That's OK, I was just trying to translate for Americans. For me l/100km makes sense, for them, it doesn't but gallons per week might. Americans don't want to use SI. I quote from a conversation I had in a hardware store.
Me: "I bought this yard stick because you don't have any meter sticks". Sales clerk: "I don't understand that metric stuff". Me: "Do you understand the English stuff?". Him: "Sure, I grew up with it". Me: "OK, how many feet in a mile?" ( My ex-wife, now an MD refused to know this number as a matter of principle) Him: "No" Me thinking goccha: "How many meters in a Kilometer?" Him: "900 something, I think". at that point I give up, but gallons per week might mean something to him.
l/100 km == gal/ 235 mi If you drive 12,220 miles per year (a bit less than American average), you can read it as gallons per week. This allows much better comparison of gallons or $ saved, and is a much better measure of "greenness".
Slashdot Mirror
That's OK, I was just trying to translate for Americans. For me l/100km makes sense, for them, it doesn't but gallons per week might. Americans don't want to use SI. I quote from a conversation I had in a hardware store.
Me: "I bought this yard stick because you don't have any meter sticks".
Sales clerk: "I don't understand that metric stuff".
Me: "Do you understand the English stuff?".
Him: "Sure, I grew up with it".
Me: "OK, how many feet in a mile?" ( My ex-wife, now an MD refused to know this number as a matter of principle)
Him: "No"
Me thinking goccha: "How many meters in a Kilometer?"
Him: "900 something, I think".
at that point I give up, but gallons per week might mean something to him.
l/100 km == gal/ 235 mi
If you drive 12,220 miles per year (a bit less than American average), you can read it as gallons per week.
This allows much better comparison of gallons or $ saved, and is a much better measure of "greenness".