Back in the days of British Rail I remember a train called the "Inter City 125" that ran on several routes, including London Kings Cross-Edinburgh Waverley. I actually rode a couple of them.
Somewhat after came an "Inter City 225" train. It didn't go that much faster, and apparently its speed was defined in km/h.
So ... if you want to appear faster, use km/h. If you want the price of potatoes to seem lower, use lb. No wonder there's a muddle.
Carleton
-------------- Original message --------------
> --- Stephen Humphreys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > I thnk it might be something like:
> >
> > "Here's the nought to sixty figure, so you know how
> > quick it will accelerate
> > on the road."
> >
> > and
> >
> > "And here's the nought to 100 figure, just for
> > information y'hear? Of course
> > you'd never test that would you?"
>
> Here in Canada I would, because 100 km/h is
> an allowable highway speed.
>
> What I was getting at, is that some people have
> pointed out
> that in Britain celsius is often used to report cold
> temperatures because 0 and below give an "appearance"
> of being "cold", but they prefer Fahrenheit in the
> summ! er because saying that the temperature is 90
> degrees (not that it happens often in Britain) "sounds
> hotter" than saying the temperature is around 30
> degrees. In other words 30 degrees doesn't seem hot
> to them, but 90 degrees does.
>
> Using that same logic, if Britain used metric speeds,
> instead of reporting a car's 0 to 60 mph time, the new
> standard could be the car's 0 to 100 km/h time.
> Doesn't 100 sound faster? Or is 60 "just right",
> because it's what you're used to?
>
> Stephen Gallagher
>
