Polestar 5 GT will debut in Munich with ultrafast charging
Another Porsche Taycan rival is close to launch. Special features include a particularly rigid platform with fresh battery tech that permits charging in minutes. Full details and a reveal of the GT's interior await September's Munich motor show.
Underpinning the GT, which closely resembles the Precept concept of 2020, is a British-engineered chassis with heroic levels of stiffness. The Model 5 from Polestar is the first to use the new scalable aluminium architecture developed by the firm at its MIRA proving facility. This new platform design will also feature in the drop-top Polestar 6 sports car due out next year. The platform is claimed to offer 'carbon fibre levels of torsional stiffness, like a two-door sports model'.
There's also the 800V electrical architecture that permits 'extreme fast-charging'. Polestar says the 5's rapid-charging capability means it can add 160km of range in five minutes without battery degradation long term.
Polestar CEO, Michael Lohscheller, said that full charging time comes down to 18 or 19 minutes with the 800v architecture. The so-called extreme fast-charging (XFC) is a collaboration between Polestar and StoreDot, which the car maker part owns.
Check out our review of Polestar 4 here.
Evidently, XFC can be integrated into existing battery technology, saving on development funds. StoreDot CEO, Doron Myersdorf, stated 'It's a game-changer as it uses traditional lithium ion and then adapts it for fast charging.'
Polestar has already confirmed a power output of 652kW and 900Nm of torque from its twin electric motors. The rear motor alone is good for 450kW.
The company claims its flagship EV will be the lightest in its class. That's in part because the 5's body is made from bonded aluminium, as is the chassis.
Polestar UK chief engineer, Dave Kane, says the result is also 'class-leading ride and handling dynamics'. Evidently the battery pack, size as yet unspecified, is integrated within the platform.
Polestar has used its most obvious competitor, the Taycan, for benchmarking. However, the Swede is aiming for more everyday compliance rather than chasing sports car handling alone. They describe its character as 'engaging but also comfortable'.
Evidently motorsport-derived underbody aerodynamics and a slippery body shape add to its overall performance. It rides almost as low as an ICE power car, according to Polestar, no easy feat for an EV.
Much of the engineering work on the 5 is with an eye to future Polestar products. The 6 will be the second model to be built on the new architecture. Both will be produced in the same factory from 2026. The Model 6 launches a year after the 5 arrives.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
2 days ago
- 1News
F1: Liam Lawson energised to perform in Austrian GP
Liam Lawson and Racing Bulls are likely to face similar issues they had in Canada a fortnight ago when they take on the Austrian F1 Grand Prix this weekend. Racing Bulls were well out of the points in Montreal and the team will hopefully have fixed any issues in the time since. Racing Bulls admitted they lacked pace to challenge for the top 10 in Canada with team principal Laurent Mekies hoping they could change that in time for Austria after some work back at the team base in Britain. Lawson's cause wasn't helped when he was forced to start from the pit lane after the team made some changes to his power unit. Unfortunately, cooling issues forced him to retire late in the race. He can only hope the car is at its best because Red Bull Ring is a unique circuit where the margins become even finer. ADVERTISEMENT It is one of the shortest and fastest circuits on the calendar with drivers completing a lap in just over a minute. It has just 10 corners, but has three DRS zones allowing for overtaking. The downforce setting becomes critical to balance the speed of the straights and the grip needed on the fast corners. Lawson has raced there in junior categories. "I've really enjoyed the track but, obviously in F1, it will bring an entirely new pressure," Lawson said. "I'm coming into this weekend with fresh energy following Canada and am ready to fight for points with the team." Both Lawson and Isack Hadjar have spent a lot of time in the simulator since Canada, while chief technical officer Tim Goss said they'll "take forward some further setup adjustments to maximise the car's capabilities". ADVERTISEMENT Qualifying will again be the key to picking up points. Lawson has made the third part of qualifying just once this season and that was in Monaco when he went on to grab his only points. Meanwhile, Red Bull have confirmed that British youngster Arvid Lindblad will get his first grand prix weekend outing at the British GP at Silverstone next week. The 17-year-old obtained his FIA Superlicence earlier this month. Lindblad, who won the Formula Regional Oceania Championship in New Zealand last summer and currently races in F2, will be involved during Friday practice at Silverstone. Until now, Ayumu Iwasa has been the only reserve driver for both Red Bull and Racing Bulls.
Otago Daily Times
5 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
UK to buy fighter jets capable of carrying nuclear weapons
Britain said it would buy a dozen F-35A fighter jets capable of firing tactical nuclear weapons in what it described as the biggest expansion of its nuclear deterrent in a generation. The purchase of the Lockheed Martin jets would allow Britain's air force to carry nuclear weapons for the first time since the end of the Cold War, Downing Street said. "In an era of radical uncertainty we can no longer take peace for granted," Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in a statement. Britain's nuclear deterrent is currently limited to the continuous deployment of at least one nuclear-armed submarine patrolling at sea. Starmer's government is increasing defence spending and upgrading its military forces, including its submarine fleet, as it faces increasing hostility from Russia and as the United States retrenches from its traditional role as a defender of Europe. The announcement by Britain on expanding its nuclear deterrence was made at a NATO summit in The Hague where European members are set to agree an ambitious new target to spend 5% of national income on defence and security. The U.S. will supply B61 tactical nuclear weapons for use on the planes as part of a plan for Britain to take on more responsibility for European security, said a British official who declined to be named. Britain said the purchase of the jets would allow it to contribute so-called dual-capable aircraft to NATO to carry nuclear weapons in the event of a conflict. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said "this is yet another robust British contribution to NATO". NEW CAPABILITY The cost of each F-35A jet is about £80 million ($NZ180 million), putting the total bill for the 12 planes at just under £1 billion, according to another British official, who asked not to be named. Britain's nuclear deterrent currently rests solely on the Trident submarine-based system, which misfired during a test last year, the second successive test failure after one veered off course in 2016. The last time Britain possessed an independent air-launched nuclear capability was in 1998 when the WE-177 free fall bomb was withdrawn from service, according to Britain's parliament. Tactical nuclear weapons are intended for battlefield use, as opposed to strategic weapons designed to be fired across vast distances. By purchasing the F-35A fighter jets, Britain would be able to diversify its military options and align more closely with NATO allies such as France, and the United States, which maintains land, sea, and air-based nuclear capabilities. The United States withdrew its last nuclear weapons from Britain in 2008, in a sign at that time that the threat of conflict following the end of the Cold War was receding. Downing Street said buying the new jets would support about 20,000 jobs in Britain and underline its commitment to NATO. The government has pledged to boost overall defence and security spending to 5% of economic output by 2035 to meet a NATO target and said on Tuesday it must "actively prepare" for war at home for the first time in years.
Techday NZ
6 days ago
- Techday NZ
The lost art of writing things down
I was once enrolled in a programming module back at university. We had been given a task, to code something, so we all sat banging out whatever code we could on our keyboards. Our professor looked around at our screens and did something that seemed bizarre at the time – he asked everyone to stop typing. "You're all being incredibly inefficient," he said, "Some of the best programmers I know never start at the keyboard. They clarify their thoughts on paper first, and when they finally get to coding, it's infinitely easier." Initially, I thought this was just academic nonsense. But reluctantly following his advice, I experienced an "ah ha" moment. Mapping out my ideas, the flow, and the outcomes on paper first helped everything flow more logically. While my coding skills were poor, there was a lot less frustration, and I knew what I was trying to achieve at each step. Years later, I find myself considering that maybe that lesson was one of the most valuable I've ever received. The scattergun approach of digital dependency That early lesson in slowing down to think before acting feels increasingly relevant today, where the rush to digital solutions often replaces the clarity that comes from deliberate, offline thought. In today's cybersecurity landscape, AI promises unprecedented automation and efficiency. Tools claim they'll automatically detect threats, write secure code or even respond to incidents. Need to draft a security policy? Ask ChatGPT. Looking for threat intelligence? Mindlessly scroll through Twitter (sorry, "X") hoping for inspiration. Trying to architect a secure system? Google for templates. This creates a scattergun approach to security thinking – firing off in multiple directions without precision, hoping something hits the mark. While there's certainly value in these tools, there's also danger in over-reliance. It feels productive because we're consuming and producing content rapidly, and maybe even solving real issues – but are we actually thinking deeply? Slowing down to go faster Just like in the movie "Cars," Doc Hudson explains to Lightning McQueen that when a car loses grip and starts to slide, you need to "turn right to go left." This means turning the steering wheel in the direction opposite the slide to regain control and steer the car into the desired direction. It seems counterintuitive. Lightning McQueen scoffs and sarcastically asks if Doc lives in opposite land. But like many things, just because something feels counterintuitive, it doesn't mean it's wrong. Sometimes you need to slow down to go faster. A few months back, I made what turned out to be one of my best investments – not in cryptocurrency, but in a fountain pen. Nothing extravagant, mind you, a relatively cheap one, but something that forces me to slow down. For this reason, British Author Neil Gaiman writes the first draft of every book by hand. He says that with a computer you "write that down and look at it and then fiddle with it." But with a pen you "slow up a bit, but you're thinking the sentence through to the end, and then you start writing." There's something about the deliberate nature of using a fountain pen. You can't rush or you'll smudge the ink. You become conscious of each word, each thought. Whether I'm working through a complex threat model or thinking through the methodology of a research paper, this forced slowdown has become invaluable. The whiteboard on my wall serves a similar purpose for bigger ideas and collaborative thinking. Those moments of standing back, marker in hand, connecting concepts with arrows and diagrams not only makes me feel like I'm a genius, but it's actually where I have the best insights. In an age where AI tools can generate ideas, write paragraphs and draft entire policies in seconds, the temptation is to let the machine think for us. But true insight rarely comes from speed alone. Sometimes, the best use of AI is knowing when not to use it—when to step away from the keyboard, pick up a pen or stand at a whiteboard. It's in those slower, analog moments where depth and clarity truly emerge. Writing as a thinking tool In cybersecurity, we're often focused on outputs, whether that be the fixed vulnerability or the secure deployment. But I've found that writing is less about the destination and more about the journey. When investigating an incident or analysing a new attack technique, writing forces connections my brain wouldn't otherwise make. The physical act of writing, whether on paper or board, engages different cognitive processes than typing. It surfaces assumptions, highlights logical gaps and often reveals entirely new avenues of investigation. Going back to my university days, it reminds me of my final year dissertation. Have I ever gone back to read it? Absolutely not. Has anyone cited it or used it for anything meaningful? Nope. But was it valuable? Unquestionably. The dissertation wasn't about the final bound document; it was about building the discipline of sustained, deep thinking. It was about learning to organise complex ideas, defend positions with evidence and structure arguments coherently. Today, with AI tools ready to summarise, generate and even argue for us, it's easy to bypass that thinking process. But outsourcing the writing often means outsourcing the thinking. AI can support analysis, but the insight—the real clarity—still comes from doing the hard work ourselves. Writing is where thought becomes visible, and in a world of instant answers, that slow, deliberate visibility is more important than ever. The AI automation paradox in security AI promises to revolutionise cybersecurity. With each passing day, new tools emerge claiming to automate everything from threat detection to incident response. And while these advancements are impressive and necessary, they simultaneously make the human element more crucial than ever. Perhaps what cybersecurity needs isn't just more automation, but a balanced approach that preserves deep thinking. In my career, the most significant attacks weren't prevented solely by automated tools; they were prevented (or successfully investigated) by security professionals who had developed rigorous thinking processes and an attention to detail that can only come from slowing down and thinking deliberately. When AI and automation promise to solve all our problems, we must remember that technology should augment, not replace, human insight. Writing things down, mapping out problems and thinking through scenarios methodically aren't outdated practices – they're timeless skills that become even more valuable in an automated world. It's not about resisting progress or technology, I embrace those enthusiastically, but about recognising that some cognitive processes can't, and shouldn't, be shortcut.
