Only 40? that’s firkin ridiculous.
I can get 100 groats to the nautical perch on a good day
Applause
Bravo, bravo sir! As a child of the 90’s I have to agree. I’ve trained myself to be able to estimate in Inches/feet/pounds, but Farenheight, I will never understand. Metric just makes bloody sense! Ask any scientist.
But a hearty cheers to whoever thought up the pint. A good ol’ pint of Old Rosie straight from The Turf… Hmmm… 
You do get more in a bottle when not using metric units. Who wants to get less beer or brandy in a bottle because people want you to switch to metric. There’s no question that the drinker will pick a larger bottle…
:: nods ::
Better metric, or non-metric, that the bloody stupid mish-mash of partial conversion that we in Canada have now, which is the worst of possible outcomes. Finish the conversion, or roll it all back to feet and inches.
I’d prefer to finish the conversion.
Bottles are metric over here - the standard wine or spirit bottle is 0.75 litres, usually denoted by 75cl which is the only common use of centilitres I can think of.
See you’ve already been gypped.
We have been too, their all smaller now.
Pah, any real drinker knows that Scotch comes in 70cl bottles 
Fahrenheit is more metric than people give it credit for. To wit:
0F: It’s really fuckin’ cold outside.
100F: It’s really fuckin’ hot outside.
And that’s about all you need to know.
This is the one that I always having problems remembering:
Yankee: My car gets 40 miles per gallon!
Old World type: ??? Is that good or bad?
or
Old World type: My car does 6 litres per 100 (km)!
American: ??? Is that good or bad?
The trick (which I can never remember) is that you divide 235 by the number your opponent has said.
The conversation should go like this:
Yankee: My car gets 40 miles to the gallon!
Old World type: (quick thinking 235 / 40 = 5.875 litres per 100 km) Not bad!
or
Old World type: My car does 6 litres per 100 (km)!
American: (quick thinking 235 / 6 = 39.166 miles per gallon) Not bad!
But does that work for Imperial gallons? Not the same as US gallons, you know.
I worked out that my motorbike does 20 to the square millimetre. That’s 645 to the square inch - practically phenomenal!
My formula works with US gallons. I was thinking that UK people would use liters / 100 km for fuel efficiency, but a quick look at a car website with a .uk address proved me wrong. When you buy a gallon of gas in the UK, how many litres is it? 3.785411784 litres (US gallon) or 4.54609 litres (Imperial gallon)? And is the gallon mentioned on the pump the same gallon as the gallon used for fuel efficiency numbers?
(conversions taken from Conversion of units - Wikipedia )
Petrol in England is now sold by the litre, but when we talk about gallons, we mean Imperial gallons (no need for five-decimal conversion factors unless you have a pump that’s accurate to ten microlitres). The US gallon is based on our wine gallon, but that’s an obsolete unit.
It’s 4.54 litres. And yes, I do the conversion in my head when I’m working out my mileage (mileage - not kilometreage!). Whiles away the long journeys, that!
I’m a 70s child too, so grew up with metric but like most people these days I measure things in cm and metres as preference. Makes it fun buying carpets, furniture, etc as you have to measure in both as you don’t know how the shops will display dimensions until you get there. Recipes are good too - as you can do teaspoons or 5ml, etc., whatever your preference!
I’m not sure it’s that big a deal at the end of the day. As noted several times already, imperial measurements will die out at some point as we all become slightly more integrated. Daily Mail readers will probably choke when this happens, but that’s no bad thing…
(and they should look on the bright side, house prices in Euros look even higher!)
For most things, it doesn’t matter - it’s not as if I won’t know how many apples I want now they have to be sold in kilos. But I’m glad to see pints stay for beer and milk.
I’m another one from '77, caught between the old codgers and the wily continentals.
But can we digitise chowder before the frost comes? I like the bullish ‘common sense’.
Cheers to that!
This is another of those Great British things… petrol has been sold in litres since… oh, not sure of the exact date but I’d say late 1980s, maybe 1990 at the latest, based on how old I was when I last remember seeing the prices in gallons. But we still use good old miles per gallon when talking about how much petrol our cars actually use. I haven’t really considered up to now how silly that is, but that’s just the way we do it. I suspect it’s because miles are so ingrained, and all road signs use miles, that “litres per 100km” wouldn’t mean much. Car adverts usually give both figures in the small print.
But then for CO[sub]2[/sub] emissions, we use “grams per kilometre”. Is this the same in the USA, or is it an “ounces per mile” thing over there? Or do y’all just not give a shit?
By the way, does anyone know why the metric systems uses “litres per (100) km”, rather than “km per litre”? Is seems a bit backwards to have a system where a higher number indicates poorer economy. But then I suppose they think it seems backwards for us to have a system where a higher number indicates lower fuel consumption… 
I don’t mind milk being in litres, half or quater litres - got used to that in Hong Kong and Ireland with no adjustment problems at all - and even started to get used to kilometres - but I still do like my imperial pint of beer.
To be hoenst, a lovely foaming stein of bier does me fine - either .5L or 1L, still goes down lovely!
My car is only little, so it pegs out at about 120KM/h… I have my TomTom set up for distances in KM which makes calculating journey times dead easy, half the number of KM left = no. of mins driving on the motorway.
And who buys bacon by the lb? Just ask for 12 rashers, or picks up a packet of the stuff 
Identify the quote (no Googlecheating):