Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:48:10 -0000 From: "SAABurger" <furnyburgernospamorld.com> Subject: Re: 9000 Fuel consumption - units
And why not. km/litre seems very sensible to me. I always think it strange that the continental European calculation (litres/100 km) is inverted comp. with miles/gallon as preferred in Britain/America (differences already well explained in this thread). I suppose SAAB could offer the ability to select each element (distance, volume, temperature, plus calculation sense) independently but the majority of owners would never get their mind round it. The interactions would be more like setting a digital watch. Although it is limiting, I can understand why SAAB chose to provide a predefined set of options. Adrian "MH" <nomailnospamere.no> wrote in message news:c1ilh3$iji$1nospam1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl... > > * litres/100 km, kilometres, †C > > * MPG (US gal), miles, †F > > * MPG (imp. gal), miles, †F > > * MPG (imp. gal), miles, †C > > -------------------------------- > > Seems that Americans who like †C and continental Europeans > > who like †F are out of luck.... > > ...I wonder if some people might prefer the following settings > > to be available: > > * miles/litre, miles, †F > > * miles/litre, miles, †C > > No, I would like km/liter, km and †C > > ------- > MH > >
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |