Find Reviews by Make:
Why build the sexiest-looking “green car” to date, only to advertise it using cobbled-together promo clips and a royalty-free techno beat? Other than the fact that several production delays indicate that every available dollar should go towards actually making the Karma production-ready, of course. [via Jalopnik]
12 Comments on “Fisker Karma: The Car That Changes Everything Except Advertising Cliches...”
Read all comments
You have to love the succession of images where you see a guy sketching w/a Sharpie, and the next thing is the car rolling on the test track. Design is easy!
That little clip at 0:22 of a guy planing a full-size clay model to shape makes you wonder: do they still build those things, and by hand? Surely the big automakers at least have some kind of laser-burning gizmo that will convert CAD to 3-D models. Couldn’t Fisker rent a few minutes on it?
All the big boys have one of these:
The 5-axis machine that “benders” describes is expensive, and the time to produce that car on that machine is very, very long.
My company owns a little 3D printer that takes 2 hours just to print a 2 cubic-inch part. The Tarus video shows how slowly the car forming process is.
The technology is out there, but I doubt Fisker can afford to utilize it. If they had it, they would have shown it in the video.
They (the car industry at large) do still employ a crew of highly specialized clay modelers to work on various design directions. While the basic shape of the car can be milled out, it takes a skilled craftsman to work the surface to a quality fine enough to cover with dinoc or paint. Most of the time, those are what we see when they unveil a new shape or prototype model at a show.
Those folks that work the clay usually build their own tools and have developed their own unique methods that vary from modeler to modeler.
Ahh yes.
The defense of buggy whip makers, err, human clay sculptors, versus the CAM equivalent.
My CAM never tires. Never needs a raise. Or a break. Or gets arrested for beating his wife after a few too many PBRs.
Clay models won’t exist in ten years. Neither will jobs for people who sculpt it.
Clay isn’t Michaelangelo art – it is just an outmoded way of executing prototypes.
I have a bad feeling about Fisker.
Quantum Technologies builds their drive train. They have no experience in that area. Their finances are next to a scam. Investors in Fisker (including the US taxpayer) are also investing in Quantum. I don’t think that is going to work out.
Tesla, for all its faults, at least has a thousand cars on the road. Yet people have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into Fisker based on nothing but a business plan and a clay model.
I have a bad feeling about this.
If Fisker’s finances are a joke, I guess they need a punchline.
“No, Little Johnny, I said Fisker, not frisk her.”
Ouch. Even if you were going to use stock footage and some photos, you could do far better than that – and FFS at least license an Armin Van Buuren track, or something. Or maybe something by Gofman & Tsukerman. Just switching their song with that one would probably have done wonders…
Jalopnik spot is dated. Go to http://www.fiskerautomotive.com. New spot (or “Film” as they call it) on the site. Stunningly beautiful!
Interior is mid-90s GM. The steering wheel specifically. The bad color combo too. Hope that’s preproduction.
I think Tesla’s Model S is hotter. [cue the Elon Musk haters]
I detest stereotypes of the design process, boiled down to a few seconds of hand sketches and serious-faced managers selecting fabrics.
And Daanii2 is right: Fisker looks pretty shaky to me also.
I hope the Model S sees the light of day. If I don’t win the Powerball, I’d still love to see one (and maybe test drive it).