http://metricpioneer.com/learn/fuel-economy/
(I added a new category tab Learn to Metric Pioneer.)
----- Message from Mark Henschel <mwhensch...@gmail.com> ---------
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 13:39:08 -0500
From: Mark Henschel <mwhensch...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [USMA:54298] Re: FW: [USMA:54286] Re: [USMA:54283] RE: He
won’t touch issue with 3.048-meter pole
To: David Pearl <cont...@metricpioneer.com>
When I was in Canada I rented a Ford and the display indicated between
four and five liters per 100 kilometers of travel. Mark
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:02 PM, <cont...@metricpioneer.com> wrote:
I just thought of a word we could stop using: mileage. I catch myself
saying that sometimes, then I realize I could be saying fuel effeciency
instead of mileage. Our little 2003 Hyndai uses about 7 liters per 100
km for little trips around Salem, but today when I fill up the petrol
tank, I notice it is only 5 L/100 km probably because my son Sam is
commuting to Woodburn for his new job and freeway travel typically
results in better fuel effeciency. How many L/100 km does your vehicle
burn? Some of you may not need a conversion formula, but here it is
just in case: 235.2/mpg = L/100 km.
----- Message from John Altounji <phy...@msn.com> ---------
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:11:23 -0700
From: John Altounji <phy...@msn.com>
Reply-To: phy...@msn.com
Subject: [USMA:54294] FW: [USMA:54286] Re: [USMA:54283] RE: He won’t
touch issue with 3.048-meter pole
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <usma@colostate.edu>
Bottom line I agree with John F-L
John Altounji
One size does not fit all.
Social promotion ruined Education.[1]
FROM: owner-u...@colostate.edu
[mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] ON BEHALF OF j...@frewston.plus.com
SENT: Sunday, August 10, 2014 11:18 PM
TO: U.S. Metric Association
SUBJECT: [USMA:54286] Re: [USMA:54283] RE: He won’t touch issue with
3.048-meter pole
I would suggest do not replace these colloquialisms –
both of these (and others, like yardstick) now have meanings that bear
little relationship to their original measurement purpose, but instead
have much wider connotations that are used around the English speaking
world (and other countries where English is understood to some degree).
John F-L
FROM: cont...@metricpioneer.com
SENT: Monday, August 11, 2014 12:21 AM
TO: U.S. Metric Association[2]
SUBJECT: [USMA:54283] RE: He won’t touch issue with
3.048-meter pole
Al Lawrence. In my opinion, your evaluation is accurate
(and also unfortunate). I wonder about common expressions like footage
and milestone. What words could we use in lieu of such words? Any
ideas?
----- Message from Al Lawrence <alana...@hotmail.com> ---------
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 12:44:43 -0700
From: Al Lawrence <alana...@hotmail.com>
Reply-To: alana...@hotmail.com
Subject: [USMA:54282] RE: He won’t touch issue with 3.048-meter pole
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <usma@colostate.edu>
I think this sums up the attitude of most Americans perfectly. They
know a lot of things in the US are already metric, they think going
to metric seems like a good idea and that maybe someone should
finally make a decision, but in the end, they just don't want to
bother.
Al Lawrence
> Subject: [USMA:54281] He won’t touch issue with
3.048-meter pole
From: i...@metricrules.org
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:23:45 -0500
To: usma@colostate.edu
http://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/lifestyle/20140809/he-wont-touch-issue-with-3048-meter-pole
Sent from my iPhone
----- End message from Al Lawrence <alana...@hotmail.com> -----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com[3]
Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 4007/8012 - Release Date:
08/10/14
----- End message from John Altounji <phy...@msn.com> -----
----- End message from Mark Henschel <mwhensch...@gmail.com> -----
Links:
------
[1]
[2] mailto:usma@colostate.edu
[3] http://www.avg.com
