The Fisker Karma sedan. Image: Fisker Automotive

Extended-range-electric-luxury-sedan builder Fisker appears to have hit a speed bump on the road to success. Faced with back-to-back recalls on its Karma sedan and running short of funding, the start-up automaker was forced to lay off employees and contractors in both California and Delaware. Fisker would also like to renegotiate the terms of loans from the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), in order to access additional funding previously committed.

Gone are 40 employees and contractors from Fisker’s Anaheim plant, representing about six percent of the workforce. As Green Car Reports tells us, layoffs in Wilmington, Delaware (where the Project Nina vehicles are under development) were proportionally higher, with Fisker letting go of 26 employees, representing over a quarter of the workforce.

Fisker obtained $529 million in low-interest funding from the DoE under a program designed to help advanced technology vehicle manufacturers. Accessing the funding required meeting certain milestones, and Fisker has so far tapped some $193 million in DoE funds. Missed deadlines on Project Nina, Fisker’s code name for its next range of electric vehicles, have frozen further access to DoE funding, and the company is currently attempting to renegotiate terms to obtain additional funds.

Like the Chevrolet Volt, the Fisker Karma sedan is a series hybrid, built to run on battery power or power from a gasoline-fueled, range extending generator. Unlike the Volt, the Karma is aimed at luxury buyers, and has a price tag over twice that of Chevy’s extended range EV. In generator mode, however, the Fisker Karma is only rated at 20 mpg combined, far less than the Volt’s combined rating of 37 mpg.

In the Karma’s defense, it’s a stunning design with far more performance potential than the Volt. The cars are aimed at different buyers in different markets, and Fisker is reportedly working on filling existing Karma orders (although the company hasn’t released sales figures to date).

Is this recent trouble just another temporary setback for Fisker, or is it a sign of things to come? We suppose that all depends on how well the Karma is really selling.

The 2012 Nissan Leaf electric car. Image: Nissan Motors

Just when you thought that legislators in the Golden State had come to their senses, something happens to reaffirm our opinion that California may be the least-car-enthusiast-friendly state in the country. After showing some degree of sanity by agreeing to adopt the proposed EPA mileage standard of 54.5 mpg by 2025, California has announced that, by 2025, a minimum of 15.4 percent of sales must be of electric, plug-in-hybrid or hydrogen powered vehicles.

To frame that mandate with a dose of reality, let’s look at the two commercially available electric cars. In 2011, Nissan sold 9,674 Leafs in the United States; excluding trucks, that represents just 1.6 percent of its car sales in the United States. Chevrolet sold 7,671 Volts, which represented just one percent of its new car sales in the U.S. market.

Do we need to tell you that legislation requiring manufacturers to sell X percent of green cars is absurd, akin to requiring grocery stores to sell 15.4 percent of food from the produce aisle? While the penalties for non-compliance aren’t clear (yet), automakers can’t dictate whether or not customers will buy a “green” vehicle over a more conventional one. Sure, they can influence this via marketing, but at the showroom level it’s always the consumer who has the final say, unless, of course, the freedom of choice element is removed.

As Autoblog and Automotive News (subscription required) report, some ten additional states (including New York and New Jersey) will likely follow California’s lead, requiring automakers to significantly ramp up sales of green vehicles. Automakers, oddly enough, back the plan, but with good reason – by mandating sales of electric and plug-in-hybrid vehicles, manufacturers get an artificially inflated market to sell into.

The 2012 Fisker Karma. Image: Jay Leno's Garage

Chances are good that you’ve heard of the Fisker Karma. Recently launched, the car has made appearances on CBS’s “Two And A Half Men,” but it’s already been the subject of two voluntary safety recalls by Fisker. Like the Chevrolet Volt, the Fisker Karma is an extended range electric vehicle, but unlike the Volt is aimed at the luxury market. It’s not a sport sedan, but it is a legitimate grand touring car, with a price tag (north of $100k) to match.

Designed by Henrik Fisker, the Karma is powered by lithium-ion batteries driving two rear-mounted electric motors. Combined, these motors produce the equivalent of 400 horsepower and 1100 pound-feet of torque, and on battery power alone the car has a range of up to 50 miles. When the batteries run down, a gasoline-powered generator kicks in, providing power to the motors and giving the Karma a virtually unlimited range (assuming you stop for gas every 250 miles, that is).

With as much torque as a Bugatti Veyron, you’d expect the Karma to be quick off the line. It is, but the car is hampered by its 5,300 pound curb weight, so the run from 0 – 60 takes just under six seconds. Top speed is 125 miles per hour, which should be fast enough for the type of buyers Fisker has in mind.

Since Jay Leno already has a Chevy Volt, he has a sense for the design behind the Fisker Karma. Is he impressed by the extended-range EV grand tourer? Check out this episode of Jay Leno’s Garage (in its new format) to find out.

The Tesla Model S sedan. Image: Tesla Motors

If you prefer your electric cars with a bit more luxury and style than the Nissan Leaf, there’s good news on the horizon: Tesla has announced pricing on its upcoming Model S sedan, and it looks like the car will span quite a price range. On the low side, the Model S with a 40 kilowatt hour battery pack (good for a projected 160 mile range) will start at $57,400, presumably without options. If you qualify for the $7,500 electric car tax incentive, you can (theoretically) get the car for $49,900, even if that’s not what you’ll pay the dealer.

Opt for the 60 kWh battery pack, good for up to 230 miles, and the base price increases to $67,400, while choosing the 85 kWh pack (good for up to 300 miles) will set the base price at $77,400. The 85 kWh battery will come standard in Tesla’s Model S Performance variants, which also get a higher-performance voltage inverter and carbon-fiber exterior trim. At a base price of $87,400, the Performance model isn’t for the light of wallet.

If money is no object, Tesla will also offer a Signature model (starting from $95,400) and a Signature Performance model (starting at $105,400), which will be built in limited quantities of just 1,000 units. Tesla clearly knows who its customers are, so as Left lane News points out, the Signature models will be the first to hit the market.

Tesla has some innovative plans to minimize the inconvenience of charging, including a twin charger system and a QuickCharge feature that will top off the battery pack (to 80 percent of capacity, presumably) in just 45 minutes. If you can’t wait that long, the Model S is designed with swappable battery packs that can be changed out in just five minutes.

You may be able to reserve a Model S today, but you won’t be taking delivery for a while. The projected on-sale date is mid-2012, but we wouldn’t be surprised if that slipped to later in the year.

Model S Alpha Hits the Road from Tesla Motors on Vimeo.

Turn on the news these days, and it seems like every media outlet is alerting you to the dangers of the Chevy Volt extended range EV. If you believe the far right, the Volt is a ticking time bomb, waiting to spontaneously combust in the garages of unsuspecting owners. It’s also part of a secret coverup, since GM (allegedly) conspired with the NHTSA to delay notification of the Volt’s fire danger.

We’re well versed with the Chevrolet Volt, and Harvey, Malcolm and myself all have extensive seat time behind the wheel of the series hybrid. To put it bluntly, the risk of fire under normal circumstances is so small that we’d consider it insignificant, and all of us have parked Volts in our driveway or garage without undue concern. If you think there’s a fire risk, remember this: you’re probably driving a car that’s filled with highly flammable gasoline, which you park in your garage each and every night. Are you worried about this fire risk?

As Left Lane News and Fox News point out, the likely source of the fires in post-crash-tested Volts is battery coolant. In liquid form the coolant isn’t flammable in any way; dried, however, a component of the battery coolant (likely a salt) will conduct electricity and can potentially cause a short in circuit boards.

Part of the NHTSA crash test procedure involves rotating a car 90 degrees following the side impact testing. In gas-powered cars, this is done to check for fuel system leaks; as it happens, the side impact test caused a battery coolant leak in the Volt. While no short-circuits were caused by the liquid coolant, the dried coolant is thought to be the cause behind the fires in crash-tested Volts, which occurred weeks after testing.

GM is in the process of designing a solution, which may involve changing the coolant, reinforcing the battery pack, encapsulating the affected circuit boards or a combination of all three. In the mean time, our advice is this: don’t buy into the hysteria.

The all-new 2012 Chevrolet Volt has entered into its second year of production remaining mostly unchanged with the exception of a few tweaks. Having been on American roads for a year now, the new Volt continues to be among the most fuel efficient cars on the market.

The debate continues on whether the Volt is a verifiable hybrid, electric car or just what some of the more car-centric techie folks refer to as a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Either way, the Volt has embarked on a lonely road. This very road is well-traveled if you are one of the lucky owners of General Motor’s most technologically advanced vehicle yet.

I reviewed the 2011 Chevrolet Volt earlier this year with a clear open mind spilling copious amounts of data. This year, after many breakthrough but friendly debates with other automotive journalists, I start to come to an understandable conclusion of the Volt’s long-term effectiveness and general perception from the public. The new Chevrolet Volt is a well-built 4-passenger plug-in hybrid electric vehicle in a class of its own that anyone can drive and appreciate.

The all-new 2012 Chevrolet Volt enters into its second production year carrying over the same design but adding new standard features such as an updated keyless ignition/entry system. The new keyless entry system adds front door buttons for quick keyless unlocking and locking. Other changes include putting the previously standard (for 2011) Navigation and Bose stereo system packages on the options list. I also took note to a traction control disable button on the roof panel which could not be found on the 2011 model.

If you are not all familiar with the Chevrolet Volt, then it can be easily understood if you think of it as an electric vehicle with a gas-powered generator that keeps electricity pumping when the battery becomes depleted. Although the Volt is a much more complex object, to the driver everything is simplified to the point that you can jump in and drive to any destination that a paved road will take you. In other words, if you are in within 300 miles of a gas station, then you will have no issues reaching your destination as fast as you can legally drive.

On the flip side of things, the new Volt can be used solely as an electric car giving drivers a range of 25 to 50 miles on a fully charged battery without using a drop of gasoline. Once the battery power is 70% depleted, the small 1.4-liter four-cylinder gas engine kicks in as a power source for the electric motor.

I found my new 2012 Volt, after depleting the usable battery range, still kicking over to battery power under low-speed conditions. Most times, such as when stopping at a stop light, the engine kicks off to save gas much like a hybrid would. The major difference in the electric motor drivetrain in the Volt versus a hybrid is the Volt’s 111 kilowatt 149 horsepower and 273 pound-feet of torque electric motor powering the front wheels. The robust electric motor handles all of the duty of propelling the 3,781 pound vehicle. The internal-combustion gas powered engine does not provide power to the wheels except under rare high-speed conditions through planetary gear-set.

Aside from educating consumers on how the Chevrolet Volt operates, you must know that Chevrolet has created a perfect blend between a hybrid and electric car. The new 2012 Chevy Volt takes the best of both worlds and masks hard-working components under sleek sheet metal and driver information displays.

The all-new 2012 Chevrolet Volt has a relaxed ride where the suspension seems to be a bit on the soft side. Power output comes on instantly, hence the instant 273 ft-lbs. of torque available from the electric motor. This gives the Volt an edge when power is immediately demanded. Unfortunately, with only 149 horsepower, the power seems to flatten out as you reach cruising speeds at full throttle. Of course the Volt is no drag racing machine by any means, but it could benefit from a bit more horsepower to keep that burst of power momentum going. The Volt’s handling abilities are predictable and over-all the vehicle feels somewhat balanced. Braking, off-braking and deceleration engagement feels like any other gas-powered vehicle with a torque converter and automatic transmission. General Motors went over the Volt’s power management and control system with a fine tooth comb that it gives a driver an experience not much different from other cars.

As far as any new software updates, the new 2012 Chevrolet Volt does not drive different from the previous 2011 model year. If GM made any changes in power management, they are unnoticeable. I did notice that the electric range seemed to have improved slightly where I was able to get 39 miles from a full charge versus the 2011 Volt’s test of 34 miles earlier this year with similar driving conditions.

On the inside things are ultra quiet until the slight buzzing hum of the 4-cylinder engine kicks in when charging power is needed. It is a rather odd feeling when you cruise at highway speeds and the gas engine is mostly out-of-sync with the position of the gas pedal. If you ever demand acceleration power, don’t be alarmed to hear an abrupt acceleration of the gas engine attempting to recuperate used battery energy.

When the new Volt is running exclusively off of battery power, things tend to get quiet to the point that pedestrians may not hear the Volt creeping up on them in a parking lot. For that reason, GM has a dedicated “horn twiddle” or what is called a pedestrian friendly alert. Essentially the alert, accessed by a button on the turn-signal stalk, softly chirps the horn as to not startle pedestrians but instead cautiously warn them of your presence. On the older 2011 Volt, the pedestrian alert was activated together with the headlight flasher instead of being a separate function found in the new 2012 model.

The new 2012 Chevrolet Volt’s interior remains mostly unchanged. The touch-sensitive center-stack buttons look to be larger than the 2011 model but still take a while to get used to even if you are a pro at using your iPhone or other touch device. Simply put, you will end up at some point and time mistakenly pressing buttons. The audible button feedback is a necessity as it is a confirmation of the touch-sensitive buttons being depressed.

The four seating configuration is fine for 4 adults but do not expect to have left-over space to for more than 4 large bags in the rear hatch. The leather bucket seats offer excellent support. The padding for the seats is a bit on the thin side but remain to be comfy enough for a 300-plus mile trip.

The new 2012 Chevy Volt gives the driver enough viable data to make on-the-fly driving style adjustments for the sake of conserving battery power. One can even put the A/C or heat into an ECO mode to conserve energy. Basically all vehicle equipment runs off of the main battery’s power so every bit of energy conservation adds to your electric range provided you have charged the Volt beforehand.

Estimated charging times can be accessed at anytime for either the supplied 120 volt portable charger cord or via an optional 240 volt station charger. Charging times for the standard 120 volt charger take about 9 hours while the optional $490 240 volt station charger takes only 4 hours.

Owning a new 2012 Chevrolet Volt will put you in a league of your own in knowing that you get on average of 93 mpg. That figure is attainable if you factor in several full charges. On gas alone you will expect to get about 37 mpg, which was precisely my figure for around town gas-only driving. However, I did manage to considerably lessen my mpg figure to about 32 mpg following a several abrupt stops and starts just as an inquisitive test.

Modestly priced at a base price of $39,145 you get a fairly good deal if you consider the $7,500 tax incentive for the purchase of the Volt. My test vehicle was fully loaded with Bose audio, hard-drive based Navigation, heated leather seats up front and review camera/park assist. The as-tested price of my 2012 Chevrolet Volt came in at $45,170.

Copyright: 2011 AutomotiveAddicts.com

SPECIFICATIONS

• Price: Base Volt $39,145 As-Tested $43,485 *without $7,500 federal tax credit
• Engine/Motor: 1.4-liter 4-cylinder (acting generator) & 2-motor electric – 149 horsepower 273 pounds-feet torque (instantaneous)
• Drive: FWD (Front-Wheel-Drive)
• Wheelbase: 105.7in.
• Total length: 177.1in.
• Total width: 70.4in.
• Total height: 56.6in.
• Track: f/r-61.2/62.1in.
• Headroom: f/r-37.8/36.0in.
• Legroom: f/r-42.1/34.1in.
• MPG est.: 95 mpg city/93 mpg highway – *all contingent on a charged battery – AutomotiveAddicts.com fully-depleted battery estimates: 41 mpg city/37 mpg highway
• Fuel tank: 9.3 gallons
• 0-60mph: 8.9 seconds
• EPA cargo volume: 10.6 cu.ft.
• Curb Weight: 3,781

BMW has gotten a fair amount of exposure over its i-Series electric cars since originally debuting the Concept Vision Efficient Dynamics prototype in 2009. Unlike brands that show a concept and then abandon the idea as too complex or too expensive, BMW will put both the i3 and the i8 into production, with expected availability in late 2013. The i3 is designed to be an urban commuter car, with a limited range and modest performance. The i8 exists at the opposite end of the spectrum, as a no-holes-barred performance coupe that happens to be be fuel-efficient and green, too.

As appealing as the concepts may be, there are still some ugly truths to face about electric cars. First up is their limited range: in the case of the i3, the battery-only version of the car is expected to have a maximum range of 100 miles, similar to a Nissan Leaf. In the real world, this translates to as few as 35 miles, depending upon environmental conditions and driving style. Also, there’s the issue of recharging in an urban environment to overcome, since most city-dwellers won’t have the ability to plug their cars in overnight.

Opt for BMW’s REX range-extender in the i3, and most of the problems go away. Range is doubled, which should give the i3 driver a maximum range of between 160 and 200 miles (again, condition dependent). BMW isn’t clear if the i3 can be driven like the Chevy Volt, which can go from coast-to-coast if the owner tanks up every 300 miles or so.

The other ugly truth about electric, range-extended electric and plug-in hybrid cars is their cost. Batteries are expensive, and so are lightweight materials. BMW has made significant advancements in material science (namely with carbon composites), but they’re not saying what the i3 or i8 will ultimately cost. This much is certain: don’t expect to snap up an i3 for the same price as a $35,200 Nissan Leaf.

What’s you take on BMW’s i-Series? Is the world ready for a premium electric car brand, and would you be willing to pay the difference to buy a BMW EV over one from Nissan, Chevy or Mitsubishi?

Honda's EV-STER electric roadster concept.

One of the highlights of this week’s Tokyo Motor Show is the debut of the Honda EV-STER electric roadster concept. Bold styling sets the EV-STER apart from the rest of the Honda lineup, and it may be an indication that Honda is listening to critics who find its current product line boring and uninspired.

Honda isn’t saying that the EV-STER will definitely be built, but it would keep with the company’s goal of being a “green” automaker. According to the details published by Honda, the EV-STER is rear drive (and, presumably, rear-motor), uses carbon materials to reduce weight and has a maximum range of nearly 100 miles on a charge. Honda claims the EV-STER will hit 37 miles per hour (60 km/h) in five seconds, before topping out at a maximum speed of 100 miles per hour. The 10 kW lithium-ion batteries can be recharged in less than 6 hours on household current, or less than 3 hours on 240V.

Honda's EV-STER electric roadster concept.

While the performance may not be enough to attract those who favor speed over saving the planet, it’s a starting point. If the EV-STER is built, tuners will find a way to add more powerful motors, hack the controller to send more voltage to the motors and even find ways to add additional batteries for more power or increased range. Tuning is tuning, regardless of whether you’re talking about an electric motor or an internal combustion engine.

If Honda builds the EV-STER, it has to be priced attractively (say, below $30k) and it has to handle like a true sports car. The CR-Z “sports hybrid” proved that very few buyers want a car that’s neither fast enough to be entertaining nor fuel-efficient enough to be green, and Honda can’t afford to make the same mistake twice.