Bill, The last paragraph of my reference reads "(Readers who are more familiar with US units should use the relationship m.c = 235 where c is the fuel consumption is customary units)".
PS - I wrote the original article. _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Hooper Sent: 26 June 2008 02:26 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:41246] RE: [Off topic?] Hybrid efficiency On Jun 25 , at 1:38 AM, Martin Vlietstra wrote: Please visit http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/10/18/how-convert-fuel-figures/#more-106 for instructions on how to do the conversion. Martins reference is to a site in the UK. Hence the numerical value is not the same as the one I recently sent to this list. That reference states: ---------------------------------- The conversion of fuel consumption in imperial units to metric units is not as straight forward as other conversions. The conversion formula can be written as: m.i = 282 where m is fuel consumption in L/100 km (metric units) i is fuel consumption in mpg (imperial units) ------------------------------------ The reference use 282 while I used 235. The difference is, of course, that his numerical constant is determined using the British gallon while mine was determined using the American gallon. Both are correct, they just deal with different things. Bill Hooper 1810 mm tall Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA ========================== SImplification Begins With SI. ==========================
