A bunch of people are upset that the base Model S (160 mile) doesn't support Tesla's future superchargers, that the 0-60 of the lower models are slower and that the tech package is 3750.SoCalGuy said:
Ah - these folks should count their blessings! They obviously haven't been through the Fisker processAnOutsider said:A bunch of people are upset that the base Model S (160 mile) doesn't support Tesla's future superchargers, that the 0-60 of the lower models are slower and that the tech package is 3750.SoCalGuy said:
Also some grumblings about the higher cost of the signature option (which I'm torn on).
They have less car body to paint.SoCalGuy said:Btw Tesla only charges an extra $750 to $1,500 for special paints!
0-60 time is actually 4.4s!!!dennis said:If you include all of the options that make the Model S comparably equipped to the Karma, as Tesla has done with the Signature Edition, the price is $87,900+$7500 tax credit = $95,400.
Karma pricing for EcoSport+metallic paint = $113,000.
The Tesla is 15% cheaper, 10% faster (5.6 vs. 6.3 to 60mph) and much roomier in both interior and storage.
Karma is much better looking and there is no range anxiety.
You would hope that both can be successful in the marketplace, especially if Fisker gets their execution act together under their new executive management.
All new products look their best before they are delivered That's where the phrase "don't confuse selling with installing" comes from.SoCalGuy said:Ah - these folks should count their blessings! They obviously haven't been through the Fisker process
With the bad blood between fisker and tesla I don't see that happening. I agree though. While I don't 100% love the karma's styling, it's definitely more striking than what Franz has come up withDeep Ocean said:I could easily see a merger between Tesla and Fisker in future years. Fisker stying and range anxiety resolution, Tesla manufacturing and model S/Nina. Think about it. Makes more sense than one might think.
Agree on all points. It is too bad that Fisker had a falling out with Musk, because imagine if all those tech features where wrapped in a Karma body! Killer!!!Sigurd said::heart:Nice car and I might buy one! But to me, the rear end is Jaguar XF like. The front has a prominet T which fits in with the Taurus of yesteryear grill. The side view is between Saab for the middle and and latest Audi hind quarters. I just don't see a very distictive design like a Karma, a Lamborghini or BMW. Looks a bit Asian to me, even though that's not a bad thing, just a little repetitive.
That will definitely not be the weight of the 85 kWh-version, but of the one with the smallest pack.SoCalGuy said:
Right, the 85kWh version is expected to weigh about 400 lbs more, maybe less. So, that's still at least 1000 lbs less than the Karma. Tesla is reported to be using 3.1AH 18650 cells in the 85kWh pack, versus 2.2AH cells in the 40kWh pack, so while there are more cells, there are not that many more cells. The higher power cells weight penalty is less than 4% per cell, btw.Dutch said: