29 May 2009
But I don't care about miles per gallon...
in civilised terms, fuel consumption is measured in litres per 100 kilometres. (L/100km)
is this really practical?
Most British car adverts show fuel consumption in L/100km (unfortunately most times in brackets and in small print).
but why not kilometres per litre? (km/L)
personally, I think km/L is simpler to get to grips with, and more practical because you know that you'll drive y km using x L of petrol at a given fuel consumption.
(y/x km/L). eg. 6 km on 2 litres of petrol at 3km/L!
using L/100km is not as practical!
so why make life more difficult?
sure many people would rather switch to km/L rather than L/100km!
why not use km/L ?
...they do in Latin America and Japan!
23 May 2009
In the mean time i'll just moan about the notation of km/h again..
I was reading through one of my textbooks today and there was a question stating:
"suppose an advertisement for a new model of car states that it does an average of 12 kilometres per litre (kpl)at a speed of 80kph..."
You'd think that a university text book author at least would have the intellect to get it right?
Kilometres per litre, although not the most widely accepted metric form of measuring fuel consumptution (the more common one is L/100km) is a correct and accepted form, however why kpl?
quite clearly km/l (or km/L) clearly!
and again this kph rubbish... it's km/h for crying out loud!
maybe getting rid of rubbish like miles per gallon and miles per hour would help the situation?
speaking of which, who uses the gallon anyway?