John David Galt wrote:
>If you want us to give up miles-per-gallon, give us km-per-litre, at least.
>The inverse measurement of fuel OVER distance makes no sense at all.
We're not in a position to give you one or the other. We can only recommend.
The choice itself is a matter of national practice. Some countries use L/100
km; others use km/L The former is a measure of consumption (per unit of
distance); the latter is a measure of range (per unit of fuel).
You are, of course, free to choose either for your own use. If and when the
government metricates the CAFE standards, you'll be able to take your cue
from them. (They might, of course, choose to express it both ways.)
By the way, the approved ways of expressing it are "kilometers per liter"
(for narrative) and "km/L" {if you're using the SI symbols). Your
"km-per-litre" mixes symbols and words and uses unnecessary hyphens.
I'm confused, by the way, by the "If you want us to give up ..." opening to
your message. Are you not already pro-metric?
Bill Potts, CMS
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
