Embracing Powertrain Diversity, GWM Continues to Enhance Clean Diesel Capabilities for Off-Roading
BAODING, CHINA - Media OutReach Newswire - 15 June 2025 - While new energy vehicles continue to gain momentum worldwide, efficient diesel power remains a compelling choice—especially in challenging off-road environments where torque, range, and reliability are critical. GWM is advancing diesel technology with a focus on refinement, performance, and real-world usability. At the recent GWM Thailand Diesel Day event, the brand demonstrated how modern diesel can deliver a clean, quiet, and highly capable driving experience.
Traditional trade-offs—torque versus comfort, power versus fuel economy—are disappearing. With today's drivers demanding both performance and efficiency, GWM's TANK 300 Diesel delivers on all fronts.
In Thailand, the TANK 300 Diesel has earned high praise for its impressive torque (480N·m at just 1,500rpm), extended driving range (up to 1,200km), and smooth, quiet ride. As one reviewer noted, 'It drives like a gasoline SUV—quiet and refined—until you need the torque. Then, it just powers through.'
This refined balance comes from GWM's 2.4T diesel engine, combined with over 200 NVH (Noise, Vibration, and Harshness) enhancements—bringing idle noise down to just 65dB, comparable to gasoline-powered vehicles. The result: urban comfort with true off-road muscle.
GWM's advanced combustion technology—featuring columnar combustion chambers and dual tangential air ducts—cuts fuel consumption to under 7.3L/100km, making long journeys more economical and environmentally responsible.
Guided by its 'All Scenarios, All Powertrains, All Users' strategy, GWM's TANK 300 Diesel demonstrates that diesel, when done right, is still a powerful, relevant solution to real-world needs. In markets like Thailand, clean diesel has a promising future.
More than just a product launch, GWM's achievement reflects a user-centered innovation that sets a new benchmark. The message to drivers is clear: more power, fewer compromises, and a brand that truly listens.
https://youtu.be/LOVtBHWdN3o?si=8SkFmlVl0iTFvqiV
Hashtag: #GWM
The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Robert Kubica seals emotional Le Mans 24 Hours victory for Ferrari
Poland's Robert Kubica sealed a deserved place in motor racing history as he took victory – alongside China's Ye Yifei and Britain's Philip Hanson – at the Le Mans 24 Hours. Hard fought with a relentless determination that has matched his refusal to be cowed after a life-threatening accident, his victory also secured an impressive third consecutive win for Ferrari at the 93rd edition of the vingt-quatre. The victory after 387 laps for the No 83 privateer Ferrari 499P, run by the Scuderia's works partner AF Corse, was the first overall win at Le Mans for drivers from Poland and China and will make Ye a household name in his home country, while for the 25-year-old Hanson it is a career high point in only his second run in the top, hypercar, category. Advertisement Related: Chadwick encouraged by female participation in motorsport before Le Mans debut However, it was surely of greatest import to Kubica for whom it was an understandably emotional moment. The victory was a triumph for a driver who has fought tirelessly to continue his career after he was seriously injured in a crash at the Andora Rally in 2011, leading to the partial amputation of his forearm. It all but ended his burgeoning F1 career, when he was set to join Ferrari the following year. However, he demonstrated immense fortitude, not least in returning to racing only a year later and now sealing a win in the greatest sportscar race of them all, putting in an exhausting five stints for more than three hours in the final phase of the race. Vindication for a driver Lewis Hamilton rated as one of the most talented he had raced. It was clear that tired as he was, nothing could have stopped Kubica from closing out the race himself. 'We deserve it. Happy for Ferrari. Three years in a row with three different crews, it is amazing,' he said. 'I was not supposed to do five stints at the end of the race. It is three hours and something in the car but fortunately I was able to control everything with a cool head, no mistakes and managed to bring it home.' Advertisement Moreover it was achieved in an enormously competitive field at the Circuit de la Sarthe. The hypercar class at Le Mans is in absolutely rude health, with eight major manufacturers now competing and three more, including Ford and McLaren, likely to join by 2027. The intensity of the competition at the race was immense with the cars running at sprint race pace solidly, with only one safety car deployed and nothing in it at the sharp end. At the close the No 83 took the flag by just 14 seconds from the second-placed No 6 Porsche of Kevin Estre, Laurens Vanthoor and Matt Campbell, with the Ferrari No 51 of Alessandro Pier Guidi, James Calado and Antonio Giovinazzi in third and the No 50 Ferrari of Antonio Fuoco, Miguel Molina and Nicklas Nielsen fourth, all within 30 seconds of the lead after a full 24 hours. Ferrari would doubtless have preferred one of their works cars to have taken the honours and that had looked the most likely result for some time but, regardless, it was a prancing horse that won, their car once more a formidable competitor. In race pace it was indomitable, consistently leading and holding down the top three slots for long periods for their third win since they returned to the top flight at Le Mans in 2023 after a 50-year hiatus. A remarkable achievement for the Scuderia who had previously last won at La Sarthe in their heyday when they took six victories in a row between 1960 and 1965. Being Ferrari, there was of course drama too. Kubica and his colleagues had been aggrieved when Ferrari issued team orders in favour of the works cars in the mid-period of the race and doubtless felt some sense of justice when the race fell in their favour and they seized their chance. Advertisement With just under four hours remaining Pier Guidi had looked comfortable leading the three Ferraris, albeit with little to choose between them, when in a tiny but enormously costly misjudgement, he overcooked it into the chicane leading into the pit lane, clipped the kerb, spun and was left in the gravel. He was able to resume but the lead was gone and the No83 car took to the front. Yet the fight continued to the flag at unforgiving pace, the three Ferrari's hunted down by the No 6 Porsche which as the race entered the final two hours was able to move up to second place. Indeed the Porsche squad had thrown everything at the Ferraris. Having started at the very back of the hypercar field after being disqualified from qualifying for being underweight, a fired-up Estre launched an absolutely mammoth assault from the moment Roger Federer waved the tricolour to start the race on Saturday afternoon. He was decisive and committed and in a field of 21 cars, featuring works entries from Toyota, Alpine, Peugeot, Cadillac, BMW and Aston Martin, had moved up to third by the end of the second hour and was in the mix from then on. Indeed the No6 did hold the lead at times as the race ebbed and flowed against Ferrari, who ultimately just had the edge. Advertisement The Porsche duly pushed to the last, the final moments impossibly tense as the minutes inexorably counted down but appropriately it was Kubica behind the wheel to see his team home with familiarly steely resolve. In the LMP2 class the Inter Europol Competition Oreca of Tom Dillmann, Jakub Smiechowski and Nick Yelloly took the flag. The LMGT3 category was won by the Manthey Porsche of Richard Lietz, Riccardo Pera and Ryan Hardwick.
TechCrunch
an hour ago
- TechCrunch
Alexa von Tobel has high hopes for ‘fintech 3.0'
It's been 10 years since Alexa von Tobel sold her financial planning startup Learnvest to Northwestern Mutual for $250 million. Since then, von Tobel became Northwestern Mutual's first chief digital officer, then chief innovation officer, before launching an early-stage venture firm of her own, Inspired Capital, with former U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker. She's also a New York Times bestelling author, and she's about to launch a new interview podcast, 'Inspired with Alexa von Tobel.' In a conversation with TechCrunch, von Tobel recalled the hectic period around the acquisition, which closed literally days before the birth of her first child, and when she knew it was time to start her own firm. Von Tobel explained that she created Inspired to be the investor she'd dreamed of — one with a 'cultish commitment to entrepreneurship' — when she was a founder herself. And while Inspired is a generalist firm, she said she feels both 'urgent and optimistic' about fintech, the sector where she launched her career. (One of her pre-Inspired fintech investments, Chime, just went public.) 'We think of this wave as fintech 3.0,' von Tobel said. 'The next wave of innovation won't come from superficial tweaks but from fundamental deep product reinvention — tools that meet the needs of a changing economy and a more diverse, digitally native population.' The following interview has been edited for length and clarity. Congratulations on the 10-year anniversary of the acquisition. Looking back, what do you feel proudest of? Techcrunch event Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Boston, MA | REGISTER NOW First, Northwestern Mutual is an incredible company, and our software became an incredibly important part of the customer experience. And I am so proud that so many of the LearnVest team stayed at Northwestern Mutual for so long, and it really was just a merger of actual values. It's just amazing how simple some things are, it comes down to the values of two companies and the missions of two companies. I sold on a Wednesday and went into labor with my first child that weekend. All jokes aside, I always say it took me about a year to mentally just recover from being, like, all systems were go, my brain was being pushed to manage so many things. Literally, I was having my first child. It was like the world threw a bus at me and I caught it. So when you were closing the deal, was there a ticking clock in your mind, that you had to finish everything before this whole other thing happens? Of course. If you think about it, we literally signed on, I think, 11am on March 25 and then we did a press tour with the CEO, and then the next day, we did a stand up with the entire team, and then I went to sleep and literally woke up in labor. Having your first child is priceless. There's nothing in the world that is more valuable to me than having my children, nothing. And so I kept being like, 'We have to get this done, because I'm not leaving the hospital to come back and close a deal. I actually need to focus on this human being that I'm bringing into the world.' I always joke that the lawyers took me very seriously. When people on the outside talk about an acquisition, obviously, the first thing they talk about is usually the financials, and then one of the signs of success is the product. LearnVest as a product doesn't exist anymore, but it sounds like it was less about having LearnVest as a standalone product and more about transforming Northwestern Mutual. It was so much bigger than a product. [Northwestern Mutual's] John Schlifske, he's no longer CEO, but he is one of the people I look up to most in the world, just a formidable human being. And he kept being like, 'We're gonna merge the companies.' And I would laugh — one is a $40-billion-a-year company, and [the other is] little tiny LearnVest. But he really meant it. He was like, 'We're gonna use this as a catalyst.' It was a catalyst for an entire digital transformation. I became the company's first ever chief digital officer, and then chief innovation officer, and it was really about taking everything and merging it into the broader parent company. My CTO of LearnVest became the CTO of the parent company. You stayed for four years? Yeah, [my last day] was basically end of January 2019, and that day we launched Inspired. How did you know it was time to leave, and where did the idea for Inspired come from? I'm always at my best when I'm building something that I wish existed for me. And I've said many times that the idea for Inspired actually happened when I dropped out of business school, and I was a really all-in entrepreneur in every way — I dropped out basically December 18 of 2008, at the bottom of the worst recession in 81 years, not necessarily the the the most inviting time to start a company. And I really was looking for a capital partner that didn't exist. I had this vision of what it should look and feel like, this sort of rigor and camaraderie and in-the-trenches-ness of what an early stage capital partner could be, and I didn't see it in the market. That was New York in 2008, 2009, and I had this long-term plan of one day, I want to come back and build that. Fast forward to 2018, 2019 I'd started really actively dreaming about what that could look like. And one day I was like, it has to happen, it's now. We're now almost seven years in. We're a dedicated early stage venture fund, generalist, headquartered in New York, but investing everywhere. And I feel like I've been here for one minute. It literally is the best job I've ever had. You mentioned having this idea of a capital partner that you wished you'd had. How do you put that into practice? What was I looking for in that capital? What were you looking for, and how did you get everyone at the on-board with that vision? So, when I talk to entrepreneurs, I always say Inspired is different for four key reasons. The first reason is that we are extremely long duration capital. It means when we back a founder, we truly put blinders on for 20 years. When you're building a company, there's choices you have to make as a CEO, which is, 'Do I do the thing for next month so that things look good, or do the harder thing that won't look good next month, maybe it pays off in three years, or not?' And what we always say is, 'Do the harder thing, do the thing that's creating far more long-term value and worry less about synthetic results.' The second thing is, our team's pretty unique in that we've built and scaled more than 10 businesses that have touched hundreds of millions of users around the world. That mentality is so different when you're sitting in the seat working with an entrepreneur, because we haven't necessarily lived every experience, but we've lived a lot, and we appreciate the contours. It's almost like seeing 3D versus 2D. The third thing is that our team operates like one unit. So when we back a company, you actually get the entire team. At many firms, you get one partner, that's the person they know, they know you, and if, God forbid, that partner leaves, it's like you've evaporated your social equity that you built up with that partner. We operate like a swarm, where you get all of us and we actively do weekly stand ups on the entire portfolio, so that everybody's up to speed. And then the final thing, because of [Inspired co-founder Penny Pritzker], she's on the board of Microsoft, was U.S. Secretary of Commerce. So we like to say that, there are many, many, many, many ways that we can help companies get access to things that are really hard to get as just a sole founder in your 20s or 30s, where we can actually be a tremendous business accelerant to our companies in a pretty unique way, with access to tech and government and many other vectors. So in short, that was the firm I wanted. I wanted a deeply cultish commitment to entrepreneurship. We always talk about this Inspired future — one of the things I love so much about entrepreneurship is, no great entrepreneur shows up and is like, 'Let's make the world worse,' right? They show up and they're like, 'Here's a big problem that's facing a billion people. Let's go fix it.' I think some of the biggest founders in the world, their companies poured out of their DNA. I started LearnVest because my father had passed away, and my mom overnight had to manage our finances. And I was like, I never want a family to feel financially destabilized, and I wanted to go build the solution. When we look back at the broader ecosystem over the last 10 years, one of the big transitions is leaving behind that period of zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) for VC and startups. Have you seen a change in the venture ecosystem in the last few years, and has that affected the way you approach investing at Inspired? So just a helpful framework — Inspired is a full generalist fund. We will touch everything from deep tech to health tech to consumer, looking for the biggest, most important ideas of the next 15 years. Every day, when I come to work, I literally mentally walk into this office in 2035. And that's how we're thinking about where the world is going and the problems be solved And I think when ZIRP existed, many things that I would say weren't venture bets, would get backed. And I almost think it would be confusing, because you'd be like: What categories are not venture categories? Lots of categories are not venture categories by nature — if you think about power law, everything that we back ideally has a real chance to be worth $10 billion. There's not a lot of those. I built LearnVest at the bottom of the worst recession in 81 years, and actually LearnVest was not an easy business. It was regulated, there were so many other things that were really hard about what we were doing. I really like hard businesses, because they have defensibility. They have reasons to exist. They have less copycats. I think a lot of things got funded over the last period of, like, 2014 to 2021, that should've been getting a different source of capital. How are you feeling about the state of fintech in 2025? Where are there still opportunities for startups? I'm feeling both urgent and optimistic about the state of fintech today. Financial services remain foundational to a functioning society, but they haven't kept pace with the rapid technological, demographic, and social shifts we're experiencing. The growing federal debt, rising income inequality, and increasing poverty — especially among older Americans — underscore the need for more adaptive and inclusive financial tools. Not to mention the rapid job loss due to AI. This moment presents a major opportunity for startups to reimagine financial products from the ground up. We think of this wave as fintech 3.0. The next wave of innovation won't come from superficial tweaks but from fundamental deep product reinvention — tools that meet the needs of a changing economy and a more diverse, digitally native population. We're excited by founders who see this challenge clearly and are building bold solutions to address it. You launched LearnVest on-stage at the TechCrunch 50 conference in 2009. If you were a judge at our Startup Battlefield in 2025, what would you be looking for in the winning team? I would be looking for a founder who, based on who they are and their lived experience, has a powerful, unique insight to a problem that touches hundreds of millions of people, if not more. Two, I would be looking for something that is non-obvious. You know, I think some of the biggest and best ideas are non-consensus, people don't think they're interesting. Third, I would look for an entrepreneur who's living and breathing a decade out. They see this very powerful future. And the final thing I would look for is the founder who has — there's a spikiness, there's a grit and resilience, but also a command, that you can sit with them and you can like it's palpable, that they will figure out a way to succeed. Those are the key ingredients that you look for.
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Multimodal AI: A Powerful Leap With Complex Trade-Offs
Artificial intelligence is evolving into a new phase that more closely resembles human perception and interaction with the world. Multimodal AI enables systems to process and generate information across various formats such as text, images, audio, and video. This advancement promises to revolutionize how businesses operate, innovate, and compete. Unlike earlier AI models, which were limited to a single data type, multimodal models are designed to integrate multiple streams of information, much like humans do. We rarely make decisions based on a single input; we listen, read, observe, and intuit. Now, machines are beginning to emulate this process. Many experts advocate for training models in a multimodal manner rather than focusing on individual media types. This leap in capability offers strategic advantages, such as more intuitive customer interactions, smarter automation, and holistic decision-making. Multimodal has already become a necessity in many simple use cases today. One example of this is the ability to comprehend presentations which have images, text and more. However, responsibility will be critical, as multimodal AI raises new questions about data integration, bias, security, and the true cost of implementation. Multimodal AI allows businesses to unify previously isolated data sources. Imagine a customer support platform that simultaneously processes a transcript, a screenshot, and a tone of voice to resolve an issue. Or consider a factory system that combines visual feeds, sensor data, and technician logs to predict equipment failures before they occur. These are not just efficiency gains; they represent new modes of value creation. In sectors like healthcare, logistics, and retail, multimodal systems can enable more accurate diagnoses, better inventory forecasting, and deeply personalized experiences. In addition, and perhaps more importantly, the ability of AI to engage with us in a multimodal way is the future. Talking to an LLM is easier than writing and then reading through responses. Imagine systems that can engage with us leveraging a combination of voice, videos, and infographics to explain concepts. This will fundamentally change how we engage with the digital ecosystem today and perhaps a big reason why many are starting to think that the AI of tomorrow will need something different than just laptops and screens. This is why leading tech firms like Google, Meta, Apple, and Microsoft are heavily investing in building native multimodal models rather than piecing together unimodal components. Despite its potential, implementing multimodal AI is complex. One of the biggest challenges is data integration, which involves more than just technical plumbing. Organizations need to feed integrated data flows into models, which is not an easy task. Consider a large organization with a wealth of enterprise data: documents, meetings, images, chats, and code. Is this information connected in a way that enables multimodal reasoning? Or think about a manufacturing plant: how can visual inspections, temperature sensors, and work orders be meaningfully fused in real time? That's not to mention the computing power multimodal AI require, which Sam Altman referenced in a viral tweet earlier this year. But success requires more than engineering; it requires clarity about which data combinations unlock real business outcomes. Without this clarity, integration efforts risk becoming costly experiments with unclear returns on investment. Multimodal systems can also amplify biases inherent in each data type. Visual datasets, such as those used in computer vision, may not equally represent all demographic groups. For example, a dataset might contain more images of people from certain ethnicities, age groups, or genders, leading to a skewed representation. Asking a LLM to generate an image of a person drawing with their left hand remains challenging – leading hypothesis is that most pictures available to train are right-handed individuals. Language data, such as text from books, articles, social media, and other sources, is created by humans who are influenced by their own social and cultural backgrounds. As a result, the language used can reflect the biases, stereotypes, and norms prevalent in those societies. When these inputs interact, the effects can compound unpredictably. A system trained on images from a narrow population may behave differently when paired with demographic metadata intended to broaden its utility. The result could be a system that appears more intelligent but is actually more brittle or biased. Business leaders must evolve their auditing and governance of AI systems to account for cross-modal risks, not just isolated flaws in training data. Additionally, multimodal systems raise the stakes for data security and privacy. Combining more data types creates a more specific and personal profile. Text alone may reveal what someone said, audio adds how they said it, and visuals show who they are. Adding biometric or behavioral data creates a detailed, persistent fingerprint. This has significant implications for customer trust, regulatory exposure, and cybersecurity strategy. Multimodal systems must be designed for resilience and accountability from the ground up, not just performance. Multimodal AI is not just a technical innovation; it represents a strategic shift that aligns artificial intelligence more closely with human cognition and real business contexts. It offers powerful new capabilities but demands a higher standard of data integration, fairness, and security. For executives, the key question is not just, "Can we build this?" but "Should we, and how?" What use case justifies the complexity? What risks are compounded when data types converge? How will success be measured, not just in performance but in trust? The promise is real, but like any frontier, it demands responsible exploration.
