|
General » rec.autos.driving » Mileage, in Metric
| Mileage, in Metric [message #796384] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 07:52 |
|
Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
speaking places that use the Metric System?
Are there separate words for the separate meanings of Mileage?
Which meanings do I mean?
One which describes distance (How much Mileage did you put on that
rental car?), and the other which describes fuel economy (What kind of
Mileage do you get in that hybrid?). Do they measure fuel economy in
Kilometers per Liter, or what?
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796386 ] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 08:02 |
|
In article
<8ff431c8-57e6-4e27-b0c5-4d3af15f7b8d [at] d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
> speaking places that use the Metric System?
I went to www.dictionary.com to look for evidence that this was
a silly question. Turns out it isn't so silly after all. They
say: "Kilometrage" may be used in the same way as "mileage".
-john-
--
============================================================ ==========
John A. Weeks III 612-720-2854 john [at] johnweeks.com
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
============================================================ ==========
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796389 ] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 09:15 |
|
larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
> speaking places that use the Metric System?
>
> Are there separate words for the separate meanings of Mileage?
>
> Which meanings do I mean?
>
> One which describes distance (How much Mileage did you put on that
> rental car?), and the other which describes fuel economy (What kind of
> Mileage do you get in that hybrid?). Do they measure fuel economy in
> Kilometers per Liter, or what?
The metric fuel economy unit tends to vary, actually, by the region of
the world. Kilometers per liter (that is, a distance per unit of fuel
ratio, as is miles per gallon) is common in Canada, to the best of my
knowledge. However, liters per 100 kilometers (the reverse, a volume of
fuel per unit of distance ratio) is used quite frequently in Europe.
1 mpg = 0.425 km/L
1 km/L = 2.352 mpg
Those can be compared directly since they express the ratio the same
way, distance per volume. On the other hand, you can't do that with the
L/100 km unit; but there is a mathematical formula for converting them
as well.
(x) mpg * (y) L/100 km = 235.215
That is to say, a car's fuel economy values in mpg and L/100 km, when
multiplied, will always yield 235.215. For example, 10 mpg = 23.5215
L/100 km, 100 mpg = 2.35215 L/100 km, and so on. My car just happens to
average around 23.5 mpg in the summer, so using the European metric
unit, it would get 10 L/100 km.
I once read a press release from some European carmaker, I forget who,
talking about a "3 car" in reference to the fuel economy they hoped to
achieve with it. Upon first glance, I thought they were hoping to match
the M1 Abrams military tank's mileage, but later on in the text, they
explained that they were talking about 3 L/100 km -- an astonishing 78.4
miles per gallon. (Obviously, this was going to be some tiny car as is
more typical in Europe than here.)
--
Larry Harvilla
e-mail: larry AT phatpage DOT org
blog-aliciousness: http://www.phatpage.org/news/
Highways section still in progress at http://www.phatpage.org/highways.html
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796427 ] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 17:31 |
|
Transport Canada officially uses L/100 km, with a conversion to Miles/
(Imperial)Gallon.
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796429 ] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 18:05 |
|
On Feb 29, 11:31=A0am, Gary V <gjvos... [at] comcast.net> wrote:
> Transport Canada officially uses L/100 km, with a conversion to Miles/
> (Imperial)Gallon.
Do the cars sold in Canada typically have metric odometers?
Speedometers usually have dual markings so they can be read either
way; odometers display only in miles. Even though my car has an
electronic odometer, I don't think there's a way to switch it from
miles to kilometers. This makes it really difficult to compute either
mileage or kilometrage. (I just know it costs a lot more for gas when
I drive in Canada!) Instead, do people ever think in terms of
"Mileiterage", or miles per liter of gas, for the purpose of
quantifying how fuel efficient their cars are when driving in Canada?
Elmer
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796460 ] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 21:46 |
|
In article <66e5cd59-5326-4a98-ae44-2e7c55688be0 [at] i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Elmer <ElmerCat [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>On Feb 29, 11:31 am, Gary V <gjvos... [at] comcast.net> wrote:
>> Transport Canada officially uses L/100 km, with a conversion to Miles/
>> (Imperial)Gallon.
>
>
>Do the cars sold in Canada typically have metric odometers?
Yep. Been that way since the 1978 model year--the highways converted to
metric in September 1977. (Hmm, since this is going to misc.transport.road,
I'll point out that last I looked there's a big white informational sign
with all this information on westbound Highway 3 somewhere in Fort Erie,
Ontario. And yeah, the sign does look like it's been there for quite a
while.)
I'm pretty sure that the change from gallons to litres didn't happen until
a bit later, maybe 1980.
>Speedometers usually have dual markings so they can be read either
>way; odometers display only in miles. Even though my car has an
>electronic odometer, I don't think there's a way to switch it from
>miles to kilometers. This makes it really difficult to compute either
>mileage or kilometrage. (I just know it costs a lot more for gas when
>I drive in Canada!) Instead, do people ever think in terms of
>"Mileiterage", or miles per liter of gas, for the purpose of
>quantifying how fuel efficient their cars are when driving in Canada?
My '78 Trans Am has, and '79 Firebird had, 140 km/h (~85 MPH) speedometers.
Every other km/h is indicated by a hash mark, and every 10 km/h has the digit
printed (other than 10: it goes from 0 to 20). The MPH markings are very
small, every 10 MPH, and don't have any hash marks to really locate them.
No such thing as electronic odometers in a '78 Pontiac!
Fortunately I can pretty easily convert MPH signs to km/h when I'm driving in
the US (the '78 Trans Am is my only car). Seeing ramp speed signs that are
absurdly low still throws me, and when I see distances in miles I usually
have to convert to kilometres to really understand how much further I have
to go.
I calculate my fuel economy in litres/100 km. My Trans Am does 14L/100km
typically; 13L/100km on a good day; and 15+L/100km in winter.
Note that when I started driving, speed limits were in MPH. But I've had 30
years of strictly metric distances/speeds, and almost as long for volumes.
.....Ed
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796465 ] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 22:12 |
|
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:05:52 -0800 (PST), Elmer <ElmerCat [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Feb 29, 11:31 am, Gary V <gjvos... [at] comcast.net> wrote:
>> Transport Canada officially uses L/100 km, with a conversion to Miles/
>> (Imperial)Gallon.
>
>
>Do the cars sold in Canada typically have metric odometers?
Yes.
>Speedometers usually have dual markings so they can be read either
>way; odometers display only in miles. Even though my car has an
>electronic odometer, I don't think there's a way to switch it from
>miles to kilometers. This makes it really difficult to compute either
>mileage or kilometrage. (I just know it costs a lot more for gas when
>I drive in Canada!) Instead, do people ever think in terms of
>"Mileiterage", or miles per liter of gas, for the purpose of
>quantifying how fuel efficient their cars are when driving in Canada?
>
>Elmer
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796467 ] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 23:06 |
|
larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
> speaking places that use the Metric System?
litres per 100 km
Yes it's a crap measure since lower = better using that measure and hence
unintuitive IMHO.
I'd far rather see km/litre.
Graham
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796468 ] |
Fri, 29 February 2008 23:07 |
|
Gary V wrote:
> Transport Canada officially uses L/100 km
This is the standard and rather crappy measure. It's daft IMHO.
Graham
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796479 ] |
Sat, 01 March 2008 00:26 |
|
Ed Treijs wrote:
>
>
> My '78 Trans Am has, and '79 Firebird had, 140 km/h (~85 MPH) speedometers.
> Every other km/h is indicated by a hash mark, and every 10 km/h has the digit
> printed (other than 10: it goes from 0 to 20). The MPH markings are very
> small, every 10 MPH, and don't have any hash marks to really locate them.
>
> No such thing as electronic odometers in a '78 Pontiac!
>
> Fortunately I can pretty easily convert MPH signs to km/h when I'm driving in
> the US (the '78 Trans Am is my only car). Seeing ramp speed signs that are
> absurdly low still throws me,
Heh, it bothers us too, and we're used to reading signs in MPH.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796485 ] |
Sat, 01 March 2008 01:45 |
|
On Feb 29, 3:26=A0pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
> Ed Treijs wrote:
>
> > My '78 Trans Am has, and '79 Firebird had, 140 km/h (~85 MPH) speedomete=
rs.
> > Every other km/h is indicated by a hash mark, and every 10 km/h has the =
digit
> > printed (other than 10: =A0it goes from 0 to 20). =A0The MPH markings ar=
e very
> > small, every 10 MPH, and don't have any hash marks to really locate them=
..
>
> > No such thing as electronic odometers in a '78 Pontiac!
>
> > Fortunately I can pretty easily convert MPH signs to km/h when I'm drivi=
ng in
> > the US (the '78 Trans Am is my only car). Seeing ramp speed signs that a=
re
> > absurdly low still throws me,
>
> Heh, it bothers us too, and we're used to reading signs in MPH.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Nate reading a speed limit sign?
Ah, come on.
BTW, 60 MPH =3D 100 KPH, for all practical puroses.
For safety, ignore the signs and "Go with the flow."
A driver going a speed-limit 60 MPH while others are going 80 MPH is
THE dangerous driver.
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796488 ] |
Sat, 01 March 2008 01:51 |
|
Studemania wrote:
> On Feb 29, 3:26 pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
>
>>Ed Treijs wrote:
>>
>>
>>>My '78 Trans Am has, and '79 Firebird had, 140 km/h (~85 MPH) speedometers.
>>>Every other km/h is indicated by a hash mark, and every 10 km/h has the digit
>>>printed (other than 10: it goes from 0 to 20). The MPH markings are very
>>>small, every 10 MPH, and don't have any hash marks to really locate them.
>>
>>>No such thing as electronic odometers in a '78 Pontiac!
>>
>>>Fortunately I can pretty easily convert MPH signs to km/h when I'm driving in
>>>the US (the '78 Trans Am is my only car). Seeing ramp speed signs that are
>>>absurdly low still throws me,
>>
>>Heh, it bothers us too, and we're used to reading signs in MPH.
>>
>>nate
>>
>>--
>>replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel
>
>
> Nate reading a speed limit sign?
> Ah, come on.
>
JP exaggerates quite a bit. He also claimed my old Scirocco had "no
suspension" when there were quite clearly H&R Sports and Koni Yellows at
every corner :)
> BTW, 60 MPH = 100 KPH, for all practical puroses.
> For safety, ignore the signs and "Go with the flow."
>
> A driver going a speed-limit 60 MPH while others are going 80 MPH is
> THE dangerous driver.
Advisory speed signs are always good for a chuckle. I am still trying
to figure out why I would ever want to take a freeway cloverleaf at 25
MPH outside of a blizzard.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796563 ] |
Sat, 01 March 2008 08:41 |
|
Eeyore wrote:
>
> larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
>> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
>> speaking places that use the Metric System?
>
> litres per 100 km
>
> Yes it's a crap measure since lower = better using that measure and hence
> unintuitive IMHO.
>
> I'd far rather see km/litre.
>
They serve different needs. In Europe, you don't just aimlessly
drive around, to the grocery or to eat out - there's public transport or
walking for that. When you drive, it is to get to certain places - on
vacation, or to commute to/from work (rarely), or to another town to
watch your football (soccer) team play. In most cases, you know how far
you will be going, and fill up just as needed. If you'll be driving
150km, and you car's consumption is 6l/100km, you put in 9l (or 10, for
safety) before you leave. Much easier to calculate how much you need
that way.
In Merka, it's the other way around - you need the car for
everywhere. So, you fill up at the gas station, and what you want to
know is how far you can go before you need to fill up again.
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796564 ] |
Sat, 01 March 2008 10:13 |
|
Patok wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> >> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
> >> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
> >> speaking places that use the Metric System?
> >
> > litres per 100 km
> >
> > Yes it's a crap measure since lower = better using that measure and hence
> > unintuitive IMHO.
> >
> > I'd far rather see km/litre.
>
> They serve different needs. In Europe, you don't just aimlessly
> drive around, to the grocery or to eat out - there's public transport or
> walking for that.
You assume too much. I do use my legs too but I rarely consider public
transport unless travelling to London since there's an excellent main line
connection. I can't even remember when I last used a bus. Actually I can and it
was something like 8 or more years ago.
Graham
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796569 ] |
Sat, 01 March 2008 15:12 |
|
In article <47C881DE.41E94F32 [at] hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
>> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
>> speaking places that use the Metric System?
>
>litres per 100 km
>
>Yes it's a crap measure since lower = better using that measure and hence
>unintuitive IMHO.
Better for whom?
For the oil companies (and oil stock/futures holders), higher = better.
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796598 ] |
Sat, 01 March 2008 20:32 |
|
Kenny McCormack wrote:
> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
> >larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> >> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
> >> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
> >> speaking places that use the Metric System?
> >
> >litres per 100 km
> >
> >Yes it's a crap measure since lower = better using that measure and hence
> >unintuitive IMHO.
>
> Better for whom?
>
> For the oil companies (and oil stock/futures holders), higher = better.
Your BIG OIL type nonsense doesn't impress me.
Graham
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796599 ] |
Sat, 01 March 2008 20:38 |
|
Eeyore wrote:
>
> Patok wrote:
>
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>> larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
>>>> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
>>>> speaking places that use the Metric System?
>>> litres per 100 km
>>>
>>> Yes it's a crap measure since lower = better using that measure and hence
>>> unintuitive IMHO.
>>>
>>> I'd far rather see km/litre.
>> They serve different needs. In Europe, you don't just aimlessly
>> drive around, to the grocery or to eat out - there's public transport or
>> walking for that.
>
> You assume too much. I do use my legs too but I rarely consider public
> transport unless travelling to London since there's an excellent main line
> connection. I can't even remember when I last used a bus. Actually I can and it
> was something like 8 or more years ago.
>
I was ASSuming about Europe, not the UKoGBaNI. ;)
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796640 ] |
Sun, 02 March 2008 01:54 |
|
In article <47C9AF31.9BE79BE7 [at] hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Kenny McCormack wrote:
>
>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >larry_scholnick [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? If not, what is the
>> >> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
>> >> speaking places that use the Metric System?
>> >
>> >litres per 100 km
>> >
>> >Yes it's a crap measure since lower = better using that measure and hence
>> >unintuitive IMHO.
>>
>> Better for whom?
>>
>> For the oil companies (and oil stock/futures holders), higher = better.
>
>Your BIG OIL type nonsense doesn't impress me.
>
>Graham
hee hee...
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796670 ] |
Sun, 02 March 2008 08:44 |
|
On Feb 29, 4:51=A0pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
> Studemania wrote:
> > On Feb 29, 3:26 pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
>
> >>Ed Treijs wrote:
>
> >>>My '78 Trans Am has, and '79 Firebird had, 140 km/h (~85 MPH) speedomet=
ers.
> >>>Every other km/h is indicated by a hash mark, and every 10 km/h has the=
digit
> >>>printed (other than 10: =A0it goes from 0 to 20). =A0The MPH markings a=
re very
> >>>small, every 10 MPH, and don't have any hash marks to really locate the=
m.
>
> >>>No such thing as electronic odometers in a '78 Pontiac!
>
> >>>Fortunately I can pretty easily convert MPH signs to km/h when I'm driv=
ing in
> >>>the US (the '78 Trans Am is my only car). Seeing ramp speed signs that =
are
> >>>absurdly low still throws me,
>
> >>Heh, it bothers us too, and we're used to reading signs in MPH.
>
> >>nate
>
> >>--
> >>replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel
>
> > Nate reading a speed limit sign?
> > Ah, come on.
>
> JP exaggerates quite a bit. =A0He also claimed my old Scirocco had "no
> suspension" when there were quite clearly H&R Sports and Koni Yellows at
> every corner :)
>
> > BTW, 60 MPH =3D 100 KPH, for all practical puroses.
> > For safety, ignore the signs and "Go with the flow."
>
> > A driver going a speed-limit 60 MPH while others are going 80 MPH is
> > THE dangerous driver.
>
> Advisory speed signs are always good for a chuckle. =A0I am still trying
> to figure out why I would ever want to take a freeway cloverleaf at 25
> MPH outside of a blizzard.
>
> nate
>
> --
> replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.http://members.cox.net/njnagel- Hid=
e quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
When I lived where snow dwelled, I loved cloverleafs covered in snow.
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796671 ] |
Sun, 02 March 2008 08:54 |
|
On Mar 1, 11:32=A0am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati... [at] hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Kenny McCormack wrote:
> > Eeyore =A0<rabbitsfriendsandrelati... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >larry_scholn... [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > >> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? =A0If not, what is the
> > >> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
> > >> speaking places that use the Metric System?
>
> > >litres per 100 km
>
> > >Yes it's a crap measure since lower =3D better using that measure and h=
ence
> > >unintuitive IMHO.
>
> > Better for whom?
>
> > For the oil companies (and oil stock/futures holders), higher =3D better=
..
>
> Your BIG OIL type nonsense doesn't impress me.
>
> Graham- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
This car crazy 'Merikn has always walked to the shops if time and
weather made it practical. Pushing 70, I still do. I lived in GB for
eight years in the 90s and found that so many there have slipped to
the US patern of driving to the sidewalk/pavement to retrieve the
daily paper. (That's a bit far, but my BIL lived within a five minute
walk pf the off-licence and drove there! His wife took a taxi to visit
her dad, even though the bus ran practically door-to-door! She'd call
me to run her back.)
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796716 ] |
Sun, 02 March 2008 23:29 |
|
In article <fqb1bf$no6$1 [at] aioe.org>, Patok <patok [at] pataklama.net> wrote:
>
> They serve different needs. In Europe, you don't just aimlessly
>drive around, to the grocery or to eat out - there's public transport or
>walking for that.
That's bullshit, at least in Berlin and Paris. Plenty of people
driving to eat out. Sure, plenty of people take public
transportation, but the car is far from unknown.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796721 ] |
Sun, 02 March 2008 23:38 |
|
"Matthew T. Russotto" wrote:
> Patok <patok [at] pataklama.net> wrote:
> >
> > They serve different needs. In Europe, you don't just aimlessly
> >drive around, to the grocery or to eat out - there's public transport or
> >walking for that.
>
> That's bullshit, at least in Berlin and Paris. Plenty of people
> driving to eat out. Sure, plenty of people take public
> transportation, but the car is far from unknown.
UK public transport is mainly for rush hour commuting in most places (outside big
cities). It's far too irregular where I live to be a useful service unless you're
forced to use it.
Mnay people I know will share a taxi when going out rather than use public
transport too. I have NEVER used public transport to go to the shops or a
restuarant.
Graham
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796773 ] |
Mon, 03 March 2008 06:26 |
|
On Feb 28, 10:52=A0pm, larry_scholn... [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> Is there such a word as Kilometerage? =A0If not, what is the
> corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
> speaking places that use the Metric System?
>
> Are there separate words for the separate meanings of Mileage?
>
> Which meanings do I mean?
>
> One which describes distance (How much Mileage did you put on that
> rental car?), and the other which describes fuel economy (What kind of
> Mileage do you get in that hybrid?). =A0Do they measure fuel economy in
> Kilometers per Liter, or what?
It's litres/100 km, generally. People will say "economy", "fuel
economy"
or, yes, "mileage", even though miles have been obsolete in Canada for
30 years. In French it's "consommation", and the "per 100 km" is
understood
("consommation de 6 litres"). Personally, I find it a perfectly
reasonable
measurement. I want to drive 500 km, I know how much gas I'll need.
Easy.
Both my cars have metric-only speedometers, BTW. I expect that of
my privately-imported (from Japan) 1992 Mitsubishi Delica. My 1986
VW Jetta, sold new in Canada, is somewhat unusual in this respect.
Our first family car with a metric speedometer was a 1978 Toyota
Celica.
=2E..laura
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #796988 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 08:02 |
|
On Mar 2, 9:26=A0pm, laura halliday <marsga... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 28, 10:52=A0pm, larry_scholn... [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > Is there such a word as Kilometerage? =A0If not, what is the
> > corresponding word that is used in place of MILEAGE in English-
> > speaking places that use the Metric System?
>
> > Are there separate words for the separate meanings of Mileage?
>
> > Which meanings do I mean?
>
> > One which describes distance (How much Mileage did you put on that
> > rental car?), and the other which describes fuel economy (What kind of
> > Mileage do you get in that hybrid?). =A0Do they measure fuel economy in
> > Kilometers per Liter, or what?
>
> It's litres/100 km, generally. People will say "economy", "fuel
> economy"
> or, yes, "mileage", even though miles have been obsolete in Canada for
> 30 years. In French it's "consommation", and the "per 100 km" is
> understood
> ("consommation de 6 litres"). Personally, I find it a perfectly
> reasonable
> measurement. I want to drive 500 km, I know how much gas I'll need.
> Easy.
>
> Both my cars have metric-only speedometers, BTW. I expect that of
> my privately-imported (from Japan) 1992 Mitsubishi Delica. My 1986
> VW Jetta, sold new in Canada, is somewhat unusual in this respect.
> Our first family car with a metric speedometer was a 1978 Toyota
> Celica.
>
> ...laura
Back in the late 1960s, a friend of mine went to Italy to see the
sights and visit relatives. While there, he drove to a town some
distance with two of them. They argued about how much fuel to put in.
He got tired of the bickering and asked the pump-man to fill it. Even
he argued against that, but followed orders.
Visiting the remote relative, my friend, on the way back for the loo,
noticed a fridge in the kitchen. He figured that it was a gas one, as
gas lamps lit the house. Inside was well-folded clothing. It seeems
that the relative was the mayor and rated a fridge, even though
electricity still hadn't reached that part of the country.
When leaving, he tried to give them cigarette lighters as a gift, but
they refused as a licence was needed for lighters - matches were a
government monopoly.
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #797041 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 19:02 |
|
> Gary V wrote:
> > Transport Canada officially uses L/100 km
> This is the standard and rather crappy measure. It's daft IMHO.
> Graham
Completely agree with you! Besides, it's logarithmic rather than
linear or exponential, e.g. if the automotive Engineering reach better
consumption rates, big improvements in fuel rate will translate in
lower and meaningless numbers to express it; example:
Car ABC improved consumption from 10.0 to 12.5 km/L
== means Car ABC improved consumption from 10.0 to 8.0 L /100km; NOW::
Car XYZ improved consumption from 35.0 to 35.5 km/L
== means Car XYZ improved consumption from 2.86 to 2.67 L/
100km !!!!???!! As you pointed out, unintuitive.
Wagner
|
|
|
| Re: Mileage, in Metric [message #797045 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 19:07 |
|
In article <737d4fc9-c353-4c44-9b56-509570ca98b0 [at] c33g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
Wagner <anhanguera [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>> Gary V wrote:
>> > Transport Canada officially uses L/100 km
>> This is the standard and rather crappy measure. It's daft IMHO.
>> Graham
>
>Completely agree with you! Besides, it's logarithmic rather than
>linear or exponential, e.g. if the automotive Engineering reach better
>consumption rates, big improvements in fuel rate will translate in
>lower and meaningless numbers to express it; example:
>
>Car ABC improved consumption from 10.0 to 12.5 km/L
>== means Car ABC improved consumption from 10.0 to 8.0 L /100km; NOW::
>
>Car XYZ improved consumption from 35.0 to 35.5 km/L
>== means Car XYZ improved consumption from 2.86 to 2.67 L/
>100km !!!!???!! As you pointed out, unintuitive.
>
>
>Wagner
Looks like somebody (that's you) flunked remedial math.
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Wed Jan 7 20:39:01 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.95416 Sekunden |
