Lamborghini's New Supercar Is Going Racing
Lamborghini
lineup is never complete without a selection of race cars, and the automaker has introduced the first one based on the new Temerario. The
Temerario GT3
ditches the hybrid system, due to regulations, and features an assortment of upgrades that turn it into a lighter, tougher racing machine.
A twin-turbocharged 4.0-liter V-8 continues to power the car, but it makes 550 horsepower instead of the 800 that it delivers in the road car. The engine features a redesigned airbox, necessary for the new, smaller turbochargers, titanium connecting rods, and a new calibration that broadened the max power across the rev range.
Photo by: Lamborghini
Repairability is one of the car's defining features. Lamborghini designed it to allow mechanics to quickly replace an assortment of body panels, suspension parts, and other components in the pits.
The lack of the hybrid system resulted in Lamborghini modifying the aluminum spaceframe chassis. The automaker simplified the design, with the rear engineered to accommodate the new six-speed transverse gearbox.
The GT3 also wears new carbon composite bodywork that tries to maintain the Temerario's styling while improving the car's aerodynamic and cooling capabilities, including the brakes, radiators, and turbochargers. The front and rear ends are each constructed as a single piece, and the floor comes in four separate parts, all of which are designed to make repairs easier.
The Temerario race car has a fully integrated roll cage, improved fuel flow into the tank, six-way KW dampers, a hydraulic steering rack, and 18-inch Ronal AG wheels. The car is still in development and won't make its racing debut until the 12 Hours of Sebring in March 2026, so we'll have to wait to see the new Temerario GT3 in action.
Photo by: Lamborghini
The Latest From Lamborghini:
Mamma Mia! This Might Be a Street-Legal Lamborghini Sesto Elemento
Lamborghini Walks Back Urus EV, Plans Hybrid Instead
Get the best news, reviews, columns, and more delivered straight to your inbox, daily.
back
Sign up
For more information, read our
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Use
.
Source:
Lamborghini
Share this Story
X
Got a tip for us? Email:
tips@motor1.com
Join the conversation
(
)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Brokers risk falling behind as AI disruption accelerates
The majority of UK SMEs are comfortable with AI assessing their insurance needs and recommending the most suitable coverage options, according to GlobalData surveying. Meanwhile, AI-native insurance broker Meshed has secured backing from Aviva and other investors, with the aim of reshaping the commercial insurance market for SMEs. GlobalData's 2025 UK SME Insurance Survey has found that 64.5% of SMEs are comfortable, to some extent, with AI assessing their insurance needs and recommending the most suitable coverage options. Moreover, over a quarter of SMEs (26.7%) cited that they were extremely comfortable with this. How comfortable are you/would you be for an AI tool to do the following? 2025 Meanwhile, Meshed has raised £950,000 ($1.3m) in an oversubscribed pre-seed funding round to transform the commercial insurance market for SMEs. Investors included Haatch, Aviva via Founders Factory, the Exponential Science Foundation, and several angel backers. Meshed highlights that around 80% of UK SMEs remain underinsured, largely due to outdated brokerage practices and inefficient manual processes. By deploying AI-powered agents for quoting, data collection, and other routine tasks, the firm aims to cut administrative costs, reduce premiums, and enable brokers to focus more on client relationships and specialist advice. Yet, findings from our 2025 UK Commercial Insurance Broker Survey indicate that brokers may be underestimating the scale of disruption that AI could bring. Only 5.2% of brokers see AI as the biggest threat to their business, compared with 13.2% citing competition from other brokers and 11.2% from direct players. Moreover, adoption remains limited, with just 5.9% of brokers using AI-driven policy recommendation tools, while 78.6% report no plans to adopt them. Brokers should recognize that while AI may not seem like the greatest threat today, failing to adopt it could make it one tomorrow. By overlooking AI, brokers risk falling behind faster-moving competitors and losing relevance in a market where efficiency and digital capabilities increasingly drive client expectations. "Brokers risk falling behind as AI disruption accelerates" was originally created and published by Life Insurance International, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
How AI will radically change military command structures
Despite two centuries of evolution, the structure of a modern military staff would be recognizable to Napoleon. At the same time, military organizations have struggled to incorporate new technologies as they adapt to new domains – air, space and information – in modern war. The sizes of military headquarters have grown to accommodate the expanded information flows and decision points of these new facets of warfare. The result is diminishing marginal returns and a coordination nightmare – too many cooks in the kitchen – that risks jeopardizing mission command. AI agents – autonomous, goal-oriented software powered by large language models – can automate routine staff tasks, compress decision timelines and enable smaller, more resilient command posts. They can shrink the staff while also making it more effective. As an international relations scholar and reserve officer in the U.S. Army who studies military strategy, I see both the opportunity afforded by the technology and the acute need for change. That need stems from the reality that today's command structures still mirror Napoleon's field headquarters in both form and function – industrial-age architectures built for massed armies. Over time, these staffs have ballooned in size, making coordination cumbersome. They also result in sprawling command posts that modern precision artillery, missiles and drones can target effectively and electronic warfare can readily disrupt. Russia's so-called ' Graveyard of Command Posts ' in Ukraine vividly illustrates how static headquarters where opponents can mass precision artillery, missiles and drones become liabilities on a modern battlefield. The role of AI agents Military planners now see a world in which AI agents – autonomous, goal-oriented software that can perceive, decide and act on their own initiative – are mature enough to deploy in command systems. These agents promise to automate the fusion of multiple sources of intelligence, threat-modeling, and even limited decision cycles in support of a commander's goals. There is still a human in the loop, but the humans will be able to issue commands faster and receive more timely and contextual updates from the battlefield. These AI agents can parse doctrinal manuals, draft operational plans and generate courses of action, which helps accelerate the tempo of military operations. Experiments – including efforts I ran at Marine Corps University – have demonstrated how even basic large language models can accelerate staff estimates and inject creative, data-driven options into the planning process. These efforts point to the end of traditional staff roles. There will still be people – war is a human endeavor – and ethics will still factor into streams of algorithms making decisions. But the people who remain deployed are likely to gain the ability to navigate mass volumes of information with the help of AI agents. These teams are likely to be smaller than modern staffs. AI agents will allow teams to manage multiple planning groups simultaneously. For example, they will be able to use more dynamic red teaming techniques – role-playing the opposition – and vary key assumptions to create a wider menu of options than traditional plans. The time saved not having to build PowerPoint slides and updating staff estimates will be shifted to contingency analysis – asking 'what if' questions – and building operational assessment frameworks – conceptual maps of how a plan is likely to play out in a particular situation – that provide more flexibility to commanders. Designing the next military staff To explore the optimal design of this AI agent-augmented staff, I led a team of researchers at the bipartisan think tank Center for Strategic & International Studies' Futures Lab to explore alternatives. The team developed three baseline scenarios reflecting what most military analysts are seeing as the key operational problems in modern great power competition: joint blockades, firepower strikes and joint island campaigns. Joint refers to an action coordinated among multiple branches of a military. In the example of China and Taiwan, joint blockades describe how China could isolate the island nation and either starve it or set conditions for an invasion. Firepower strikes describe how Beijing could fire salvos of missiles – similar to what Russia is doing in Ukraine – to destroy key military centers and even critical infrastructure. Last, in Chinese doctrine, a Joint Island Landing Campaign describes the cross-strait invasion their military has spent decades refining. Any AI agent-augmented staff should be able to manage warfighting functions across these three operational scenarios. The research team found that the best model kept humans in the loop and focused on feedback loops. This approach – called the Adaptive Staff Model and based on pioneering work by sociologist Andrew Abbott – embeds AI agents within continuous human-machine feedback loops, drawing on doctrine, history and real-time data to evolve plans on the fly. In this model, military planning is ongoing and never complete, and focused more on generating a menu of options for the commander to consider, refine and enact. The research team tested the approach with multiple AI models and found that it outperformed alternatives in each case. AI agents are not without risk. First, they can be overly generalized, if not biased. Foundation models – AI models trained on extremely large datasets and adaptable to a wide range of tasks – know more about pop culture than war and require refinement. This makes it important to benchmark agents to understand their strengths and limitations. Second, absent training in AI fundamentals and advanced analytical reasoning, many users tend to use models as a substitute for critical thinking. No smart model can make up for a dumb, or worse, lazy user. Seizing the 'agentic' moment To take advantage of AI agents, the U.S. military will need to institutionalize building and adapting agents, include adaptive agents in war games, and overhaul doctrine and training to account for human-machine teams. This will require a number of changes. First, the military will need to invest in additional computational power to build the infrastructure required to run AI agents across military formations. Second, they will need to develop additional cybersecurity measures and conduct stress tests to ensure the agent-augmented staff isn't vulnerable when attacked across multiple domains, including cyberspace and the electromagnetic spectrum. Third, and most important, the military will need to dramatically change how it educates its officers. Officers will have to learn how AI agents work, including how to build them, and start using the classroom as a lab to develop new approaches to the age-old art of military command and decision-making. This could include revamping some military schools to focus on AI, a concept floated in the White House's AI Action Plan released on July 23, 2025. Absent these reforms, the military is likely to remain stuck in the Napoleonic staff trap: adding more people to solve ever more complex problems.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The Lamborghini Fenomeno in Photos
More from Robb Report 'It Needs Cinematic Drama': Lamborghini's Design Director on the 1,065 HP Fenomeno The Lucid Gravity X Reimagines the Electric SUV as an All-Terrain Beast Cadillac's Elevated Velocity Concept Wants to Take the Performance SUV to New Heights Best of Robb Report The 2024 Chevy C8 Corvette: Everything We Know About the Powerful Mid-Engine Beast The World's Best Superyacht Shipyards The ABCs of Chartering a Yacht Click here to read the full article. The Lamborghini Fenomeno, the marque's most powerful V-12 model to date. 'We give adrenaline a shape,' says Mitja Borkert, Lamborghini's design director, regarding the Fenomeno. Though the interior roughly mimics the Revuelto's cockpit, it adds a few delightfully, and absurdly, sinister elements. The new hard-shell racing seats have a retro-modern styling and feature strategically placed pads. The Fenomeno's airflow management allows for an improvement of 30 percent in both aero load and cooling compared to that of the Revuelto. The Fenomeno's widened and lengthened body—when compared to the Revuelto—has been designed in a very graphical way, with fewer lines, broad shoulders and surfaces, a long tail, and a peaky front. The car is claimed to cover zero to 62 mph in 2.4 seconds on its way to a top speed of 217 mph. Only 29 examples are being built for Lamborghini's most valued customers, along with one more for the automaker's museum. Each Fenomeno starts at $3.5 million.
