2023 · e-tron quattro
Side by side · 2023 and 2024
Audi e-tronvsFisker Ocean
226 mi EPA · 25 min 10–80%231 mi EPA · 35 min 10–80%
vs
The Audi e-tron is rated 226 miles on the EPA test, the Fisker Ocean 231. A 10–80% stop takes 25 minutes in the Audi e-tron and 35 in the Fisker Ocean. Every figure below names the version of the car it belongs to, and the three tools further down turn the same numbers into a charging race, a road trip and a yearly bill.
At a glance
Audi e-tron · e-tron quattro
226mi EPA
25min 10–80%
Fisker Ocean · Ocean Sport 20in
231mi EPA
35min 10–80%
The short answer
The Fisker Ocean turns the same electricity into more miles.
1
The Fisker Ocean is rated 231 miles against 226 — 5 miles, 2% further. It uses 42.9 kWh to cover 100 miles where the Fisker Ocean needs 36.6.
2
A 10–80% stop takes 25 minutes in the Audi e-tron and 35 in the Fisker Ocean. On a 50 kW post it is 54 and 89 minutes, so most of the advantage disappears at a slow site.
3
The Fisker Ocean makes 420 kW against 230.
Which one, in one line
Pick the Audi e-tron ifit wins on charging (25 minutes against 35), space (23.3 cu ft of boot against 16.8 cu ft).
The priceNeither car has a US list price in the sheet yet, so nothing here claims an MSRP or a monthly payment.
2024 · Ocean Sport 20in
Fisker Ocean
SUV · 106.5 kWh usable · CCS1
- EPA range
- 231mi
- Efficiency
- 2.73mi/kWh
- DC peak
- 250kW
- Boot
- 16.8cu ft
Charging, raced
Two cars, one post, same clock
Charging speed is a station number and a car number, and the smaller one wins. Set the post and both cars fill against the same clock — the interesting part is not who wins, it is how much of the gap a slow post takes away.
Each car is modelled on its own published 10–80% time, which gives an average power over that window: 109 kW for the Audi e-tron, 128 kW for the Fisker Ocean. A post above that average changes nothing; a post below it sets the pace.
Fisker OceanCCS135min
Audi e-tronCCS125min
At 150 kW, going from 10% to 80% takes 25 min in the Audi e-tron and 35 min in the Fisker Ocean — a gap of 10 minutes. Both cars are limited by their own packs at this post, so a bigger station would change nothing.
Every figure
The numbers, with the version attached
A tick marks a figure that is simply more useful — more range, less energy per mile, a faster stop. Rows without a tick are different, not better: a bigger battery, a longer wheelbase and a wider body are all trades, and this page does not pretend otherwise.
| Measure | Audi e-tron | Fisker Ocean |
|---|---|---|
| Range and efficiency | ||
| EPA range | 226 mi2023 e-tron quattro | 231 mi✓2024 Ocean Sport 20in |
| EPA efficiency | 2.33 mi/kWh | 2.73 mi/kWh✓ |
| Energy per 100 miles | 42.9 kWh | 36.6 kWh✓ |
| Battery, usable | 64.7 kWhAudi e-tron 50 quattro | 106.5 kWhFisker Ocean Extreme |
| Range left in the cold | 57%modelled envelope | 57%modelled envelope |
| Charging | ||
| DC peak | 120 kW | 250 kW✓ |
| 10–80% at peak | 25 min✓ | 35 min |
| Average power, 10–80%(derived) | 109 kW | 128 kW✓ |
| AC maximum | 11 kW | 11 kW |
| Full charge on 240 V | 10 h✓ | 12 h |
| Fast-charge plug | CCS1 | CCS1 |
| Size and weight | ||
| Length | 193 in | 188 in |
| Width with mirrors | 86.3 in | — |
| Height | 63.6 in | 64.2 in |
| Wheelbase | 115.3 in | 115 in |
| Kerb weight | 5,390 lb | 5,569 lb |
| Space and practicality | ||
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Boot, seats up | 23.3 cu ft✓ | 16.8 cu ft |
| Front trunk | 2.2 cu ft✓ | 0 cu ft |
| Maximum cargo | 60.9 cu ft✓ | 32.4 cu ft |
| Towing, braked | 3,968 lb | 4,012 lb✓ |
| Heat pump | Standard Equipment | Standard Equipment |
| Performance and safety | ||
| Power | 230 kW | 420 kW✓ |
| 0–100 km/h | 6.8 s | 3.9 s✓ |
| Euro NCAP stars | 5 | — |
| Battery warranty | — | 10 years / 99,419 mi10 years / 160,000 km |
| V2L / V2H | Not supported | Not supported |
How to read the mixed rows. Range and efficiency come from one EPA row — the longest-range version of each car's current model year, not the longest range it has ever been rated at. Battery, charging and the catalogue dimensions come from the catalogue's headline record, which is not always the same trim. Each of those rows names its trim where the two disagree, and the model pages carry the full per-trim table.
What the cold row is not. “Range left in the cold” is the catalogue's modelled cold-highway figure as a share of its mild-urban one — a European model, not an EPA test in US weather. It is shown as a share rather than in miles so it cannot be mistaken for a US range rating.
Euro NCAP is the European crash programme; NHTSA and IIHS ratings are not in this dataset and are not claimed here. Warranty terms are the catalogue's kilometre figures converted to miles, so read them as indicative until a US warranty source replaces them.
Your numbers
What this pair costs you, on your drive
Two questions decide most purchases: how often you stop, and what the year costs. Both are arithmetic on the figures above, so change the inputs and the answer changes with you.
The drive
Starts full, arrives at 10%, charges back to 80% at each stop, and assumes a highway range of 85% of the EPA figure.
- Audi e-tron
- 4
- Fisker Ocean
- 3
stops · 100 min charging
stops · 105 min charging
The year
Energy at the wheels from the EPA label, priced at the tariff you pay. Home charging is usually cheaper than the directory's median.
- Audi e-tron
- $1,801
- Fisker Ocean
- $1,537
$15 per 100 mi
$13 per 100 mi
The trip model ignores charger detours, queueing and the last 10% of the pack, which is slow on both cars. The yearly cost is energy only: no session fees, no idle fees, no home-charger installation, and no petrol car to compare against.
Your priorities
A verdict you can argue with
There is no single winner, only a winner for a set of priorities. Move the sliders and the weighting changes — nothing here is a magazine score, and the page never hides the numbers it is built from.
Weighted result
Fisker Ocean
wins 4 of 6 measures on these weights
Audi e-tron40%
Fisker Ocean60%
Each measure is scaled between the two cars, so a weight of 5 means “this is the thing I care about” and 0 means “I do not care at all”. The scores are relative, not a rating out of ten.
Questions
Short answers, then the reasoning
Every figure here comes from the same data as the rest of the page. Where the data cannot answer, the page says so instead of guessing.
Still unsure about a term? The charging glossary covers the rest of them.
Which has more range, the Audi e-tron or the Fisker Ocean?
The Fisker Ocean. The Audi e-tron is rated 226 miles and the Fisker Ocean 231, each on the longest-range version of its current model year — 2023 e-tron quattro and 2024 Ocean Sport 20in respectively. EPA figures are lab scores from one standard test, not a promise for a cold morning or a steady 75 mph.
Which charges faster?
The Audi e-tron. Going from 10% to 80% takes 25 minutes in the Audi e-tron (120 kW peak) and 35 in the Fisker Ocean (250 kW peak). At a slow post the station becomes the limit and the gap narrows, because the slower car is short of power rather than short of time.
Do they use the same plug?
Yes. Both list CCS1 for DC fast charging, so either car can use the same sites without an adapter. An adapter still cannot raise the power a car will accept.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Fisker Ocean, by about $753.85 a year at 12,000 miles and $0.35 per kWh. It uses 36.6 kWh per 100 miles against 42.9. That is energy only, at the wheels: session fees, idle fees and home-charger installation are not in it.
Which has more space?
The Audi e-tron: 23.3 cu ft of boot against 16.8 cu ft. Boot volumes are measured by different conventions between makers, so read the direction as reliable and the exact size of the gap as indicative.
Is there a price comparison?
Not yet — neither car has a US list price in the current dataset. When a price source covers both, price becomes one more row in the table and one more slider in the weighting tool.
Other comparisons
All comparisonsEvery figure on this page comes from the same records the Audi e-tron and Fisker Ocean pages use. How the sources are chosen, and what a figure here never claims, is on the methodology page.