as an example the Nissan Leaf is rated for 73 miles, that's not using A/C or heaters or w/e else. I routinely make a trip down to my friend's place in Queens that's a 22.5 mile drive in each direction (for math lazy 43 miles round trip). So a fairly normal drive for NYC is more than half of the car's maximum range.

The other day I went to visit someone on LI (same island as Brooklyn/Queens but not part of the city itself), another common thing a lot of people who live in NYC do, the trip there alone is 62 miles.

Current state of BEV's basically limits their market to people like a few of my co-workers, they live in the suburbs outside the city, drive to the train station and then take a train into the city, they also own houses where they can plug in the cars. Anything outside of that very specific to the North East use case and you are paying quite a bit for very little.
 
Last edited:
There is no point in discussing this car in terms of the "general public". It's like talking about a Lamborghini for a soccer mom. Every electric car comes with the inherent characteristic that the charge is short lived. It's not just for fun cars like the Tesla. If you have a family but live in an urban area, here is a useful electric sport sedan for you.

Please stop trying to label a car as bad because it doesn't fill every role possible. And of course BEVs have limited markets. Expensive cars also have limited markets.
 
SpitfireMK461 said:
There is no point in discussing this car in terms of the "general public". It's like talking about a Lamborghini for a soccer mom. Every electric car comes with the inherent characteristic that the charge is short lived. It's not just for fun cars like the Tesla. If you have a family but live in an urban area, here is a useful electric sport sedan for you.

Please stop trying to label a car as bad because it doesn't fill every role possible. And of course BEVs have limited markets. Expensive cars also have limited markets.
Click to expand...
We are not labeling any specific car as bad, we are labeling the actual technology behind it as a step backwards regardless of what car it goes into. The problem is not the Leaf or the Tesla or any other BEV, the problem is the technology itself, it just cannot serve as a viable replacement for ICE. I have said this before there is no point in wasting energy and resources on a technology that could never fully replace ICE, especially not when similar but better technology that could exists (HFCEV).

Don't forget that the vehicle in question is not a BEV either, it's a serial hybrid.
 
BEVs are a niche product, they don't need to be able to fully replace ICEs. A BEV is superior* for short trips to an ICE. By having a hybrid, you have the niche ability of the BEV on short trips without having to worry about running out of juice. If you drive more than a BEV can handle, than it doesn't make sense to buy one, or even a hybrid, as you can get better ICEs for that. But if you are an urban dweller and you have the money, there is little reason not to get an electric/hybrid car*.

*In theory. There have been bad BEVs/hybrids that cannot be justified at all, but that goes for most technologies.
 
While valid I would say that this is somewhat short sighted, sure for a certain group of people BEV can cetainly be a viable alternative but why bother? We have a realistic replacement for ICE, which is hygrogen fuel cells like the Honda Clarity. You get all the benefits of the much smaller and easier to service drivetrain and insane amounts of torque but you can also fill it up in the time it would to fill anything else up.

I mean think of it this way, we used to have bows and arrows then someone came up with a crossbow but that didn't replace bows and arrows because it still had some serious drawbacks. Then we came up with gun powder and rifling and eventually sealed cartridges and bows and arrows along with crossbows were obsoleted. BEV is the crossbow in this case, just not really up to the task.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top