Fisker Ocean Slammed By Consumer Reports For Being An ‘Unfinished’ Product

By automotive-mag.com 5 Min Read

History, as it turns out, tends to repeat itself. Fisker, the up-and-coming California-based EV startup, is trying as hard as possible to sell its sole product, the battery-powered Ocean crossover, and avoid bankruptcy.

It’s an interesting product with some features that would make any car enthusiast interested in at least going for a test drive. However, as more and more owners and journalists experience the Ocean EV, the biggest thing that stands out is that the car isn’t exactly finished. And it’s a story we’ve heard before some ten years ago.

Henrik Fisker, the founder and CEO of Fisker, Inc., had another go at a car company that made the Karma plug-in hybrid, a car that’s still trying to prove its worth (one way or another) under Karma Automotive over a decade after it was born. However, Fisker Automotive, which created the Karma, went bankrupt, and now the financial situation of Fisker, Inc. is far from being rosy, which even prompted the company to suspend production for six weeks as it scrambles to move cars from inventory.

Getting back to the Ocean, it was clear from day one that some features would become available later on in the EV’s life, but that still hasn’t happened yet, even though it’s been almost a year since deliveries started. That made famous YouTuber Marques Brownlee say that the Ocean is the worst car he’s ever reviewed, and now Consumer Reports got in on the action by saying that the battery-powered crossover is an unfinished car that came with a bizarre (and rather expensive) delivery experience, software features that disappeared overnight, and the yet-to-be-fulfilled promise of adaptive cruise control.

It’s worth noting that while MKBHD’s car wasn’t running the latest version of Fisker’s software, V2.0, Consumer Reports’ car did. However, CR described the Ocean’s powertrain as being “bizarrely tuned,” referring to the fact that the driver needs to push the accelerator way down to feel any sort of engagement when using the default “Earth” driving mode. Furthermore, the ride comfort was described as being “both nauseating and jarring,” and one of the group’s testers called it “the worst of both worlds.”

There were also issues with the Bluetooth connectivity, but the biggest complaint was the fact the car feels incomplete, with the Ocean lacking adaptive cruise control even though Consumers Reports, and other owners, paid for the feature. What’s more, CR’s car had the blind spot warning and lane-keeping assist systems working one day, but then they disappeared from the car without warning the next day, only to reappear once more after that.

The delivery experience was also “bizarre” and very expensive. CR said in its review of the Fisker Ocean that the $2,438 destination charge was by far the highest of any vehicle it had tested. That said, the car came with a visible dent, and a scratch, and the optional floor mats that were specced when buying the car were missing and never made their way to Consumer Reports.

It wasn’t all bad, though. The organization praised the Ocean for its roominess, clever storage compartments, generous glass surfaces, the presence of physical buttons (which is weird to say about a car, but that’s the reality of 2024), and the rather impressive range of 350 miles for the Ocean Ultra version that CR bought for $63,981.

That is more or less the same as what we found when interviewing several Fisker Ocean owners, who embarked on the ownership vessel knowing full well that the journey might get rough along the way. They like the car, just not the bugs. The problem is, that selling and getting the full amount for a new vehicle today with the prospect of delivering on all the promises sometime in the future isn’t exactly a compelling proposition for buyers.

But what’s your take on this? Let us know in the comments below.

Share This Article
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *