Need help with calculating.......

AdrianC

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

I'm surprised at that, you must have one hell of an exercise regime.

<groan> D'oh...

Joe_Horner

AdrianC wrote: »

[...] It's wierd, because in so many ways it's far more logical. Heck, it answers the OP's question - how much will I use to get from A to B - right off the bat...

It's the difference between British and Continental thinking.

Johnny Foreigner plans his trip, works out how much fuel he needs, and has an efficient (but boring) journey. A true Brit say something like "What Ho, lads, got a couple of gallons in the old girl, let's see how far we can get. Beer's on me if we don't make it, Tally Ho!" :beer:

That difference in attitude is also why we have all the best poetry and songs btw

Richard53

AdrianC wrote: »

But _THAT_ breaks my head... It's wierd, because in so many ways it's far more logical. Heck, it answers the OP's question - how much will I use to get from A to B - right off the bat...

Mine too, because it's the inverse of what we are used to. For a century now, fuel consumption figures have been big = good, 50 mpg better than 30 mpg and so on. If you work in l/100km, small is good. And I'm confusing myself now, because I'm talking about fuel *consumption* - high fuel consumption is bad, but high mpg figures (which we term 'fuel consumption') are good.

Until I just looked it up, I had no idea if 5 l/100km is normal for a Honda 50 or a Chieftain tank. (It's 56 mpg.) Logically, it's a much better way of looking at the issue, but I can't get my head round it either.