AD #3021 – Karma Unveils New GS-6; Rimac Close to Buying Bugatti; New Rogue Disappoints in Crash Tests

February 22nd, 2021 at 11:58am

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #3021 – Karma Unveils New GS-6; Rimac Close to Buying Bugatti; New Rogue Disappoints in Crash Tests” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 9:41

0:08 India Paves Way for Great Wall & GM Deal
0:46 British Gas Won’t Buy ICE Vehicles Ever Again
1:14 Vitesco Helps PHEVs Improve Emissions
3:25 Rimac Close to Buying Bugatti
4:03 NHTSA Downgrades Nissan Rogue in Passenger-Side Crash Test
4:59 Karma Unveils New GS-6
6:46 Mercedes Puts Big Trucks Through Winter Tests
7:22 Renault Partners with Faurecia On Fuel Cells
8:06 Why the Chip Shortage Won’t Get Solved Anytime Soon

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: BorgWarner, Bridgestone, Intrepid Control Systems and Magna.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

27 Comments to “AD #3021 – Karma Unveils New GS-6; Rimac Close to Buying Bugatti; New Rogue Disappoints in Crash Tests”

  1. clem zahrobsky Says:

    this just shows the problems with just in time inventory that was to save the industry

  2. Lambo2015 Says:

    So your saying that the Executive order that Biden signed to resolve the chip shortage (you guys reported on Feb 12th) is going to be as comprehensive as his Covid plan.. Gotchya

    Guess we cant rule out fuel cells yet, Seems to still be lots of R&D going on.

  3. Buzzerd Says:

    VW sells Bugatti to Rimac and buys a chunk or Rimac?? OK,what was the point of that.
    I’ve always thought and still think that fuel cells are the future and that electric was just the stop gap till they can figure it out. Time will tell of course.

  4. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Bugatti never seemed to make much sense for VW. Somehow, a “halo” brand selling million dollar plus cars doesn’t fit with a the company. It’s not like just another “premium” brand like Audi or Porsche.

    I’m still not convinced that fuel cell cars make any sense. The hydrogen has to come from somewhere. The main commercial source is currently dissociating natural gas. How does that make sense as a fuel for cars? You can also get hydrogen by electrolyzing water, but why not just use the electricity in other ways? I might be convincible, but I haven’t yet heard any good arguments for having 10,000 psi tanks of gas in a very complex car with limited range, and almost no place to refuel it.

  5. ChuckGrenci Says:

    I still don’t get it on the chip shortage; sure it may take 6 months to get a chip in production, but hey, we’re not (or shouldn’t) be starting from scratch. These things were already in production. I guess I’ll need to see the Autoline show in full to see if it enlightens me.

  6. bradley cross Says:

    Where can Bugatti go?
    They are kind of the pinnacle of ICE cars speed & price wise so must turn to EVs but there seem to be lots of competition of high end EVs.

    Nissan safety mistakes are glaring and not a good sign. Of course they key is how you recover.

  7. Ukendoit Says:

    I agree with Kit on FC/EV. A friend and I have debated the issue since the late 90s; I see the Fuel Cell as the stop gap to electrics until the battery technology is better (which it is quickly doing). The potential for energy density, simplicity, cost, and efficiency can all be developed better with batteries. Even though some of the manufacturers like Toyota & Honda still believe in FC potential, as I see the electric infrastructure outpacing hydrogen and money backing battery tech, I still believe EV will supersede FC in the near future.

  8. wmb Says:

    While Karma may not be going for the same customers as Tesla, the ones that they are may not be to impressed since they are offering looks the same as the vehicle that originally came out and had the fire issues. It only looks like they did a mild refresh, in that time frame. It’s true that the Model S has only had modest undated too visually, but the vehicle that was the Karma has had a change in company ownership, a reworking of its hard and software and still doesn’t look that much different then it did almost a decade ago! I would think that if they were chasing a new/different audience, the styling of the car would have had bigger changes to it, so that it would at least scream all, almost or somewhat completely ‘new’. I’m not saying it’s not attractive, for its still a very beautiful car al, these years on, but to the uninitiated it just still looks the same!

  9. Kit Gerhart Says:

    8 I’d think Karma, formerly Fisker, would have a hard time outliving the fact that its first car just wasn’t any good. It had very limited range on plug-in power, and then was a noisy gas hog after those few electric miles were used up. The new, improved one is better, but still, only 26 mpg combined on gas.

  10. GM Veteran Says:

    Fuel cells make more sense for large vehicles than for regular passenger cars/trucks/SUVs. Most of the recent development work has centered around medium duty and semi trucks. While you don’t hear that much about it, the technology is also being integrated into ships, buses and trains. The fuel cell powertrain reduces or eliminates the need for a very large and heavy battery, which means more cargo can be carried. Its a solution that combines much cleaner emissions and moving the freight that is key to our world economy. It will soon be commonly available in most large work and freight vehicles.

  11. ChuckGrenci Says:

    As with BEV’s, it’s the batteries; so goes fuel cells, it’s the hydrogen. I believe that hydrogen will eventually be figured out but even the experts have resigned themselves that it won’t be quick.

  12. Mac Says:

    The fuel cell challenges are addressable with current technology. The battery challenge — energy density — requires at least one if not several leaps in technology to fully address. Most of my friends in the electrical industry are still scratching their heads, so to speak, about how we’re going to overcome challenges with rare earth availability, manufacturing energy costs, disposal/possible-recycling, and serial discharge / recharge degradation.

  13. Kit Gerhart Says:

    10,11 Currently, more than 90% of commercially produced hydrogen is from natural gas, oil, and coal, with CO2 as a byproduct, which is dumped to the atmosphere. What is the point of that? Yeah, maybe one day we will have infinite supplies of free electricity to hydrolyze water, which will change things.

  14. Buzzerd Says:

    With electric cars there are two major problems. 1 recharge times – that might be fixed in the near ish future… maybe. That’s a huge problem for the 10′s of millions of cars that park on the street. 2 electrical grids in 1st world countries are barely up to the task, now picture the rest of the world. Yea, not so much.
    I don’t think fuel cells share these major hurdles.

  15. Buzzerd Says:

    With Nissan struggling to make money I wonder if they are scrimping on the high strength steel in their chassis to squeeze a bit more profit out of them.

  16. rick Says:

    need to do an autoline exclusives on vitesco helps PHEVs improve emissions.

  17. cwolf Says:

    Another type of clean fuel being tested:

  18. Kit Gerhart Says:

    17 That’s interesting. They are using wind power to get hydrogen, but instead of using the hydrogen for fuel cells, they do a bunch more processing to get liquid fuels.

  19. cwolf Says:

    18) The bright spot in developing these fuels is that they are as clean as EV’s,… so they say!
    These fuels would be a good eco-friendly combo with a hybred.

    How knows where we are headed if fusion power becomes doable. That is… if someone can find a way to deal with the radioactivity issue.

  20. Sean Wagner Says:

    HYDROGEN There’s a pilot plant in Germany’s north close to the offshore wind turbines where they produce hydrogen by electrolysis and feed it into a natural gas pipeline (hence obviating the need for costly added steps).

    PORSCHE I think their rather astute medium-term goal is to enable greenhouse-gas free production and running of the classic aka iconic Porsches old and new. Owners can absorb the premium (recalling the $8000 color options) ((and $1500 enhanced sound of the Taycan!)).

    It’s a pity plant-derived Ethanol can’t be used more widely, the US produces enormous amounts of it. Looked it up – 16 billion gallons in 2018, or just about a million barrels per day. Source:

    SEMICONDUCTORS Chuck – that’s 6 months it takes just for production. The porc cycle has long applied to things like humdrum but very high-tech/high-capital memory chips – once supply and demand get out of kilter it’s definitely felt in the market.

    Buzzard – parked EVs can be slow-charged with no more power than it takes to run an oven given the average daily mileage.

    The more I see of the alternatives to pure EVs, the more I’m convinced they’re too complex and costly, especially considering the continuing improvements in battery tech and cost. There will be outliers, and those should be interesting to investigate.

  21. Sean Wagner Says:

    One more thing: Faurecia is one of the world’s top ten automotive suppliers.

  22. cwolf Says:

    For as much faith as we are putting into EV’s and the development of battery technology, there may be a large roadblock ahead. China has 80% of the rare earth minerals and purchase all they can get. Their aim to hoard these materials could be used to control auto manufacturing and to hinder US growth as we become more reliant in the future.
    I have voiced my views towards China clear many times when commenting. For as much as I realize the importance of all US/China trade and commerce, we must never forget that China is our adversary. Becoming over reliant upon them and having false beliefs that buying their many less expensive goods(perhaps made possible from pirated technolgy) may become a big mistake we will come to regret.
    I hope to be proven wrong,….but just saying….

  23. Lambo2015 Says:

    22 Your right, and I expressed the same concern as many OE manufacturers wanted to cash in on the emerging Chinese auto market, even though the Chinese government required manufacturers to share the technology and employ a minimum 50% local labor. So for the quick buck many set up shop taught them how to manufacture cars and freely provided technology that they will now use to undercut the competition.
    Everyone seems to forget that the one with the money makes the rules and China is buying and owning more and more key elements that will provide them the control they need to rule the world at least economically.

  24. Carl Says:

    So the UK wants to ban the sale of ICE by 2030. You can’t force the public to buy what they don’t want. So what do I see happening? There will big increase in the demand for used vehicles, and others will travel to nearby country’s France or Germany to buy their NEW vehicle and ship it back home.

    Meanwhile the sales of new EV’s will soldier on at a snails pace.

  25. Kit Gerhart Says:

    22 China doesn’t have 80% of the “rare earth” reserves, but they have a lot.

    The biggest reserve of cobalt, used in many of the batteries, is concentrated in Congo, and is being bought up and controlled by China. Fortunately, there are alternatives to cobalt for batteries, and there are significant cobalt reserves in Australia and Canada.

  26. Kit Gerhart Says:

    24 I seriously doubt that Britain will allow new LHD gas cars to be imported from France and Germany, if no new gas cars are being sold in the country. Of course, it’s highly likely that Britain will “change its mind” about ending sale of new gas cars in 2030, after reality sets in.

  27. Sean Wagner Says:

    Completely agree that we should not trust nor facilitate the so-called Communist party of China. Fortunately, “rare” earths exist in quite a few places. I wom’t shed a tear if our good Saudi friends lose out in the transition either.

    Incidentally, I think the Tesla approach of innovating at a breakneck pace serves us best and actually poses the smaller risk long-term.

    Intel got a little too comfy being king of the silicon. Boeing tried its best at pushing out big investments and necessary change always a little further out. GM went bankrupt and subsequently retreated from the world.

    24 & 26 UK banning ICEs by 2030. I think it can and will be done – but that doesn’t mean it applies to every country.

    By then, there will be better-than price parity. Smaller cars gain even more in driveability from the shift. But charging and manufacturing will really need to kick into high gear to satisfy demand.

    Also, the UK would gain from that target by being able to trade freely with the neighboring EU again.