Thanks for the input.  The question remains, (I presume) that some body
(automotive?) decreed that  fuel usage would be expressed in L/100 km.
IF L/Mm would be an improvement (for reasons already expressed)  where does
one go to propose such a change?
D.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Potts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: March 29, 2002 21:45
Subject: [USMA:19152] RE: Fwd: Re: What is an SI unit?


>I can only assume that people regard 100 km as a nice base value for trip
>planning, using a quick mental calculation.
>
>If a trip is between 400 km and 500 km and the car uses 9 L/100 km, then it
>will consume between 36 L and 45 L on the trip. The advantage is that the
>trip consumption is of the same order of magnitude as the specified rate of
>consumption.
>
>Neither of the alternatives (0.09 L/km and 90 L/Mm) has quite the same
feel.
>Also, given that highway and trip distances are given in kilometers, people
>are not used to thinking in megameters.
>
>Bill Potts, CMS
>Roseville, CA
>http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
>Behalf Of Duncan Bath
>Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 17:53
>To: U.S. Metric Association
>Subject: [USMA:19151] RE: Fwd: Re: What is an SI unit?
>
>
>I concur.  The problem is, where did the L/100 km come from?
>Duncan
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Joseph B. Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: March 29, 2002 17:04
>Subject: [USMA:19148] RE: Fwd: Re: What is an SI unit?
>
>
>>Bill Potts wrote in USMA 19131
>>
>>>There's a very common exception -- L/100 km.
>>
>>
>>I would prefer L/Mm.  It is 4 characters shorter and in practice would
>>eliminate a decimal point from the number.
>>               1 L/Mm = 10 L/100 km
>>
>>Joseph B.Reid
>>17 Glebe Road West
>>Toronto  M5P 1C8             TEL. 416-486-6071
>>
>

Reply via email to