According to the EPA, this is also a subcompact:
Don't think that it will be an issue one way or another.
-- Fab.
Don't think that it will be an issue one way or another.
-- Fab.
Can't get mad at the EPA. Their rules are clear, and fisker compromised interior space for their design.brian said:So, the EPA in it's great wisdom (which was obtained by the Wizard of Oz apparently) has decided that the Karma is a sub-compact. Whatever.
What I want to know is will this rating help insurance rates or hurt? Or not matter at all?
Allstate still has no idea what the Fisker Karma is, so I still don't know what this thing is going to cost to insure.
-Brian
Farmers supposedly has an EV discount. It's worth looking into.Mycroft said:The insurance should be about the same as a BMW X6 M since they're about the same weight and price.
http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/guzzler/index.htmMycroft said:I don't think there's a "guzzler tax" anywhere in the U.S. Is there?
Well, actually, they do use a lot of logic, it just tends to be hemmed about by rules written by politicians.mattjs33 said:By logic, I'm guessing EPA will use the Karma's 52MPGe rating, or perhaps an average of that with it's 20MPG gas rating, but honestly I never expect a government agency to do anything logically. ...
The tax is calculated based on overall MPG regardless of the size of the car. Any car that gets more than 22.5 MPG overall is exempt from the tax. Assuming they start with a fully charged battery in stealth mode, since most of the test covers city driving, it is hard to imagine the Karma even coming close to dipping below 22.5 MPG, but this is Fisker we are talking about, so all bets are off.The Gas Guzzler Tax for each vehicle is based on its combined city and highway fuel economy value. Manufacturers must follow U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) procedures to calculate the tax. The calculation uses a formula that weights fuel economy test results for city and highway driving cycles (the combined value is based on 55% city driving and 45% highway driving) ... [T]he combined city and highway fuel economy that is used to determine tax liability is not adjusted to account for in-use shortfall [calculated reductions to MPG that are meant to account for real-word conditions such as cold starts, hills, and high acceleration and speed], so it is higher than the mpg values provided in the Fuel Economy Guide (www.fueleconomy.gov) and posted on the window stickers of new vehicles..
That's the way it used to work. Thus GM could balance out their large trucks and SUVs by slinging a bunch of Aveos onto the public. Under the new rules though, each model line must meet the rating of its class. Thus a fullsize pickup will have a standard relative to fullsize pickups. And a subcompact car will have a different standard.Fabulist said:CAFE standards apply to the manufacturer's fleet, not each individual car. In the case of Fisker, assuming they can get their act together, by the time the new standards take effect, most of the fleet will consist of Ninas and Nina derivatives that will (most likely) be more efficient than the Karma because of lower weight, more efficient ICE, etc. I doubt that this will be a big issue. Getting the cars built and in customers' hands is another story.
-- Fab.
Brian, are you married? That makes a huge difference. I have shopped around and I have never seen USAA's rates beat. And I have never had an issue with claims either. Of course, I have only claimed once for someone smashing in my passenger door at a dealership, and two windshield chips each on a different car.brian said:I hope Allstate does a little better for me because even my $150k Aston only costs me about $1000/year. Multi-car discounts and all that obviously, so maybe that matters.
-Brian
![]()