[WARNING] Running out of gas (Gen III)

Or you can fill up at 2 or 3 bars on the fuel gauge like the hand book suggests when it says

Section 2-5
Fuel Gauge

"It is a good idea to keep the tank over​

1/4 full."

See page 122 of your hand book if you have a Gen II.

 

my smart car tells me when i have 1 gallon left

 

Do you americans really still use and talk in gallons? it's such a large quantity, and seems quite cumbersome compared to litres. why don't you all join the rest of the world and switch to metric? it's weird...

And today when looking at Bob's pics of his dashboard, I realised that the MPG indicator you have would be fully lit as normal, and go down the harder you accellerate, which is a bit strange, because it indicates less when there is more fuel consumption, unlike the litres/100km indicator for other countries, which is blank to begin with and if you accellerate, it lights up. So the more it is lit, the more consuption you have.... which makes more sense, because it's "more=more" instead of "less=more".

 

I think you're just being sarcastic, because I cannot imagine how much money that would cost.

 

No, I'm being serious. all the other countries upgraded. it doesn't have to cost anything if it's a gradual process like it was in australia in the 1960s. it's such a simpler system too.

 

I'm not *trying* tpo change the subject especially, conversations drift, that's normal. For the record, I agree with everything you have said on the fuel thing Bob, and I have to thank you for doing the experiments.

 

I beg to differ. The UK still uses imperial... as well as metric!! We measure fuel economy in MP(Imperial)G, but fill our cars up in litres. We measure our speed in mph, but our engine and capacity in litres. It is not unusual for people to give their height in imperial and their weight in metric, or vice versa.

 

Undoubtedly the English system of units is less consistent than SI. That aside, there is nothing odd about the bar graph going down as we accelerate. Our bar graph is showing miles per unit of fuel. Yours shows fuel per unit of distance. Neither is wrong. Neither is better. One is simply the inverse of the other. You derive the same information from either format, once you understand the format.

As for units of measure, much of the U.S. has switched to SI: beverages, many machine tools, many fasteners, many food products. We have dual labeling on almost everything. While people are accustomed to SI use in these contexts, many are uncomfortable making the general switch away from feet, pounds, and gallons for day to day use. As a country, we came very close to switching in the 1970s, but our politicians chickened out when too many people complained.

As an engineer, I don't care what system I use, as long as I know the system. Likewise, as a programmer, I don't care what number base I use. They each have strengths and weaknesses.

Tom

 

I think a bar going up to illustrate a rise in something is better than it going down. Whether it is miles per gallon or litres per 100 km, the thing being measured is consumption. and that goes up when you accelerate and down when you don't. So that's what I feel the guage should do, and i would find it a bit strange to see it do the opposite.

What are the weaknesses of metric? what advantage does imperial have over metric?

(I'll check your reply tomorrow, as it's past 1am here)

 

US Interstate 19, in Arizona, is unique among US highways because distances are given in km (although speed limit signs are in mph.) This highway is 64 miles long.
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_19]Interstate 19 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Since some drivers have been confused by the use of metric signs, there is a plan to change those signs back to mile markers, costing $1.5 million.
News : Dump I-19 metric signs, says Sahuarita mayor - Inside Tucson Business - newspaper, business news, opinion, classifieds

That's a pretty big investment for just 64 miles of highway.

The entire US highway system encompasses 46,876 miles:
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System]Interstate Highway System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

A little extrapolation will show you that it will cost over $1 billion to change the signs for the entire interstate highway system.

 

...and just think how long it will be if we switch to kilometers!





Tom

 

The bar isn't going down to illustrate a rise in something, the bar is going down to illustrate a *reduction* in something. You are stuck in your own mindset. Step back and look at the whole picture. Miles per gallon is a measure of distance per unit of fuel. If you step on the gas, you get less distance for the same amount of fuel. The bar goes down as the distance goes down.

You are thinking your system while evaluating our system. That's what makes people think that other systems are confusing. Translation is always harder: 2.54 cm per inch, 453.6 g per pound. If you translate, SI looks stupid. Of course it isn't, but you have to step over and immerse yourself into the system before it becomes better. If you translate it seems confusing, just as you are confusing yourself about the bar graph by thinking fuel per distance while looking at distance per fuel.

I was considering the relative advantages and disadvantages of various number bases in my comment. Chiefly that comes down to number bases that are powers of two being convenient and efficient for binary computers. A second issue is the trade-off between the size of times tables verses the number of digits needed to represent a value.

As for measurement systems, the chief weakness of the metric system is that it exists in several variations, each having different fundamental units. That leads to some confusion and inconvenience.

If we specify a particular variation, say SI, then the problem mostly goes away. Then my only complaint is one of customary usage. Typically there are a few outliers that never get adopted, even if they are or once were part of the metric system. For example, decimal time and decimal angles never gained much traction.

Other than that, there is not much to dislike about SI. It's a good system. The Imperial System, on the other hand, has few redeeming qualities. It is a hodge podge of poorly related interconnecting units, each with its own bizarre conversion. The Imperial System exists only because of momentum and the cost of converting.

All systems, even SI, become less convenient when dealing with physical constants. SI does about as good a job as possible incorporating physical constants into base units, but nature is not always kind or consistent. For example, a year is not a whole number of days in any system - it can't be. Likewise Pi remains irrational. Nature could have made things easier for us.

Tom

 

I am an American. Both my wife and I speak 3 languages and both of us know metric as well as English.

A unit is just a unit. One is not superior than another. What you are saying is really culturally insensitive and sort of a type of reaction spoken without thinking.

Why don't everyone speak English? Why don't everybody drive on the same side of the street? Why the hour and km per hour? Why split a day into 24? The Chinese split the day into 12 units. Why such a Eurocentric 24 hour view?

The meter is some arbitrary Eurocentric unit related to some sort of a fraction of a length from the equator to the North pole based on a meridian between Dunkerque and Barcelona. Very Eurocentric and egocentric. Why not a meridian through Washington DC or Tokyo? And, if fact, they got the length of the meter wrong and it was never corrected. Why adhere to a length that was never correct for historic reasons. And if we are adhering to history, why not the mile which has a longer history?

And the spelling of Litre - which is not phonetic at all. Why? It is illogical.

We should respect native cultures (including native U.S. culture and native European culture) and not impose foreign standards on native cultures. Isn't this the politically correct thing to do these days? So leave the U.S. with their chosen units.

I think the metric people have become very chauvinistic. Metric is not bad. I like to standardize too. I just feel it is not more logical and not superior - just more commonly used. And for that sole reason, we should standardize.

The US is not non-metric. All cars have mph as well as kilometer per hour. Most manufacturing and cars are in metric and most science is in metric - there are exceptions and holdouts of course. The US leads the world in decimalization of its currency - something the rest of the world tends to forget. All foods and consumer goods have metric markings. So if there is a fault in the U.S., it is that we did not stop using the old system. Not that we have not adapted to metric. The old English system is more romantic and ergonomic. A six foot person is about six shoes in height. A yard is about an arm's reach. A league or 3 miles is about what you can walk in an hour. 10 pounds is a gallon of water (British system). You can do some complex calculations without paper. A 160 pound man is roughly 16 British gallons in volume for example.

And the metric countries - they do their altitudes for flights in feet and buy crude oil in barrels. So, they are not pure metric either.

 

The old system of measure was easy for low tech societies.

Say butter cost an English pound per gallon. It will be 60 pence per quart. 30 pence per pint, 15 pence per cup etc. So by having an accurate gallon, you can trade (more or less) by making even splits and even uneducated people can do the math. An uneducated person can watch a merchant split butter into halves and see that he is not cheated.

An English pound of 240 pence can be split by half, 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, 1/6, 1/8, 1/10, 1/12 and so on into even sums. So after a job, an uneducated group of men who all speak different languages can split a pot of money and everyone can be assured of not being cheated. This is even if the splitting is complex (skilled laborer gets a share, unskilled man gets half share, boys get 1/4 share . . . etc)

With metric. Split in half, gets you 5. Split again, gets you 2.5. Split again, gets you 1.25. So unless you have an accurate measure, you either buy by the kilo or trust the seller when he says he got you 3/10 or 1/5 of a kilo.

A league is what a soldier can march in an hour. A mile is what he can do in 20 minutes. So the common man would know, for example, without much math that a marathon of 26 miles would be about 9 hours of walking without slowing down. Then you have to add some more time for fatigue and one would also know how many hours one can march. A car going 30 mph is roughly 10 times the speed of a walking man. Try that question on a metric person. A car going 60 mph is going 20 league per hour which is about 20x a marching man's speed. An old peasant can figure that out in an instant. The old peasant would know that a 60 mph car is going 20 leagues per hour or 1 league every 3 minutes. So it will take an hour of walking to cover the distance traveled by that car in 3 minutes. All without a calculator. Try that with metric.

 

rhino, you're my hero...