Fisker Alaska vs Ford Ranger vs Toyota Camry
Fisker Alaska
$45,000
Ford Ranger
$42,500 – $43,200
Toyota Camry
$36,795
AI Comparison Summary
Comparing Fisker Alaska vs Ford Ranger vs Toyota Camry. Toyota Camry offers the strongest value on price. Toyota Camry leads on expert rating.
Category Winners
Overall Winner
Toyota Camry
Best Value
Toyota Camry
Fuel Economy
Toyota Camry
Performance
Fisker Alaska
Visual Comparison
Category Radar
Price & Reviews
Model Year
Expert Rating
Fisker Alaska
$45,000
Rating: 4.2/10
Ford Ranger
$42,500 – $43,200
Rating: 4.6/10
Toyota Camry
$36,795
Rating: 4.8/10
| Specification |
Fisker Alaska |
Ford Ranger |
Toyota Camry |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brand | Fisker | Ford | Toyota |
| Model | Alaska | Ranger | Camry |
| Year | 2025 | 2025 | 2025 |
| Type | Ev | — | — |
| Body Style | Electric Pickup Truck | Pickup Truck | Sedan |
| Current Price | $45,000 | $42,500 – $43,200 | $36,795 |
| MSRP | $45,000 | $43,200 | $36,795 |
| Dealer Price | $44,000 | $41,900 | $35,995 |
| Engine | Dual Motor Electric | 2.3L EcoBoost I4 Turbo | 2.5L Hybrid I4 |
| Horsepower | 400+ hp (estimated) | 270 hp | 232 hp |
| Torque | N/A | 310 lb-ft | 163 lb-ft |
| 0–60 mph | 3.9 to 7.2 sec (0-60 mph depending on variant) | 6.5 sec (0-60 mph) | 6.8 sec (0-60 mph) |
| Top Speed | 115 mph | 112 mph | 112 mph |
| Fuel Type | Electric | Gasoline | Hybrid |
| Mileage / MPG | N/A | 22 mpg combined | 46 mpg combined |
| Range (EV) | 230 to 340 miles EPA estimated | — | N/A |
| Emissions | 0 g/mi | EPA compliant | Low |
| Battery | 75 kWh / 113 kWh | — | Lithium-ion |
| Charging | DC Fast Charge capable | — | Self-charging hybrid |
| Expert Rating | 4.2/10 | 4.6/10 | 4.8/10 |
| Community Reviews | 0 | 1120 | 0 |
| Performance Score | 8.2 | 8.5 | 8.8 |
| Comfort Score | 8.0 | 9.0 | 9.2 |
| Safety Score | Automatic Emergency Braking, Lane Keep Assist | 9.2 | 3.0 |
| Fuel Economy Score | 9.0 | 9.5 | 46 mpg combined |
| Technology Score | 8.6 | 8.8 | 8.8 |
| Value Score | 8.8 | 9.0 | 9.5 |
| Pros | Innovative 'Houdini' expandable bed system; Lightweight agile platform architecture; Sustainable recycled interior mater... | Ultra-fast 800V DC charging; Distinctive retro-futuristic design; Spacious lounge-style interior; Strong standard safety... | Excellent fuel economy; Standard hybrid powertrain; Comfortable ride; High reliability; Strong safety features |
| Cons | Brand availability and production uncertainty; Towing capacity details vary by configuration; Limited physical service n... | Ride can feel floaty on some roads; No frunk on all trims; Infotainment learning curve for some users; Real-world highwa... | No V6 option; Conservative styling; Limited sporty feel; Rear headroom slightly reduced |
