MPG!! Why not litres per 100 Miles??!!

[artyman]

I still buy my fuel in gallons, usually 45.5 litres and also mpg after 60 years of working this way I'm firmly in the "if it ain't broke I ain't fixin it"

 

[JethroUK]

I still buy my fuel in gallons, usually 45.5 litres and also mpg after 60 years of working this way I'm firmly in the "if it ain't broke I ain't fixin it"

Yeah but it *is* broke
1/ You cant buy gallons of fuel

2/Deisel is x times more expensive than petrol

Neither if these even existed 60 years ago which make "mpg" an utterly and totally redundant source of information

Might as well calculate your expenses in groats

 

[artyman]

............
Might as well calculate your expenses in groats

I'm still on the barter system, it's a goat and two chickens for a full tank these days

 

[geraldrobins]

Figures are usually quoted in mpg and in litres per 100 kilometre so you have a choice, and this really defeats your argument. Im pretty ocd with figures like mpg, but generally use miles per litre and convert. However some people make remarks like they use 20 pounds worth of fuel a week,

 

[baxlin]

Yeah but it *is* broke 1/ You cant buy gallons of fuel 2/Deisel is x times more expensive than petrol Neither if these even existed 60 years ago which make "mpg" an utterly and totally redundant source of information Might as well calculate your expenses in groats

But we don't measure road distance in Kms!

Also, I pay 132.9p for diesel, Mrs Baxlin pays 128.9p for unleaded petrol, How many "x" more expensive is that? 1.03? Or £2.20 ish on a Merc tankful?

Oh, and she gets around 35 mpg in her little Fabia (which I love, btw), while I get significantly more than 1.03 times that, usually around 50 on brim to brim in the C220.

So, using your argument, any calculation of fuel used over distance is redundant. Why not just continue with mpg then, which everyone understands. I agree, in this context, it ain't broke!

 

[MercedesDriver]

Mpg is outdated since we don't buy gallons of fuels, l/100km makes no sense here so l/100mi would be the most appropriate.

 

[markjay]

Mpg is outdated since we don't buy gallons of fuels, l/100km makes no sense here so l/100mi would be the most appropriate.

I would argue that what most drivers want to know is how far they can get on the fuel they have, or on a full tank, hence MPL (miles per Litre), nor L/100Km or L/100Miles will be the most useful alternative to MPG?

 

[MercedesDriver]

I would argue that what most drivers want to know is how far they can get on the fuel they have, or on a full tank, hence MPL (miles per Litre), nor L/100Km or L/100Miles will be the most useful alternative to MPG?

MPL reflects current situation and is very dependable on driving style and traffic conditions, so inaccurate.

 

[Giantvanman]

Can anyone explain why fuel is permitted to be advertised and sold in monetary denominations that do not exist?

For resample, if fuel is being sold at 119.9 pence per litre and I bought the minimum two litres, that would be 229.8 pence. Do I pay 230 pence or 229 pence?

 

[baxlin]

MPL reflects current situation and is very dependable on driving style and traffic conditions, so inaccurate.

Have to say that ltrs/100kms is just as inaccurate if taken over a short distance, or on instantaneous readout, as any measurement will be. MPL is just as accurate/reliable/meaningful over a longer distance, as is any fuel/distance calculation, the units don't matter for this particular aspect of the argument.

 

[JethroUK]

Can anyone explain why fuel is permitted to be advertised and sold in monetary denominations that do not exist?

For resample, if fuel is being sold at 119.9 pence per litre and I bought the minimum two litres, that would be 229.8 pence. Do I pay 230 pence or 229 pence?

Youll pay 230 pence so it would be smarter to put 230 pence of fuel in rather than 2 litres )

You could equally ask why are banks allowed to give you 8.73% interest on your deposit when this could lead to an interest payment if £164.564148652577 pence

They could round it down to the nearest whole penny and they did - this in turn lead to the finacial onbudsman introducing "bankers rounding" which mean they have to round up and down alternatively and this is checked and inspected by law

 

[MercedesDriver]

Have to say that ltrs/100kms is just as inaccurate if taken over a short distance, or on instantaneous readout, as any measurement will be. MPL is just as accurate/reliable/meaningful over a longer distance, as is any fuel/distance calculation, the units don't matter for this particular aspect of the argument.

That's why my measure is number of services visits per month. This measure is the most accurate one.

 

[renault12ts]

Even weirder is ages old


Then even bigger descrepancy is why describe MPG at all when the type of fuel is so diverse eg petrol is now far far far cheaper than diesel - this wasnt a factor when MPG was invented but now its huuuuuuuuuge factor thats completely ignored in this calculation

I don't think an average of 5p per litre cheaper could by any stretch be described as "far far far cheaper than diesel". Diesel is about 3% more expensive...but diesel mpg (or litres/100km) tends to provide in excess of 20% better consumption.

 

[renault12ts]

Mpg is outdated since we don't buy gallons of fuels, l/100km makes no sense here so l/100mi would be the most appropriate.

It would be well nigh impossible to have anyone agree to a new measure which continued to mix imperial with metric...and really not useful. People need to learn a little maths and then get on with it. Your kids don't think in feet and inches...

 

[renault12ts]

Yeah but it *is* broke
1/ You cant buy gallons of fuel

2/Deisel is x times more expensive than petrol

Neither if these even existed 60 years ago which make "mpg" an utterly and totally redundant source of information

Might as well calculate your expenses in groats

There you go again..."X times more expensive than petrol". To put a figure on it, if petrol is £1.30 pl and diesel is £1.35 pl, then the diesel is 1.04 times more expensive...is that a lot?

I'm not sure what you are saying didn't exist 60 years ago...petrol, diesel, litres or gallons? As far as I know they all existed.

And you can buy gallons, you just need to think a little...for instance (and this is an easy one), 50 litres is exactly 11 gallons (or as near as makes no difference).

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I would suggest that the primary use of fuel consumption information is for comparison purposes, and therefore it doesn't matter which units of measure are used, as long as it's consistent.

Another use might be journey planning, to calculate theoretical range based upon a published or previous actual figure. As a calculation is involved then it doesn't matter which units of measure are used, as the calculation can include conversion.

Another use might be cost forecasting. As a calculation based upon assumptions is involved then it doesn't matter which units of measure are used, as the calculation can include conversion.

 

[markjay]

I would suggest that the primary use of fuel consumption information is for comparison purposes, and therefore it doesn't matter which units of measure are used, as long as it's consistent....

I'll agree with that.

 

[renault12ts]

I'll agree with that.

And I agree with you.

 

[E55BOF]

I calculate my fuel consumption in furlongs per gill...

 

[geraldrobins]

I calculate my fuel consumption in furlongs per gill...

Is that the amount of hay your steed uses then?