If one trader sells apples at $1.00/kg and another at $1.20/kg, which is the
more expensive? The one with the larger number associated with it.

Similarly, if one car uses 5 L/100km and another uses 6 L/100km, which is
the more expensive? Again, the one with the larger number associated with
it. 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of STANLEY DOORE
Sent: 28 January 2008 18:55
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:40269] Re: convenient numerical values

    The use of km/L  is similar to the mpg used in the US.  It  avoids the 
need for a decimal point in L  or the use of  mL in the L/km expression..
    If one runs out of gas and you know the distance you need to travel to 
the next  fuel station, it's very easy to know how many L are needed.

Stan Doore



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pierre Abbat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 7:11 AM
Subject: [USMA:40258] Re: convenient numerical values


> On Sunday 27 January 2008 20:37, Ziser, Jesse wrote:
>
>> I'd like to offer another possible example of violation of the rule of
>> thousands.  I keep seeing L/100 km in fuel efficiency contexts.  I also
>> occasionally see km/L but it appears to be rarer. km/L is clearly more
>> "thousandy", and also has the debatable advantage of being "distance per
>> volume" just like MPG.  Besides, "L/100 km" seems an awkward mouthful. 
>> Is
>> this really the preferred unit?
>>
>> I'm thinking about getting metric mileage bumper stickers for my friends
>> and family (most of whom I'm sure would enthusiastically accept and 
>> display
>> them) and I was wondering if anyone had any other opinions on the km/L
>> versus L/100 km issue.  I've been unable to find much about it online.
>
> At least two of us agreed, the last time this came up, that the unit of 
> fuel
> consumption should be the liter per megameter, or microliter per meter (or
> cubic millimeter per meter if you wish to avoid "liter").
>
> As to methods of averaging, the harmonic mean is a bit more abstruse than 
> the
> arithmetic mean, but it comes up all the time in electric circuits. Every
> little kid should know some reciprocals and be able to estimate a harmonic
> mean.
>
> Pierre
> 

Reply via email to