Official EPA Figures Show Revero Electric Range, Efficiency Way Below Karma’s Estimate


…or maybe not (via KarmaAutomotive at time of press)

Buy the plug-in hybrid Karma Revero and you’ll actually spend $500 more in gas over 5 years than the average new car sold today. Selling point? No way…

Official EPA figures reveal that the Karma Revero gets horrible gas mileage for a PHEV, extremely low MPGe ratings and returns way below Karma’s advertised electric range figures.

There’s no win here. We’re hugely disappointed by the numbers put up by the Revero and, in fact, have a hard time recommending this plug-in over a comparable standard hybrid or even a more efficient gas vehicle, that is unless you can keep the Revero operating in electric mode for most of your commute.

Karma Revero EPA Ratings

Making matters even worse is that the Revero requires costly premium fuel and has a tank size of just 10 gallons, which means you’re going to be hitting up the gas station very often on a long trip. Karma Automotive had originally pegged total range at up to 300 miles, the EPA number says 240. Adding insult to injury, the Revero is the only 2018 PHEV listed in which you’ll actually spend more on fuel over a 5-year period than the average new car sold today:

Buy A Revero, Spend $500 More Over 5 Years On Fuel Than Today’s Average New Car

Karma was initially promising 50 miles of all-electric range for the Revero, but EPA testing has confirmed a combined figure that’s way lower. Here’s the graphic showing all-electric range, as well as the cringe-worthy MPGe figures:

As seen in the image above, the Revero returns a combine electric range of 37 miles, which is well below the automaker’s estimate of 50 miles.  The MPGe comes in at 60.

In the composite MPGe category, the Revero gets 34 MPGe city, 37 MPGe highway and 35 MPGe combined.

Karma Automotive’s current brochure for the Revero is also a tad optimistic (click to enlarge)

Moving on to raw fuel economy numbers, the Revero fares perhaps even worse. It’s been a long time since we’ve seen a PHEV with figures this low (just as an example the BMW 740e nets 27 MPG):

Ouch…These figures may be expected from a full-size truck, but not from a PHEV that’s presumably much more aerodynamic and supposedly focused on fuel economy.

Sadly, the new Revero, though offering decent all-electric range, fails in every other efficiency category.

And while we know the testing methods change over time, we thought some of the numbers were pretty familiar, so we decided to look up the old 2012 Fisker Karma specs and do a little side-by-side comparison:

2012 Fisker Karma, 2018 Karma Revero

Lastly, we have this screen grab of a few “comparable” plug-ins to share:

Categories: Fisker / Karma

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

36 Comments on "Official EPA Figures Show Revero Electric Range, Efficiency Way Below Karma’s Estimate"

newest oldest most voted


Of course, as always, if you rarely drive more than 37 miles a day (like a gen 1 Volt), the mediocre gas mileage becomes mostly irrelevant. I assume though that max power in the Revero requires the gas engine engage so you might be tempted to dip into that more often…

The electric mileage is crap too. Only 60 MPGe is embarrassing. I guess this is a performance car, but still…

It does not even perform very well either…

It seems they improved the AER, but not the efficiency. Still, a huge fail for almost 150K car.

Now let the mockery begin!

Mockery Night In Canada?

Damn, what a fail! An EV that burns MORE gas than the average car!

20 MPG on gas power is pretty bad, however it might be a bit of a stretch to worry too much about this because this isn’t the average car:
1. People who buy $150,000 luxury vehicles don’t tend to care about MPG.
2. The typical $150,000 sports luxury vehicle gets bad MPG.
3. This is not being positioned to compete against Tesla. It is being targeted one notch upstream and more exclusive buyer that is buying on style and can afford whatever they want. So in that market, my opinion is that taste in design that matters more than MPG as well as the air of exclusivity. In that person’s mind the S has become passe perhaps. They’ll park this in the custom built storage barn next to the Maserati.

Well, if exclusivity in the number of vehicles purchased is the crowing point, then the specs on this vehicle is going to make it VERY exclusive!

Yeah, this will be the car under the cover, parked next to the Maserati. The daily thrill ride will be a P100D.

All those people are very stupid, lacking IQ.

Nothing beats a Tesla.

So Who do you think is in the market for this car? Unlike the $100K+ brands which are sold for the badge, the “Karma” name is a complete unknown.

The only thing the company is famous for is going bankrupt, and a mediocre founder.

Compare something like the Rimac — certainly not a well-known name, but a few people who can afford it will buy because of the engineering and performance. What does the Revero have? No such thing as an unknown high-end luxury brand.

i knew , evs are a hoax. They all cost more than a small gas car. It’s not with that that we will change the climate or conterreact peak oil or stop the devastation caused by ethanol and jatropha bio-diesel.

The devastating jateopha bio-diesel scandal, that is changing the climate all by itself, as we speak!

Somebody Stop the jatropha curcas L. oil extraction, it is devastating the climate! Please end the abuse of saturated/unsaturated fatty acids. Support your local seed sequestration today!

You will have to ignore gorr, he is here just to show how worthless he is.


Volt remains the best plug in ever.

Isn’t it odd there is an entry for a Karma Revero on the EPA website but not for a Model 3?

How can the Model 3 have been on sale for over a month but the official information isn’t available yet?

I think they just want to keep you up at night…


I guess it’s working. I’m not going to lie, I do check every few days.

Careful. PP will get all up in your case for asking questions. It makes you a fudge lover or some such thing

It’s a conspiracy, Unlucky, to make you keep posting crazy tinfoil hat posts claiming that Tesla is only pretending to sell the Model 3.

And it’s succeeding! 😉

I didn’t say this proves anything about Tesla’s sales. It’s just puzzling. I’d like to see the puzzle put together so there aren’t outstanding questions.

If at some point I believe this proves something about Tesla’s Model 3 sales you can be certain I won’t hesitate to mention it. Right now I just can’t tell what is going on.

At a weight of around 5,600 lbs Revero is a very heavy vehicle and there are only 2 vehicles for its close comparison.
BMW i8: $143K price tag, 86 cu. ft interior volume, 15 mile AER and 28 MPG
Acura NSX: $156K price tag, 54 cu. ft interior volume, 0 mile AER and 21 MPG and only a 2 seater.

Karma Revero: $130K price tag, 96 cu. ft interior volume, 37 mile AER and 20 MPG and a 4 door 4 seater.

So compared to BMW i8 & Acura NSX (Hybrid), Karma Revero is a much better choice in every aspect. How many do these vehicles sell; just < 100 for both put together.

The i8 sold more than 100 units per month in the US alone, last year. in 2015 it was nearly 200/month in the US alone.

Worldwide sales of i8 in 2015 where 450/month.

I bet the Caddy CT6 PHEV is the real joke here as I’ve stated several times. The problem with the 31 miles estimated electric range is that no one who actually tests the vehicle seems to be able to achieve it. AutoNews couldn’t even get 22 miles on electric. Factoring THAT figure in, the new Karma doesn’t look so bad.

GM should have saved their development monies for future vehicles by just continuing to manufacture the PROVEN ELR. They’d have sold at least a few more thousand by now, and certainly more than the CT6 phev’s 20 per month, or whatever they are at now.

Proving the car is a JOKE, the nearest caddy dealer deciding to sell the car in the States, to me, is 380 miles away, and 280 miles if I take a shortcut through Canada.

The relative simplicity/workability of the original voltec drivetrain has suffered a cancerous growth here, and it has hurt overall efficiency badly:

3 Planetary gearsets, Turbo engine (requiring more oil changes), and a 3 horsepower electric oil pump to operate all the clutches would make Rube Goldberg proud.

The Cadillac PHEV is a car made in China for China. It’s was just a token effort to sell it in the USA. Maybe they did it just to see what would happen, or maybe to make the Chinese government happier.

“As seen in the image above, the Revero returns a combine electric range of 37 miles, which is well below the automaker’s estimate of 50 miles.”

Nobody should be surprised. It’s entirely expected that the reported ranges of EVs will fall as they approach production. In fact, GM originally touted the 2011 Volt as having “up to 50 miles of range”… and then got an EPA rating of 35 miles.

So compared to GM’s original claim for the Volt, Revero is actually slightly ahead in converting EV range claims to EPA-rated reality!

And in case anyone thinks I’m GM-bashing… I’ll just remind you that Tesla originally touted the Model S85 as a “300 mile” car, even after receiving the original EPA rating of 265 miles.

Nope more lies – to which you’ve been corrected over and over.

The original VOLT concept was going to get 50 miles electrically and over 400 total.

The actual car was somewhat different than the concept. But that is beyond your ability to comprehend since this has to be constantly explained to you.

Next, you’ll say the 230 MPG was a total lie – but I got 232 miles in the 2012 volt I had for 6 months. But you cannot fathom that either.

And, btw, advertising is meant for people who PLAN ON BUYING EV’s, which totally excludes you, since you’ll never buy one – and i don’t care that you don’t drive, you are too cheap to buy a relative one.

Since you are not GM’s target audience (I and people like me ARE the audience) – what you think just doesn’ matter – other then to flesh out the articles here on a slow news week.

@Bill: It gets tiresome refuting the rather boggling amount of misinformation you post to InsideEVs, including all the B.S. in the post above. And since you’ve chosen to make repeated and wholly unprovoked personal attacks on me here, completely without justification or reason: Instead of wasting time refuting your B.S., I’ll just remind people of some of the more *cough* memorable *cough* things you’ve posted, with links to your original posts in case anyone doubts you actually wrote any of that nonsense: “…stop the ChemTrails program which is killing the forests, oceans and lowering worldwide oxygen content.” “It wouldn’t bother me if the Supercharger expansion at least included the LEGALLY REQUIRED DISCONNECTING MEANS, as far more humbler, smaller (think 25 kw) fast charging stations are required to have. Somehow Tesla has avoided this due to being ‘special’, but once they become more mainstream they are going to have to tolerate the National Electrical Code just the same as any homeowner has to.” “Electric cars that are fast charging on a very hot day must be compensated by the utility by having LOAD-Shedding arrangements with large users such as governmental entities, hospitals, universities, etc that are told to run… Read more »

Other than the chem trails thing, those quotes from Bill (how long did it take you to go back and find these? Or do you keep them set aside? Either way, that’s a weird amount of effort) are hardly questionable. Mandatory disconnect switch? Yes, I’ve installed several DCFC stations and code has required this, although more and more exceptions seem to be getting through. Load shedding and generators on peak days? Absolutely true. Why does that even sound at all far fetched? Google “demand response”.

Chevy Bolt was touted from the beginning as a 200 mile EV and the EPA ratings blew that target out of the water.

He’s just a kindergartner in a 63 year old body. Thats why more and more commenters here are saying they don’t read his drivel anymore, since if you look at my true electrical system statements, you’ll find they are every bit true – but Pushi is too uninitiated to understand that. Since he is clueless, he reads my statements and thinks they are nonsense, and thinks everyone else will conclude the same thing, when really, its just he’s simply clueless and doesn’t understand the first thing about what is being said. A silly child telling the teacher he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He can’t dispute the facts at hand, and then every point he brings up (lets ignore the Chemtrails for the moment since its a too complex and sophisticated issue to discuss with children), namely the electrical issues which he knows nothing about – again – he knows nothing about load-shedding and by his comments, I don’t even think he has begun to understand how electric utilities have ever successfully functioned. He also does not understand about electric safety, nor the legal requirements, of course, when I prove his side-kick NIX was TOTALLY IN ERROR about ongoing… Read more »

Pushy, when the early Volt came around the testing regiments were not well established. EV car companies were invariably using other measures which gave longer range figures simply because higher numbers market better.

By the time the car came out the EPA had selected a testing methodology that produced lower numbers. Remember Nissan said the LEAF would get 100 miles, the EPA figure ended up being 73.

The Fisker Karma may have been in the same situation given the time of it. But there has been no change in testing methodology to account for the Revero figures dropping. This shouldn’t be happening anymore. The Model 3 came out right at the number Tesla gave earlier, for example.

unlucky said: “Remember Nissan said the LEAF would get 100 miles, the EPA figure ended up being 73.” Yes. And Nissan continued to advertise the Leaf as a “100 mile electric car”, in the same way that Tesla continued to advertise the original Model S85 as “300 mile car”, for some years after both had received significantly lower EPA range ratings. “The Fisker Karma may have been in the same situation given the time of it. But there has been no change in testing methodology to account for the Revero figures dropping.” Well, you’re entitled to your opinion. This isn’t a disagreement over the facts, but over viewpoint. Tesla has more experience at engineering EVs, and I have no doubt they were able to make a more accurate estimate of the Model 3’s EV range in advance, or more likely Tesla tweaked the TM3 until they got the range they were aiming for. Clearly I’m willing to cut Karma more slack than most, if the comments posted hear are any indication! Yeah, the Revero’s electric range isn’t as good as the Volt 2.0, but I find it more than a bit strange that people here are slamming the Karma for… Read more »

It’s not the bias.
1. It’s not 2011, it’s 2017. Plug-Ins are way better now. It turns out Karma wasn’t actually updated and I don’t see the point of comparing 2018 Karma to a 6 year old Volt 1.0 and not to the 2018 Volt 2.0.
2. Karma costs $150K, Volt costs $35K. And for $100K you can buy a way better premium Plug-In hybrid – a Porsche Panamera 4S E-Hybrid with 460 bhp, 0-60 in 4,6 s, EV range of 31 miles and 52 MPGe combined. And soon a 680 bhp Panamera Turbo Plug-In is coming for $150K.

It’s OK. It’s not going to sell in significant numbers.

I have a Fisker and have made 50 miles on electric alone.
The Revero should be the same as is the same vehicle and has a copy of TOMS device so equipped like mine.
Screw EPA and its statistics. I also have an ELR and it has made 43 miles on electric and EPA says 38.