Building an all-new car is wildly expensive. Automakers routinely spend more than a billion dollars per major all-new product from conception to market launch, which is why shared platforms have become so popular. The Bentley Bentayga sits on a version of the platform that underpins the Audi A7, the Toyota Sienna rides on the same platform as the Camry, and the Karma Amaris is another great example of building off of what’s on hand. While it looks all new, some of the bits underneath the skin should be incredibly familiar, and it’s set to come out right as its powertrain configuration can enjoy mainstream desirability.
On first glance, these renderings seem vaporware-y, but the purported bones of this thing have actually been with us for ages. See, the Amaris is based on the Gyesera, which is an evolved Karma Revero, which is an updated Fisker Karma. Yep, the same car Childish Gambino rapped about in 2013. Announcing a new car on a nearly 15-year-old architecture might sound crazy at first glance, but this one actually might be right for the times.
See, the Fisker Karma launched as a range extender hybrid, with electric drive to the wheels and a gasoline generator providing extra juice when the battery pack runs low. As such, the Revero continues the tradition with a 1.5-liter BMW three-cylinder engine shared with the outgoing Mini and BMW i8, and it’s the sort of system North Americans want. Loads of EV range for about-town tasks, then dependable gasoline generator power for road trips and such.
However, now that BMW isn’t using the B38 three-cylinder engine in any new models, Karma is looking to pivot to a different gasoline engine as a generator. The firm claims to be switching over to a turbocharged four-cylinder, and while the exact engine hasn’t been announced yet, I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s BMW’s B48. Regardless, the Amaris boasts a claimed zero-to-60 mph time of fewer than 3.5 seconds and a purported top speed of 165 mph. Not earth-shattering figures now that some battery electric cars have put the acceleration of 20-year-old hypercars in the hands of more everyday people, but specs that certainly wouldn’t make the Amaris slow.
Of course, even at zero miles-per-hour, this thing should turn more than a few heads. You can definitely tell that there’s some Revero DNA in the rear end, but the French curves down the flank and that extra-long dash-to-axle ratio are properly classic GT car stuff. Sure, the wheels are a bit Aston Martin, but I reckon the Amaris works from a visual standpoint.
Perhaps the most promising part about effectively recycling the old Karma platform is that the Amaris is expected to be on the market relatively quickly. Karma is targeting a launch in the fourth quarter of 2026. Hopefully, we find out by then what the interior looks like, but beyond that, the Karma Amaris looks like an intriguing boutique option for people who want a green grand tourer.
Top graphic credit: Karma
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
These Exclusive Spy Shots Seem To Show What Could Be A New Karma Crossover
-
How We Wasted Far Too Much Time Trying So Hard To Write About The Karma Revero
-
The Karma Kaveya Is An EV Supercar With Billionaire Doors And Working Eyelids
-
Karma Automotive Sues The New DeLorean Company And Its Executives Over Alleged Trade Secret Violations
Please send tips about cool car things to tips@theautopian.com. You could even win a prize!
The wheels are not okay, but the rest of the car is drop dead gorgeous.
Is it though? I’ve never driven anything from Fisker so is there something actually bad about the current platform that would require a significant redesign? Or is this something people just like to throw shade about like how the 911 never changes or using OHV vs OHC engines, etc.
Great looking car, but all I see from the A pillar forward is Corvette.
I was just thinking it looked like a Maserati rear-ended a C7
Whew. I’m glad I’m not the only one.
Yep, I assumed this was an “upcycled” Corvette when I saw the lead picture.
“Hold my beer” – Stellantis
“See, the Amaris is based on the Gyesera, which is an evolved Karma Revero, which is an updated Fisker Karma”
Did one of them hear from this guy who knows this kid who’s going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night?
Karma still exists?! I thought they were dead. Again. Or are they and this is the 15th resurrection?
Karma automotive was borne out of the first failed Fisker and has been selling cars since 2018.
I was aware they had attempted to rise from the ashes, but I thought they had gone under again already. Interesting to hear they still exist.
Technically, it was born out of the second failed Fisker, because Fisker Coachbuild had already gone tits up after selling like 9 cars
Someone will correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m not sure how a turbocharger makes sense in an (effectively) fixed speed genset engine.
So they can place a turbo badge on the back.
Porsche Taycan: “Hold my Krombacher.”
It makes sense in some scenarios. Of course it adds complexity, but it would allow for a smaller displacement engine to generate more power. I think the biggest benefit would be getting more power at elevation.
Many diesel generators feature a turbo. I don’t know enough about this too give you a real answer though.
Thermal efficiency can make a big difference (part of the reason your 495 hp Corvette gets better mpg than your 180 hp Miata), but I don’t know how that plays with a turbo.
If thermal efficiency is the goal dump the turbo and just use a simpler larger displacement Atkinson engine. Although come to think of it a light pressure Miller cycle might be a good compromise.
Yeah I wish I knew more, as I’m sure there are many other factors besides thermal efficiency. I do agree with you though, it seems like for a generator you’d want a larger NA under square engine (long stroke) that gives a solid torque output at a lower rpm. Maybe the goal for Karma is more power from the gas engine rather than better efficiency.
Or keep the turbo and run a Miller cycle.
I suspect there’s a couple big reasons behind it. One is who will give engines to Karma in general. The other larger reason behind turbo engines is likely that with a boosted application, you can get a fixed power output easily at constant load, and turbos help you get that from both a small package, and help muffle the sound of the engine which is critical in a luxury platform. Without it driving the wheels, a smaller engine has fewer NVH implications because it can be mounted in a more isolated fashion that an engine that has to put it’s power to the ground.
Also likely the biggest reason was the Fisker Karma it’s bones was based on used a turbo GM ecotec 4-cylinder, so a straight or V six cylinder likely wouldn’t fit without a completely different front structure, and an NA 4-Cylinder likely wouldn’t have enough power to keep up with their intended goals for power generation ability at higher speeds.
Thanks. I was just going by the fact that I’ve never seen a turbocharged gasoline engine in a “stationary” application.
When designing a combustion engine for a motor vehicle, it’s important (in most cases) that the engine has relatively flat power and torque curves. Which sort of implies that it’s possible to build a “peaky” engine designed to run at a specific load and RPM – which would be perfect for a genset (or air compressor or pump) application. But in this case it must be cheaper to buy an off-the-shelf engine than to design one specifically for this application.
Yep in an application like this, especially in the very low volumes these will sell in, there is absolutely no budget to design an engine. In order to design any engine to modern Emissions regulations, it takes a lot of R&D money, and if Karma can’t even make a new platform, and engine is a huge step too far. Also the other thing to be considered is not necessarily peak power of the engine versus generator needs, but the thermal efficiency of that engine while producing the desired power (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption). BSFC is often calculated in terms of grams of fuel per kWh of energy produced which makes it shockingly easy to calculate for backfeedng an EV powertrain/battery.
The thing that is not the most intuitive, is that ICE engines have the lowest BSFC (least grams of fuel per kWh, highest efficiency) at the middle-low half of the RPM range near maximum torque. What this means is that a smaller turbo engine is actually really well suited for a REX because it can operate at a flat 3-4k RPM, high boost, and create what’s needed for regen, at the most efficient point in the operating band. It has the added benefit of having higher power overhead if needed too.
So counterintuitively, in this case the smaller turbo engine is actually the sort of peaky that would be more useful for this application, coupled with the fact that a turbo engine is able to exploit that high torque potential at a wider range of low-RPM points, which is harder to do in an NA engine, with the packaging advantage over a larger/higher Cyl count NA engine, it makes a lot of sense here.
I really appreciate your insight. And it also explains why the i3 used a scooter engine. Scooters have CVT, so the engines can be peakier.
We’re still giving Fisker/Karma the benefit of the doubt? Isn’t this the third or fourth iteration of a failed business?
No, it’s only the second of this particular one. Waxiang bought all the assets of the first bankrupt Fisker, and reengineered the Karma into the Revero, five years later. The new company is called Karma, and has been selling cars continuously since 2018.
I look forward to see who upcycles the Canoo skateboard chassis, and into what.