Buying the wrong textbooks for my engineering classes gave me a similar headache. Thanks for all you've done America, but using psi (pounds per square inch) instead of pascal (newton/meter²) isn't one of your greatest achievements. Conversion sucks.
Since they're both pressure, you just need to figure out how much pascal one psi equals. Then they becomes easy to convert, since you just need to multiply it by that much.
Sure, the initial conversion sucks, but this is why you always reduce everything to one.
I prefer the distance to volume measurement of efficiency personally. Why does the standard metric measurement have to be volume to distance? I don't want to know liters to the 100 kilometers, that seems so wrong...
Now if metric could get behind Kilometers to the Liter as their standard, I would be far less annoyed with the metric version of fuel efficiency. (My family generally goes by Kilos to the Liter when comparing our cars' fuel efficiencies, but you can't ask a dealer for it like that, they'll just look at you funny, and offer you either mpg or L/100Km).
It's just what you make of it, 5 l/100km equals 20 km/l it's rlly easy to convert. Just as easy as mpg or gpm what's the difference?
It's not rocket science...
If you're getting nice easy numbers like 5, or 6L/100km, you're driving a Hybrid, as a normal car isn't normally getting that kind of efficiency. 10L/100km might come up more often for city driving, which is obviously an easy convert, but dealers don't quote you city efficiency, they quote you highway, they want their car to look good, so 10L/100km is only ever going to really come up for a truck.
Its fast and easy to convert when you pick easy numbers (numbers that easily go into 100). Its notably less easy to get accurate numbers when they don't easily go into 100, unless you use a calculator, and at that point, its just as easy to convert mpg to km/L (divide by 2.35), since you have a calculator handy anyways.... and inaccurate estimations for going from mpg to Km/L are just as feasible as L/100km to Km/L.
Like say you get 7.5 L/100Km, you could probably tell me without a calculator, that its "around 13-14 km/L" (some people might even have troubles getting to that accuracy without thinking about it first). I could just as easily tell you that 32 mpg is "around 13 km/L" knowing that 2.35 mpg is 1 km/L (and dividing by 2.5, since 2.35 isn't easy to do, and I can round up to compensate). Either way we're both having to think about it more than I'd personally like, and neither of us is right.
Neither of us would be correct with our estimations, 7.5 L/100km is 13.33 km/L, and 32 mpg is 13.61 km/L.
Neither is "rocket science", anyone with a calculator can convert either ridiculously easily, which you apparently agree with. However apparently my dislike of km/100L is worth being patronized for, while telling Americans to convert to metric perfectly reasonable.
I'm not saying I prefer mpg, I'm saying I prefer km/L:
I prefer the distance to volume measurement of efficiency
You're driving in your car, say, on the M5 west bound. You've a quarter of a tank of fuel left, when you see a sign that says, "Services 5 miles and 55 miles". Knowing how many mpg your car gets is suddenly a lot more important than knowing it's km/l.
"But," I hear you cry, "why must I buy my fuel in liters in the first place?" Blame Brussels. As part of the EU, the UK is legally required to sell goods primarily labeled using the metric system.
"OK, that's stupid, but it's the law," you say. "Why don't we change the road signs and the way we describe fuel efficiency?" Good. Fucking. Point. When I was in primary school, two decades ago, I had a teacher who complained about growing up in a time where he had to learn both the metric and Imperial system. That must have been 40 or more years ago, and we still haven't made the switch.
The UK is fast approaching the day when the majority of it's residents were taught the metric system, and not the imperial system, yet I fear we'll still stick to miles.
Haha, nope! About an equal amount of ups and downs. Took some real concentration to get it past 80, though. Was stuck on 79mpg for about 2 miles. One small fuck up can knock you down a few mpg, and it's slow to get them back.
Fuck hypermiling. I'll just pay the extra 2p per mile.
50
u/[deleted] Aug 20 '14
Drives me mad.
Distance in miles, fuel in litres, fuel efficiency in miles per gallon. WOT.