They, of course, use Imperial on purpose. It’s the Clarkson way.
The car manufacturers themselves put out the figures for the UK market in their PR, so "Jezza’ doesn’t need to get his calculator out. I’ve noticed Lexus quote 0-62*, must make the maths easier. That Lexus link gives a good idea how confused our metrification is: they quote maximum speed as MPH, then CO2 emissions as grams per km.
Anyway, adapting the figures has got to be easier than putting the steering wheel on the other side of the car.
*Why yes, that is my new car, how kind of you to ask 
A foot is 304.8 mm 
I also notice they list their wheel sizes in inches.
Frankly, the CO2 emissions listing seems a bit redundant. If you click on the “Prices & Specifications” link on that page, the CT 200h S listing shows a fuel economy of 74.2 miles per (Imperial?) gallon. As far as I know, the amount of gasoline you burn DETERMINES the amout of CO2 you put out, period. In fact, the only way to reduce your CO2 emissions without improving your fuel economy would be to burn the fuel more dirtily, so you get junk like partially-combusted hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide in your exhaust instead of CO2. Bleah.
True, but at least right-hand drive isn’t just a British thing. They also need to put the steering wheel on the right if they’re going to sell it in India, South Africa, Japan, Australia, and (I think) Puerto Rico.
Unless you’re talking about U.S. survey feet, in which case it’s 304.8006 mm.
Except Richard Hammond
:rolleyes:
A speed bump is a “sleeping policeman”.
So, in other words, the Brits who create threads asking, “Why can’t you Americans fully commit to the metric system like we do?” are idiots.
Which Brits said that?
The CO2 listing’s something it’s useful to know directly, as Vehicle Excise Duty is based on CO2 emissions - but then again, fuel consumption in litres per mile is more useful than mpg in letting drivers estimate the running costs of their cars (even though it mixes two measurement systems)
So long as they don’t throw Nautical miles into the mix…
I don’t know. Find a few “Why don’t Americans use metric?” threads. They’re around.
Oh, and before I forget:
The shoe size puzzle pales in comparison to DRESS SIZES.
I swear, the income tax code is easier to understand.
Okay folks-----
Since we’ver already derailed a Top Gear thread to a let’s-bang-British-measurements-thread…
How have we gone 34 posts without mentioning the most infamous unit of all: the Stone?
Used exclusively ( I think) for weighing human beings.
Its only purpose is to confuse the rest of the world.
Agreed! No one understands stone(s?) except the Brits. I’ve lived here 9 years and I still can’t translate that into anything sensible - by which I mean kilos, of course. None of your pounds here, tyvm.
I generally go “okay, so a stone is 14 lb, I think, so that’s about… er… divide by 2.2… okay, call it 2 because that’s easier but… argh, fuck it, where’s Google?”
The two thing that strike me as oddest about the stone are:
(A) It’s its own plural. You don’t say “two stones”, you say “two stone”. And
(B) It’s a multiple of 14. Most older customary units are organized into groups of 3, 8, 12, or 16. (3 teaspoons to a tablespoon, 3 feet to a yard, 16 ounces to a pound, 12 troy ounces to a troy pound, 12 inches to a foot, 8 furlongs to a mile, etc.) BUT, it kinda does make sense, in that an Imperial long ton is exactly 160 stone.
You mean he’s not just the token Yank there for comic relief?
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaait a minute … Richard Hammond was born in England, and lives in England. How is he a Yank?
EDIT: Ohhhhhh! This must be one of the running gags on the show…
I saw an episode, filmed in the UK, where Clarkson, not Hammond, was drinking a Barq’s Root Beer. I was appalled at how American he’s become.