Your point would have more merit if the article were a tiny 10 cm tall, 1-column piece, Paul. But this is the half-page, above the fold article on the first page of the Automotive section in our paper. (I don't know what layout it received in the paper version of the L.A. Times.) Nor did O'Dell struggle to include metric sizes for the engines; those were the only units used there. There was a time when Americans rated car engine sizes in cubic inches. When the automotive industry moved to metric production, newspaper reporters helped Americans make the transition by "dual labeling" for a bit and then using only SI. O'Dell had the space to do the same with the other quantities. And his market certainly should be cosmopolitan enough to understand metric units, especially when provided alongside the HodgePodge units. Surely you wouldn't tell me that by putting torques in foot-pounds his readers understood a whole lot more than if he had put them in newton meters! And I'm sure you wouldn't recommend that the Pharmacopia require that teaspoons be used with no metric equivalents because Americans understand them better. What made it especially sweet to be sending that comment was his obvious lack of understanding of pecks. That's what caught my eye and made me say to myself, "I feel a letter coming on!" Jim Paul Trusten wrote: > > Jim, > > There may be journalistic reasons for Mr. O'Dell to use WOMBAT in his > article if he is writing for an American audience, an audience which may > not yet be ENTERTAINED by metric units. Here, the author appeals to > emotion, not reason. > > I don't expect Mr. O'Dell to educate his readers in this context, nor > do I think, as much as we would like them to be, that these readers > want to be educated. The United States has no SI measurement standard, > much less an SI measurement folklore. Americans are still beckoned by > Horse's Ass Units. They may make an attempt to refer to the metric > engine size in the article, but storage space here is presented to amuse > rather than to inform. > > "James R. Frysinger" wrote: > > > > Posted a few minutes ago.... > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > Subject: Big SUV; tiny cargo space > > Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:27:47 -0400 > > From: "James R. Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Organization: Metric Methods > > To: ..... > > > > Letter Editor, L.A. Times > > copies to John O'Dell and the editor of the Charleston Post and Courier > > > > Dear Sir: > > > > In today's Charleston Post and Courier, an article by John O'Dell of the > > Los Angelos Times is printed, regarding the new Chevrolet Tahoe. It is > > also available online at > > http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/highway1/la-000056934jul11.story > > Then online version provides more information than is printed in our > > local paper, but unfortunately it too is lacking in some respects. > > > > Mr. O'Dell writes about the Tahoe's 5.3 L engine (and a smaller 4.8 L > > engine that is available) but then gives the engine's power in > > horsepower (but not kilowatts), torque in foot-pounds (but not newton > > meters), and towing capacity in pounds (but not in in kilograms). He > > also provides some dimensions in inches and feet. (Do cars have feet?) > > The Society of Automotive Engineers includes the metric quantities in > > their articles, so that information is available to Mr. O'Dell. > > > > The strange part of the article is where he states, "It will haul people > > in serious comfort, carry a peck of parcels, and tow a ton (or four) > > with ease." Gee, in an SUV, I would expect the glove box to hold a peck > > (8 dry quarts or 8.8 L). What a tiny cargo space the Tahoe must have! > > > > Ain't it a shame that Americans have such a deep understanding of their > > units that they hate to give them up for SI? Come on, Mr. O'Dell. Join > > the automotive world and get metricated. There is absolutely no reason > > in the world why your article (at least the online version) couldn't > > include metric quantities. > > > > James R. Frysinger > > also at: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.cofc.edu/~frysingj > > > > -- > > Metric Methods(SM) "Don't be late to metricate!" > > James R. Frysinger, CAMS http://www.metricmethods.com/ > > 10 Captiva Row e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Charleston, SC 29407 phone/FAX: 843.225.6789 > > -- > Paul Trusten, R.Ph. > 3609 Caldera Boulevard, Apt. 122 > Midland TX 79707-2872 USA > (915)-694-6208 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Metric Methods(SM) "Don't be late to metricate!" James R. Frysinger, CAMS http://www.metricmethods.com/ 10 Captiva Row e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charleston, SC 29407 phone/FAX: 843.225.6789
