After testing the first Karma Revero, the American press has been exceptionally tough and critical with the model. Its enormous weight conditions it severely and after 3 years of development to re-launch it has hardly changed or improved Fisker’s original Karma.
After spending about 4 years out of the market , three of which are still under development which a major upgrade, the supposed Fisker Karma has returned to the market, although new identity, and is now called Karma Revero , although Simple sight seems not to have changed too much.
After the Fisker Automotive debacle – commercially launched the Karma in 2011 and went bankrupt in 2012 – the Chinese group Wanxiang Group took over Fisker’s assets in a lengthy legal process, only to restart the project Karma, Which ended up taking the name the company, with executives coming from Tesla and Cadillac to the front of the same , supposedly with carte blanche to act. Now, 3 years later, Karma Revero is already on the street, and the result seems to have been much worse than expected.
In theory, the Revero should have reached the market soon after it was in the hands of the Wanxiang Group, however, once launched the project had to be delayed considerably. According to the statements of the company at that time because they had to redesign more than they initially thought to make the model acceptable. Apparently, they have not succeeded.
The new Karma seems to be a complete disaster.
After being presented recently we were able to verify how, at least externally, the model had not changed anything since its initial presentation at the beginning of the decade , and in terms of its specifications, despite the time elapsed and the enormous technological advances of these last years , In terms of performance either. The only palpable change has been the color chart, now has new color options.
The first tests done by the US press – probably the only one that comes to prove it – have not been too good, at best they have described it with a succinct “it worked” , which we can translate as “worked”, in the Most literal sense of the word. But a recent Bloomberg article signed by Hannah Elliott has been quite critical of the supposedly new model (to put it mildly), highlighting the huge shortcomings presented by Revero.
Do not buy a Karma Revero, instead buy a Tesla. Or anything else . Hannah Elliott on Bloomberg.
Revero has not been able to satisfy anyone.
The title already describes perfectly the content of the article: “Do not buy a Karma Revero, instead buy a Tesla. Or anything else . ” After a week with Revero, the best thing that Elliott came to say is that only from some angles seemed almost beautiful. The only points in favor of the model were that it had an electric power train and that it looked expensive, no more, but no more beautiful than other similar or cheaper models.
The main problems seem to have been its heavy weight, officially declared 2,450 kilos (heavier than a Ford F-150 pick-up) that severely condition it to accelerate or move, in addition to its mechanical performance, only 80 kms of autonomy Electric thanks to its batteries of 21 kWh, a consumption of 11.76 liters / 100 kms once it is put into operation the 4 cylinders of 2.0 liters that it does of generator when the batteries are exhausted and a maximum capacity of acceleration quite discreet, 5.4 seconds for Complete the 0-96 km / h.
All of these figures are markedly lower with respect to not only rival models but also considerably cheaper models. As Elliott points out, any Tesla Model S is faster and has much more electric range and even the Chevrolet Volt has much lower gas mileage. Compared to luxury models in its price range, $ 130,000 base price, Revero is less service and more expensive.
Revero seems to follow Karma and will have a short life.
As for his driving sensations, the Bloomberg article’s description is rather hard: “It ‘s like chewing sand . ” The high weight of the model, in the words of Elliott, made him believe that he was starting with the parking brake. Other means that the Revero, such as Motor Trend, have been able to cater to have been much more benevolent with the model, but certainly their figures on paper, although they might look good even at the beginning of this decade, are now completely out of context .
After several years of development, the update does not really bring anything new to the performance level with respect to the original model and aesthetic level, even taking into account that it is a subjective criterion, it is still a model that came to the market six years ago And that if it had continued to be commercialized it would have suffered a more than logical aesthetic facelift.