[Haulr]

Correct me if i'm wrong, you'll never get (as) good regenerative braking power with an asynchronous motor in the front.
Most of the braking is done in the front and a permanent magnet motor as an advantage there.

to some extent, I feel like Polestar is a victim of Volvo economies and planning for the forthcoming EX60. Which shares the new 800V motor/inverter. Also, RIP the torque vectoring rear-end. Blame Volvo.

But are there really just two different motors - and the boost is just software? The new MY26 Performance has got 100 more lb-ft of torque - so my wag is that there could be some hardware variation here. It would be kind of wild if they could get that much torque through software alone.

MY26:

MY25:

 

[nbvolks]

I would expect a similar, real world reduction in the 0-60 speeds for MY26, as has been seen with MY25. For example, the published 0-60 sprint for MY25 Performance Pack is 4.5 seconds, whereas reviews and owners alike has seen as low as 3.9 seconds. So, if the MY26 published number is 3.8, I think it's safe to expect lower 3s in reality.

 

[Rikwandi]

Interestingly MY26 has less torque overall to MY25, but able to deliver much more hoursepower.

 

[strangeengine]

Interestingly MY26 has less torque overall to MY25, but able to deliver much more hoursepower.

Horsepower is a function of rpm. The new motors just rev higher and are geared lower.

 

[Haulr]

Interestingly MY26 has less torque overall to MY25, but able to deliver much more hoursepower.

that is interesting. it looks like they went with slightly weaker 800V hardware - that can spin faster.

for more efficiency I suppose. the range got a big bump. (edit: oops. comparing WLTP to EPA).

 

[ryzvy]

the range got a big bump

Maybe for the Performance version, looks like the Dual Motor range went down slightly.

https://insideevs.com/news/774327/2026-polestar-3-facelift-battery-charging-specs/ "the new Dual motor version is WLTP-rated for 394 miles (635 km), a 0.6-mile (1 km) decrease over the previous model. The Performance is good for 368 miles (593 km) on the same test cycle, which is an increase of 16 miles (26 km) over the pre-facelift version. The EPA figures have yet to be published, but we expect similar differences to the WLTP cycle."

 

[Jupiter7]

Maybe for the Performance version, looks like the Dual Motor range went down slightly.

https://insideevs.com/news/774327/2026-polestar-3-facelift-battery-charging-specs/ "the new Dual motor version is WLTP-rated for 394 miles (635 km), a 0.6-mile (1 km) decrease over the previous model. The Performance is good for 368 miles (593 km) on the same test cycle, which is an increase of 16 miles (26 km) over the pre-facelift version. The EPA figures have yet to be published, but we expect similar differences to the WLTP cycle."

Battery is smaller, range less than a mile less. Not bad, and more efficient is always better!

 

[ryzvy]

Battery is smaller, range less than a mile less. Not bad, and more efficient is always better!

Not disputing that more efficient is better. I was simply responding to the statement that the range got a "big bump".

 

[Haulr]

Not disputing that more efficient is better. I was simply responding to the statement that the range got a "big bump".

thanks - I made the mistake of comparing WLTP (complete fantasy anyway) to EPA.

 

[Yastus]

thanks - I made the mistake of comparing WLTP (complete fantasy anyway) to EPA.

I'm European and i'm never generally a fan of American metrics, whether it's F vs C or miles vs km's, ft vs m's.

But for the EPA vs WLTP, the EPA is so much more accurate it's ridiculous we're not just adopting that (however then in KM's not miles).

 

[Jupiter7]

I'm European and i'm never generally a fan of American metrics, whether it's F vs C or miles vs km's, ft vs m's.

But for the EPA vs WLTP, the EPA is so much more accurate it's ridiculous we're not just adopting that (however then in KM's not miles).

The only non-metric measure that makes sense to me is Farenheit. (Except for scientific research) People live in weather between 0 and 100 (approximately). It just makes sense…

 

[Yastus]

The only non-metric measure that makes sense to me is Farenheit. (Except for scientific research) People live in weather between 0 and 100 (approximately). It just makes sense…

I understand what you mean in a way. However in celsius below 0 is when water freezes and 100 is when water boils. + it's pegged to the Kelvin scale which has absolute zero in the same lineair way. But I guess that's why you mentioned (except for scientific research).

anyway, forgive me going off-topic in the P3 forum.

 

[Haulr]

The only non-metric measure that makes sense to me is Farenheit. (Except for scientific research) People live in weather between 0 and 100 (approximately). It just makes sense…

designers often prefer feet and inches over meters. which makes sense if you have ever tried to lay something out on paper. even European naval architects, for example, still turn out boats measured in "feet". hint: it has to do with divisibility.

car designers? idk.

 

[Tophertron]

This is the main reason I leased, plus the wicked depreciation... The technology changes at a rapid pace and the old becomes outdated quickly. The outdated technology accelerates the depreciation curve.

Same here. I’m a little salty I just leased one, but at least we get the chip upgrade!

 

[Aggie57]

The only non-metric measure that makes sense to me is Farenheit. (Except for scientific research) People live in weather between 0 and 100 (approximately). It just makes sense…

Funny, after 11 years living in the US it's temperatures that I still use Celsius for. 0-100 = freezing to boiling water at sea level, just makes so much sense. Miles and even weights I can handle now, although why in the world is tyre (sic) tread depth measured in 16ths of an inch !

 

[Jupiter7]

Funny, after 11 years living in the US it's temperatures that I still use Celsius for. 0-100 = freezing to boiling water at sea level, just makes so much sense. Miles and even weights I can handle now, although why in the world is tyre (sic) tread depth measured in 16ths of an inch !

Close! Tire tread is actually measured in 1/32 of an inch Or the height of Abe Lincoln’s forehead on a penny…

 

[Giove]

measured in 1/32 of an inch Or the height of Abe Lincoln’s forehead on a penny

yes, but how many football fields?
🤣

designers often prefer feet and inches over meters. which makes sense if you have ever tried to lay something out on paper. even European naval architects, for example, still turn out boats measured in "feet". hint: it has to do with divisibility.

well, this may be a problem as A&W learned the hard way. 😄

the great advantage of metric system is that everything is connected.
1 kg is 1 liter of water, 1 liter is 1 dm3 of volume... etc.

aside from Americans i haven't seen a single designer that prefer inches over meters.
many engineers even prefer base 100 for time measurements instead of the base 60.
with some reason i'd say, since Babylonians are quite dead...
(here, Breitling keeping the base 100 measure scale on their Chronomat:

)

boats length is a traditional way of defining it in a very specific environment (but everywhere in boat spec sheet is reported the metric length), as is for aeronautics where we still measure altitude in feet (except in Russia). but anything else is metric, from runway length to fuel loads.
then there's miles. nautical ones. not those decided by a king.
ironically the "connection" thing is the reason why nautical miles are still used instead of metric: 1 nautical mile is 1' of latitude, which comes handy while navigating a round thing.

 

[jim5667]

Bit miffed the 26 has way more HP and looks a better proposition than the original. May ask what I need to do to swap out in the scheme I am in.

 

[Haulr]

Bit miffed the 26 has way more HP and looks a better proposition than the original. May ask what I need to do to swap out in the scheme I am in.

wait 2 years?

one thing I noticed for the first time. Polestar now offers a "loyalty discount" on new leases.

aside from Americans i haven't seen a single designer that prefer inches over meters.

it was actually a British yacht designer who told me different. A special case I suppose, but it's telling which way somebody goes when they can freely choose either standard.

and. like I said. it makes complete sense to me. it's a pita to try and divide 10 by 3 (well nigh impossible, in fact). but likely it's more than that, the units of feet and inches are of a "human" standard. ergonomics are key for yachts - they are all about the human environment. and why I think arguments for degrees F also make intuitive sense, they were originated to human scale.

so. yeah. you bring up engineers. sure. scientists as well. certainly. degrees K, all the way. ;-)

 

[jim5667]

They are available to order now for delivery in march next year here in the UK. So just over 6 months. Not too bad