Fisker Ocean to Utilize VW's MEB Platform… Probably

by Matt Posky

July 17th, 2020 4:37 PM

fisker ocean to utilize vw s meb platform probably

Henrik Fisker, CEO of Fisker Inc., has announced a deal reached with Volkswagen that allows him to use the German company’s MEB architecture to build the all-electric Ocean crossover. While it seems like the platform is going to turn up everywhere before long, the deal hasn’t actually been made official.

Neither Fisker nor VW feels comfortable saying the arrangement had been finalized.

But that couldn’t contain Henrik’s excitement. The Fisker Inc. founder was on social media this week proclaiming the upcoming Ocean would start at just $29,999. Mathematicians will notice this is less than $30,000 and actually pretty damn cheap for an electric crossover, especially one that’s supposed to contain so much luxury and sustainability (the latest in a long line of empty terms used by the industry). The series of 9s at the end of Fisker’s proposed pricing should have tipped you off that there might be some light shenanigans afoot.

A seasoned car salesman, he neglected to note that the price given actually includes the available federal tax credit. The real price will be $37,499, which isn’t new information.

Still, it’s not a bad price if this thing is all its cracked up to be. Fisker certainly seems excited and we know Volkswagen Group doesn’t have many issues with sharing its MEB architecture. It’s already spread liberally throughout its own subsidiaries and will be used by Ford to underpin numerous electric vehicles over the next few years.

Based on an investor presentation foreshadowing the partnership, Fisker’s arrangement with Volkswagen may also include battery packs and ancillary components — helping bring the Ocean to market more quickly and at a lower cost than if company attempted to fly solo. Though one wonders why anyone would bother getting one, when it sounds like it will basically be a badge-engineered VW.

“Volkswagen is still open to support small series projects that demonstrate the variety of conceivable concepts based on the MEB platform through their emotional appearance,” a spokesperson for Volkswagen said in an email to The Verge in reference to its investor presentation.

“In consultation with Volkswagen, the Audi subsidiary Italdesign has now used the MEB platform as the basis for the development of the Fisker Ocean SUV. However, a final decision has not yet been made about a possible cooperation with Fisker to implement a series project.”

We just hope it doesn’t use a single line of Volkswagen’s coding. The German company seems to have serious issues in getting some of its newest models to behave, forcing it to unleash at least one EV onto the market half baked. While a fix is supposedly forthcoming, selling a product that’s effectively broken from Day One is an embarrassment.

[Images: Fisker]

#Fisker #FiskerOcean #MEB #Volkswagen #VolkswagenGroup #VW

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 13 comments

Chris724 on Jul 19, 2020

How did Fisker get another car company called Fisker? Who would loan him any money?

Like Reply
Shane on Sep 19, 2020

I remember back around 1994, I was in high school, a buddy of mine had what I believe was an '85 Quantum. I took special interest because I drove an '86 Audi 5000S, and recognized the Quantum as basically a slightly downmarket Audi 4000. I remember it being a decent car when he first got it. Next time I saw it, not long after, it didn't run anymore and seemed to never run again. It was weird.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

56m65711446 Well, I had a suburban auto repair shop in those days.
Dukeisduke Yikes - reading the recall info from NHTSA, this sounds like the Hyundai/Kia 2.4l Theta II "engine fire" recall, since it involves an engine block or oil pan "breach", so basically, throwing a rod:"Description of the Safety Risk : Engine oil and/or fuel vapor that accumulates near a sufficiently hot surface, below the combustion initiation flame speed, may ignite resulting in an under hood fire, and increasing the risk of injury. Description of the Cause :Isolated engine manufacturing issues have resulted in 2.5L HEV/PHEV engine failures involving engine block or oil pan breach. In the event of an engine block or oil pan breach, the HEV/PHEV system continues to propel the vehicle allowing the customer to continue to drive the vehicle. As the customer continues to drive after a block breach, oil and/or fuel vapor continues to be expelled and accumulates near ignition sources, primarily expected to be the exhaust system. Identification of Any Warning that can Occur :Engine failure is expected to produce loud noises (example: metal-to-metal clank) audible to the vehicle’s occupants. An engine failure will also result in a reduction in engine torque. In Owner Letters mailed to customers, Ford will advise customers to safely park and shut off the engine as promptly as possible upon hearing unexpected engine noises, after experiencing an unexpected torque reduction, or if smoke is observed emanating from the engine compartment."
Dukeisduke In an ideal world, cars would be inspected in the way the MoT in the UK does it, or the TÜV in Germany. But realistically, a lot of people can't afford to keep their cars to such a high standard since they need them for work, and widespread public transit isn't a thing here.I would like the inspections to stick around (I've lived in Texas all my life, and annual inspections have always been a thing), but there's so much cheating going on (and more and more people don't bother to get their cars inspected or registration renewed), so without rigorous enforcement (which is basically a cop noticing your windshield sticker is out of date, or pulling you over for an equipment violation), there's no real point anymore.
Zipper69 Arriving in Florida from Europe and finding ZERO inspection procedures I envisioned roads crawling with wrecks held together with baling wire, duct tape and prayer.Such proved NOT to be the case, plenty of 20-30 year old cars and trucks around but clearly "unsafe at any speed" vehicles are few and far between.Could this be because the median age here is 95, so a lot of low mileage vehicles keep entering the market as the owners expire?
Zipper69 At the heart of GM’s resistance to improving the safety of its fuel systems was a cost benefit analysis done by Edward Ivey which concluded that it was not cost effective for GM to spend more than $2.20 per vehicle to prevent a fire death. When deposed about his cost benefit analysis, Mr. Ivey was asked whether he could identify a more hazardous location for the fuel tank on a GM pickup than outside the frame. Mr. Ivey responded, “Well yes…You could put in on the front bumper.”