• GrimSheeper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    “Dongles per snongle” sounds like a British person measuring the gender ratio at their local pub

  • KrummsHairyBalls@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    11 months ago

    Reminds me of an app I downloaded the other day to help plan routes. They asked for my cars “KPL”.

    Like what? Who in the world says KPL? It’s l/100KM.

    While I’m aware that some places may use KPL, it just seems very American to go “hey, we use MPG, so they must use KPL”.

    • bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 months ago

      I grew up with km/L.

      I don’t mind using whatever scale, but it’s somewhat better for comparing the numbers that cars actually use, because with l/100km every car is five something or six something.

      Also the higher numbers are better like everything else on the car comparison cards.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah maybe it’s just being an American but mpg makes sense in an intuitive way, so kpl sounds like it would be rightish. I’d never guess that people would use l/100km, and I use metric somewhat regularly in my personal life

        • Madlaine@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          11 months ago

          Guess the difference is what you grew up with and therefore intuitively prefer:

          • allegedly american thinking: This baby sucks X gallons. Let’s see how far I can get with it

          • allegedly non-american thanking: I need to drive roughly X 1/2 hundred kilometers, and that will burn that much fuel.

        • BCsven@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Fuel consumption makes more math sense, especially when doing mental math comoarisons. Litres per 100km or the newer Gallons per 100miles for USA makes it easier for linear fuel consumption calculations. This quote explains: "The advantage of measuring fuel consumption this way is that it makes comparisons easier as fuel efficiency improves for a specific vehicle. That’s because the differences are linear. With miles per gallon, efficiency is graded on a curve. For example, for a 15-mpg car, a 5-mpg improvement is a 33-percent gain. But that same 5-mpg upgrade for a 30-mpg car is only a 17.5-percent improvement to a vehicle that is already using half as much gas. " With litres per 100km a 5 litre increase is 5 litres regardless of starting fuel consumption.

          • emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’m not even American but this is way less intuitive for everyday use. I don’t need some abstract measure of how efficient my car is being. My fuel tank is measured in liters, when I fill up i pay by the liter, I want to know how far I can go on x liters. Not have to do a bunch of mental math to reverse the equation for my gas tank with 40 liters in it. I have 40l, I can go x*40 km. Mental multiplication is way easier than mental division.

            • BCsven@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Well the car does the math for you, but it is meant for comparison when purchasing because range relies on fuel tank capacities. where as L per 100 k is a fuel efficiency rating regardless of tank size. But it it makes more sense when you have a fleet of vehicles and are doing logistics and need improvements. if you have X dollars to spend on economy it is a linear equation compared to convoluted deminishing returns on low mpg vehicle. Like the quote mentioned 5mpg improvement on one vehicle is not the same efficiency as mpg on another vehicle.

              • emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Right so in that scenario that measurment makes sense but for the average person in their day to day life it’s much less useful. And my car doesn’t have a fancy computer that tells me the efficiency. Or measure in accurate increments how much fuel is in the tank. So if I wanted to know how efficient my engine is, the best way to do it would be start on empty, add a liter of fuel, and see how far I could drive it, which is probably why and how that measurement became commonplace. Because cars have been around alot longer than computers.

      • KrummsHairyBalls@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’d love to know which cars you drive with 5-6 l/100km lol

        My best vehicle is 10. My worst is 28. Unless you’re a hybrid, I don’t know of a single vehicle doing 5-6l/100km

        • bstix@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I’ve had Opel, Renault, Peugeot, VW, Skoda, Mazda, Suzuki.

          None of them were worse than 7 L/100km. Pretty much all modern cars go at 5 L/100km unless you get something with a larger engine.

          Never had a hybrid.

          • KrummsHairyBalls@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Pretty much none of those brands exist in Canada, or are extremely uncommon. Not to mention the cold weather makes our fuel economy even worse.

            • dunz@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              All these brands exist in northern Europe, they work fine here. My 2007 VW Golf does about 6-7l per 100km. They aren’t unusual numbers really

        • Knuschberkeks@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          what? Even my parents 6 Seater family car drank only 8l back in the day, I drive my Opel Astra with about 7 and my brothers little fiat drinks 4,5 if he drives efficiently. You gotts have either s pickup truck or something really old.

          • KrummsHairyBalls@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            What? A pickup uses 15-28 l/100km.

            A Silverado uses 15MPG, according to GM themselves. That’s like 16l/100km

            • BCsven@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Yeah pickups and SUVs are gas guzzlers. i get about 5.5L/100km with my Honda Fit

              • KrummsHairyBalls@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Ya I don’t know why I’m being down voted for saying what my cars get. Never said anything better didn’t exist, just asked which other cars get less.

                I fucking hate Lemmy. I asked a question and I’m downvoted. Fuck this place. There’s no way to have a god damn discussion here.

                • BCsven@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  People probably misread the intended question as denial of lower consumptions cars existing. The interwebs are fickle

                • wieson@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I’d love to know which cars you drive with 5-6 l/100km

                  Could be an inquiry, could be a statement of disbelief. Up to interpretation.

                  I’d love to know which cars you drive with 5-6 l/100km lol

                  The “lol” at the end makes it read like your accusing the other commenter of lying and that you think this is an impossible to reach fuel consumption.

                  Additionally, many people don’t like huge pickup trucks and worshippers thereof. You might have slipped into that category in their understanding.

            • onion@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              A Polo 3-cylinder runs at around 5.5l/100km mixed city/interstate. 16l is atrocius

        • BCsven@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Our Honda Fit does about 5.5L/100km if I drive and about 7.5L/100km if my wife drives. I have had it as low as 3.9 But that was purposely watching acceleration and avoiding hills

    • ursakhiin@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’d imagine they were giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming everybody uses a metric that allows for 1 conversion to tell how far a tank of fuel will take you.

  • MasterNerd@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    11 months ago

    Dude it’s such an easy conversion between dongles and whatsits, you just don’t get how intuitive it is. There are 42.48 whatsits in a dongle, and 17.49 dongles in a shlorp. Europeans are overreacting so much

      • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        I feel like this is part of the the joke because Americans often focus on Europeans when metric comes up. I’m Australian, and I have been assumed to be in Europe a number of times by US internet commenters on the topic haha

          • Obi@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            More importantly they participate in Eurovision so really that says it all. I for one welcome our down under cousins to the continent.

        • MasterNerd@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          There was this one redditor a few years ago who thought I was European because I held different values than him (I’m American). Man am I glad I don’t use Reddit anymore

    • JPSound@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      As an american, It’s easier when you convert football fields to watermelons and seconds to no healthcare. One you start thinking in terms of watermelons per crippling medical debt, everything clicks. You’re welcome.

      • MacN'Cheezus
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Is this a joke about black people not being able to afford healthcare or something?

        • JPSound@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          No… Not at all but what gave you that idea? Besides, everyone here enjoys medical debt or an undiagnosed ailment. Sometimes both if you’re lucky.

    • IDontHavePantsOn@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      You make dem der figures FPH n’ you got a deal. I don’t wanna be going no 600 yards a minute. I wanna be cruisin at 35000 yard and hour, ya hur?

      • MacN'Cheezus
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        A mile is about 15 football fields, so if we did switch to using that measurement, we could all be going 1,000 on the freeway.

        • IDontHavePantsOn@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Ur gotdang right. My Mopar might be a four banger, but with cheezus behind the wheel we’re gon’ near 1700 n’ gettin 500 a gallon.

  • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Modern tech makes a lot of this irrelevant. I can drive from US into Canada, spend 5 seconds going through my cars settings, and have everything displayed in km, even the km I have left in the tank. It’s like when coders use constants in their program, and only have to remember the constant name while the number it represents can change in a config header or something. The program still runs as normal while silently using the new value.

    It’s not really worth caring about. Not in everyday life. I’d say differently if you were a scientist or engineer. Metric should be the measurement system of all STEM.

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      You could do that in old cars too, without even changing anything. A lot of them had a separate ring inside the speedometer showing KPH. But that doesn’t mean the person understands the distance when told that their destination is 47 kilometers away and they’re accustomed to miles.