Would you use an app to pay for petrol?

Ever stumbled out of a petrol station clutching a triple CD of 1970s power ballads, a Bruce Willis film on Blue-Ray and a family bag of Revels – all accompanied with a lingering sense that you’ve squandered £25 on stuff you neither want nor need?

Why do we do that?

But the temptation to pick up overpriced treats when paying for fuel could become a thing of the past, thanks to a mobile payment initiative from Shell and PayPal.

’Appy days

Drivers can now use an app to pay for their fuel without having to leave the car while at a Shell station. You can see the benefits for anyone in a hurry, or parents with kids in the car.

Using the Shell Motorist app or the PayPal app, drivers entering the forecourt simply select the corresponding pump on the app, scan its QR code, and fill the tank. Once refuelling is complete, a receipt is sent to the phone to confirm the payment has gone through.

Initially mobile payments will only be available for Shell Driver’s Club members through either app, but wider roll-out is expected later this year.

Pump action

Rob Harper, director of mobile commerce at PayPal UK, said: “We’ve created a simple and secure way to use your mobile phone to pay at the pump nationwide. We’ve always believed people will use their mobile phones to pay if there’s a clear benefit. Now we’re offering drivers a faster way to fill up their car and pay, and get back on the road.”

Would you use an app to pay for petrol? Let us know…

Would you use an app to pay for petrol?

India Adopting First-Ever Crash-Test Standards, Key Automakers Would Fail [w/ Video]

Here’s an advancement that we all can agree will save thousands of lives each year: India’s very first-ever crash requirements for new vehicles.

The government of the world’s second-most-populous nation has concluded that its 1.2-billion people deserve airbags and other critical safety attributes we right here in the U.S. have taken for granted as common gear more than the previous 2 decades. The Instances of India reports that India’s road-transport ministry will mandate crash testing on all redesigned models starting in October 2017 and for each new vehicle sold by October 2019. Front and side crash tests modeled right after other new-car assessment programs (NCAP), such as in China, will be implemented when the government completes testing facilities. According to the Instances, India will not mandate any security gear but only demand minimum overall performance standards. (This is similar to some conditions in the U.S., where, for example, side-curtain airbags are not technically essential but should be installed in order to pass the test.) A star rating program also will be adopted.

The lack of any car requirements in India and scores of other developing countries has allowed major automakers to profit from promoting cheap, stripped-down vehicles—often many generations older than the ones sold in Europe, Japan, and the U.S.—to burgeoning middle classes eager for individual transportation. And despite how quirky cool it might be to watch brand-new Volkswagen Microbuses and other vintage rides roll off present-day assembly lines, in reality, they’re several magnitudes significantly less secure than totally modern cars. But this problem isn’t just about imported models that forego airbags and extra crash structure, it also encompasses autos like India’s own Tata Nano and the Nissan-built Datsun Go—which earned zero stars from a Global NCAP test—that have been engineered in the contemporary era to meet a cost point. Appear at the Go—a 2014 model, it have to be noted, not a 1994—crumple in its test and attempt to disagree that it disregards safety to an virtually vulgar level.

[embedded content material]

Then there are these vehicles tested by Worldwide NCAP in the very first-ever round of independent crash testing of Indian-spec autos. The outcomes have been released final week.

[embedded content material]

Worldwide NCAP, which is most likely to inform India’s personal regulations, tested base models of the Suzuki-Maruti Alto 800, the Tata Nano, the Ford Figo, the Hyundai i10, and a version of the Volkswagen Polo presently on sale in India with each other they represent 20 % of all Indian vehicle sales. None have been fitted with airbags, though they probably wouldn’t have mattered. The protection provided by these autos was so poor, the group mentioned, that there would be no way to avoid serious injuries in a normal crash test. All received zero stars.

According to the World Well being Organization, almost 134,000 people died from car crashes in India during 2010. Of these folks, 32 percent died riding on motorbikes, tuk-tuks, and other 2- and 3-wheeled automobiles that won’t fall beneath the new specifications. Another 21 percent died in buses and heavy trucks. But the WHO predicts that, assuming that regulations keep pat globally, traffic accidents—currently about 1.24 million every single year—will turn into the fifth-top lead to of fatalities worldwide by 2030, matching HIV/AIDS. Only 7 percent of the world’s population, according to the very same WHO study published in 2013, drives in countries with sufficient laws and enforcement for seatbelts, drunk driving, speed, helmets, and youngster seats.

---

---

Does any individual truly deserve to die or turn into seriously injured from what may well be a minor crash in a much more stringently regulated country? That’s a question all automakers—whether or not they’re forced to by regulations—should be asking themselves prior to they ship substandard vehicles to creating nations.

India Adopting First-Ever Crash-Test Standards, Key Automakers Would Fail [w/ Video]

Would you Splash a Pedestrian?

You don’t need to be a racing driver to know that driving on wet roads can be challenging at occasions as you drop grip and have a higher chance of skidding. This is why motorists are routinely advised to reduce their speed for the duration of wet weather in order to make confident they keep secure on the road. Nonetheless, it is not just motorists that are far more at risk during wet climate, as other road customers like cyclists and pedestrians also have their own concerns to manage.

Lately, it has been reported that police across England and Wales have received a number of complaints from pedestrians who have been splashed by passing automobiles. Naturally, it is not usually feasible as a driver to steer clear of a puddle, even so driving by means of them at such a speed as to lead to it to splash these on the pavement is both unnecessary and unkind. Across England and Wales there have been sixty-3 complaints created against drivers purposely splashing pedestrians throughout a 5 year period from January 2009, with one case even being against a police officer.

Mike Frisby, the Driving Instructors Association chief examiner, said: “Motorists have a duty of care not to splash pedestrians. Usually the maximum penalty would be to get somebody’s clothing dry cleaned – it’s not imprisonable – but splashing can be very easily avoided. It’s almost certainly not widely identified by pedestrians that they can report incidents if they’re splashed, but we don’t actually want to engage in a culture exactly where folks are going to report each little incident.

“The driver has an obligation to strategy properly, as there is constantly a danger when driving through a puddle simply because even in shallow water drivers won’t know what lurks beneath.” Meanwhile, a spokesman for Pedestrian Liberation said: “We often hear stories from pedestrians who have been splashed, from pedestrians who have to take avoiding action so as not be splashed, and also of councils that show valuable little interest in sorting out the dips in the road and blocked drains that are the supply of the puddles in the initial place.”

As pointed out by Mike Frisby, intentionally splashing pedestrians is not only illegal but can also harm your car. It is frequently hard to establish how deep a puddle is, and it only takes a tiny quantity of water to enter your engine in order for it to be written off – a punishment some people might feel is match for those who purposely splash pedestrians.

As a motorist you ought to make certain that you respect other road users at all instances and keep in mind that what might appear like a joke is really both illegal and in poor taste. In order to remain on the appropriate side of pedestrians it is therefore sensible to often make sure that you drive slowly through puddles or – if possible – stay away from them altogether.

Photo by Christine Matthews / CC BY-SA 2.

The post Would you Splash a Pedestrian? appeared initial on Very first Insurance coverage Weblog.

Would you Splash a Pedestrian?

Would you Splash a Pedestrian?

You do not need to have to be a racing driver to know that driving on wet roads can be hard at times as you shed grip and have a higher chance of skidding. This is why motorists are often advised to minimize their speed in the course of wet climate in order to make confident they keep secure on the road. However, it’s not just motorists that are much more at risk throughout wet climate, as other road customers like cyclists and pedestrians also have their own issues to manage.

Recently, it has been reported that police across England and Wales have received a quantity of complaints from pedestrians who have been splashed by passing vehicles. Naturally, it is not constantly feasible as a driver to avoid a puddle, however driving via them at such a speed as to lead to it to splash those on the pavement is each unnecessary and unkind. Across England and Wales there have been sixty-3 complaints created against drivers purposely splashing pedestrians during a 5 year period from January 2009, with one particular case even becoming against a police officer.

Mike Frisby, the Driving Instructors Association chief examiner, said: “Motorists have a duty of care not to splash pedestrians. Normally the maximum penalty would be to get somebody’s clothes dry cleaned – it’s not imprisonable – but splashing can be effortlessly avoided. It’s almost certainly not broadly recognized by pedestrians that they can report incidents if they’re splashed, but we don’t genuinely want to engage in a culture exactly where folks are going to report each and every small incident.

“The driver has an obligation to strategy nicely, as there is constantly a danger when driving by means of a puddle since even in shallow water drivers won’t know what lurks beneath.” Meanwhile, a spokesman for Pedestrian Liberation mentioned: “We often hear stories from pedestrians who have been splashed, from pedestrians who have to take avoiding action so as not be splashed, and also of councils that show valuable tiny interest in sorting out the dips in the road and blocked drains that are the supply of the puddles in the very first spot.”

As pointed out by Mike Frisby, intentionally splashing pedestrians is not only illegal but can also harm your vehicle. It is typically difficult to figure out how deep a puddle is, and it only takes a tiny amount of water to enter your engine in order for it to be written off – a punishment some folks might really feel is match for those who purposely splash pedestrians.

As a motorist you need to make positive that you respect other road users at all times and keep in mind that what may possibly appear like a joke is truly both illegal and in poor taste. In order to remain on the correct side of pedestrians it is as a result wise to always make sure that you drive gradually through puddles or – if achievable – steer clear of them altogether.

Photo by Christine Matthews / CC BY-SA 2.

The post Would you Splash a Pedestrian? appeared 1st on Very first Insurance coverage Weblog.

Would you Splash a Pedestrian?

Would You Spend $350k-$475k for an Audi Sport Quattro?

December 19, 2014 at 5:57 pm by Alex Kierstein | Photography by RM Auctions

In 1984, a road-legal automobile capable of a 4.8-second sprint to 60 mph that could also turn and cease, and was practically practical, sounded like vaporware to most individuals. It wasn’t: the Sport Quattro, a shortened and enhanced ur-Quattro, was that vehicle. Not that many men and women knew about it—it was staggeringly costly and had virtually none of the cachet of, say, a Porsche 911 Turbo or vehicles of that ilk in the status-obsessed 1980s. Also, frankly, it was a bit ugly to modern eyes.

Thankfully we humans are equipped with hindsight, and that signifies that as Audi has emerged as a full-bore performance brand connected with AWD, advanced tech, and boulevard cred, the vehicle that genuinely enabled all of these factors can get the appreciation it deserves. That’s both subjective appreciation, and also monetary appreciation. This 1984 Audi Sport Quattro at RM Auctions  could sell for as a lot as $ 475,000 when it crosses the block subsequent month.

Read A lot more: The Sport Quattro Concept is one more super hybrid Audi won’t build 

---

---

Genuinely, it’s probably worth each and every penny. Intact is the 2.1-liter inline-5 that is excellent for 302 horsepower courtesy of a KKK turbo and Bosch electronic fuel injection.  This example is extremely clean, with barely 5200 miles on the odometer. The auctioneers consider it is wearing its original paint, it’s got the appropriate wheels, the original Recaros are present—even the tool kit is integrated. Caveat emptor, of course, but if you are spending half a million on an Audi, you must utter that phrase to your self every waking hour.

WATCH THIS: Audi’s S3 and Sport Quattro throw down in an epic video battle 

Look for it at RM Arizona on January 15-16.

This story originally appeared on roadandtrack.com.

Other Stories You Might Like

---

Would You Spend $350k-$475k for an Audi Sport Quattro?

Would you trust a driverless auto?

Would you trust a driverless vehicle?

It is a easy query, but think about it – would you be able to sit back and let your vehicle do the driving?

For most, if not all drivers, letting the tech take more than and negotiate traffic would take a enormous leap of faith – specially if you’re the sort of driver who’s already a terrible passenger in any automobile.

Ever pump an imaginary brake pedal in the passenger seat foot-properly? Believed so.

Wheels of fortune

To prove the point that we’re all a bit twitchy when it comes to driverless tech, a survey from Autotrader has identified an overwhelming majority (95%) of motorists have concerns more than no matter whether the cars could safely navigate the UK’s busy public roads.

[embedded content material]

The survey of more than 1,000 British motorists also discovered almost 2-thirds (60%) wouldn’t trust an automated automobile on the school run – though in my encounter the college run tends to be completed on auto-pilot anyway – whilst over half (56%) would never even think about owning  one.

And just more than one-in-10 (12%) are fearful of the threat of cyber auto crime, whereby criminals use a computer to hack into your vehicle to take handle of it.

So are these fears properly-founded, or just a massive scale case of technophobia?

The rise of the cyber-criminal

Even though it sounds like something from an old sci-fi film, cyber vehicle crime is on the rise.

Just last week Theresa Could MP, the Residence Secretary, announced one in 3 cars are stolen by hackers who use tech to bypass remote locking and ignition systems.

This backs up figures from the London Met, Britain’s biggest police force, which indicate far more than a third of vehicles stolen in the capital are not driven away employing a important.

And if a car’s systems are totally automated, this signifies hackers could make off with a vehicle remotely – as Pentagon security experts identified when they were capable to take handle of the accelerator, brakes, steering and dashboard displays of an SUV using nothing at all much more than a laptop and a video games console controller.

So, it looks like an improve in cyber automobile crime is a genuine worry, but what about these security concerns?

The rise of the technophobe?

When it comes to the security of driverless vehicles, the figures speak for themselves. Google’s fleet of self-driving SUVs have now covered a lot more than 700,000 miles and the only recorded collision came after 300,000 miles, and that was when a human driver rear-ended it!

[embedded content material]

Even so, the roads of the UK and the US are very distinct. Effective trials on one particular side of the Atlantic will not necessarily translate to the other.

So we probably will not know if the security fears are effectively-founded till the testing begins early next year.

However, the very good old British weather could stop Google’s 1st wave of driverless automobiles as it is been suggested they cannot cope with snow, heavy rain or potholes.

If correct, this would render the Google auto all but redundant in the UK and place it appropriate up there alongside the Sinclair C5 when it comes to failed automotive innovation.

Would you trust a driverless car? If not, what would be your biggest reservation? Let us know… 

Would you trust a driverless auto?