Posted on 06/19/2008 11:50:26 AM PDT by MaestroLC
Some Duke professors are challenging the conventional "miles per gallon" terminology employed by the automobile industry.
Researchers with Duke's Fuqua School of Business say that posting a vehicle's fuel efficiency in "gallons per mile" rather than "miles per gallon" would help motorists make better decisions when buying a new car.
The study will appear in the June 20 issue of Science magazine. It was inspired by a debate professors Richard Larrick and Jack Soll had while carpooling in a hybrid car, according to a Duke press release.
The two management professors ran experiments showing current "miles per gallon" terminology led consumers to think fuel consumption goes down at an even rate as efficiency improves.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsobserver.com ...
How about “furlongs per quid” instead?............
“It was inspired by a debate professors Richard Larrick and Jack Soll had while carpooling in a hybrid car.”
The all-Steisand station on XM must have been on the fritz that day
“It was inspired by a debate professors Richard Larrick and Jack Soll had while carpooling in a hybrid car,...”
Well, that guarantees the idea is good. While they are at it, they should say the fuel use should be expressed in metric system format too. We all know how conversant Americans are with that. How about expressing horsepower in kilograms or joules too.
Management profs, eh? Figures. Same type of clowns who have destroyed Detroit, sent all of our electronics production overseas, and still can’t pass an elementary math course.
Wouldn’t you have to convince people that smaller numbers are better? I’d guess people have a natural tendency to prefer bigger numbers.
Hmmm, so two college professors want to turn a well-known number upside down. That will confuse people quite nicely, though all it will do is turn a number like 25 into 4%. Nothing else changed.
Quite the liberal solution: do nothing except confuse every ordinary person.
So my car uses .026 gallons per mile on the highway.
If I could only get that down to .020.
They must be tenured professors.
I suppose this is at least a little better than falsely accusing lacrosse players of rape.
You know, I like the sound of Teeter-Harris better than Harris-Teeter.
Perhaps I should ask these two professors?
Because saying 0.03333 gallons per mile is just sooooo much easier to say!
Do these people have a brain extraction done at their tenure hearing?
Who teaches math these days?
There’s no time between teaching Secular Humanism and putting condoms on cucumbers.
The obviously weren’t math professors, the thought of inverting the ratio so that it would be clearer wouldn’t even have occurred to someone with a logically trained brain.
Leave it to a bunch of liberals, when things get tough, to rearrange the deck chairs.
“30 mpg” sure sounds better then “.033 gpm”
I’m speechless.
I prefer hours of operation per pound of fuel.
Or, 3.33E-2 gal/mile. That's easy to remember!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.