Thread: MPG vs L/100k
View Single Post
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 10th February 2007, 10:50 PM
vnx205's Avatar
vnx205 vnx205 is offline
ChatterBox
Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tuross Head, South Coast, NSW
Posts: 2,611
Thanks: 220
Thanked 889 Times in 536 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladas View Post

If you are running at 28 mpg which equals 10.0906 l/100km

If you had a 100% improvement on 28 mpg, that would mean

14 mpg, which is 20.1811 l/km a saving of 10.0905 l/100km (not 5 ltrs as you state)

If you were running at 56 mpg which equals 5.043 l/100km

A 100% improvement would mean 112 mpg which equals 2.5226 l/100km

Which leave you with a saving of 2.5204 l/100km

......

Sorry cock but a 10,20,30,40,50, 75, 100% improvement is 10,20,30,40,50, 75, 100% improvement in any language
I was just trying to make the maths simple by using 100%.
By the way a 100% improvement on 28 mpg is 56 mpg, (not 14 mpg as you state)
I would have though that it was more important to know the actual change in consumption rather than the percentage. After all as you point out yourself, it depends on what it is a percentage of. That was one of the points I was trying to make.
__________________

1973 Series III LWB 1983 - 2006
1998 300 Tdi Defender Trayback 2006 -
- often fitted with a Trayon slide-on camper.

Reply With Quote