Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..
Really? I know on commodores I have owned in the past, each increment seemed to be 1.6kms, obviously based on something from the USA, but other cars I have noticed that they had increments of 2kms.
1.6 Km is one mile...
So USA based cars might have done a lazy conversion?
Select to expand quoteJulianRoss said..FormulaNova said..
Really? I know on commodores I have owned in the past, each increment seemed to be 1.6kms, obviously based on something from the USA, but other cars I have noticed that they had increments of 2kms.
1.6 Km is one mile...
So USA based cars might have done a lazy conversion?
Yes, sorry, I didn't spell it out, but my assumption at the time was that it was a unit that was calibrated in miles. It makes sense as a lot of stuff is just used as is from the US and then only the things that are changed are the bits the user sees.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..JulianRoss said..FormulaNova said..
Really? I know on commodores I have owned in the past, each increment seemed to be 1.6kms, obviously based on something from the USA, but other cars I have noticed that they had increments of 2kms.
1.6 Km is one mile...
So USA based cars might have done a lazy conversion?
Yes, sorry, I didn't spell it out, but my assumption at the time was that it was a unit that was calibrated in miles. It makes sense as a lot of stuff is just used as is from the US and then only the things that are changed are the bits the user sees.
Ha ha
yep as a determined key board warrior I just need to be right every so often..... even when stating the obvious
Select to expand quoteJulianRoss said..FormulaNova said..JulianRoss said..FormulaNova said..
Really? I know on commodores I have owned in the past, each increment seemed to be 1.6kms, obviously based on something from the USA, but other cars I have noticed that they had increments of 2kms.
1.6 Km is one mile...
So USA based cars might have done a lazy conversion?
Yes, sorry, I didn't spell it out, but my assumption at the time was that it was a unit that was calibrated in miles. It makes sense as a lot of stuff is just used as is from the US and then only the things that are changed are the bits the user sees.
Ha ha
yep as a determined key board warrior I just need to be right every so often..... even when stating the obvious
Wouldn't it be easier if we just argued? I could come up with some lame argument that it must have been 1.57kms and you could argue it was obviously a mile 
I must admit that I was a bit surprised that my ford falcon seemed to have the increment as 2kms, so obviously Ford Australia decided to adjust it. Then again, the commodores I was talking about still had mechanical throttle control, with a separate cruise module, and most or all have electronic throttles now, so the ECU can run the cruise functions.
On two cars I have, I have an ECU edit program, where you can change a lot of parameters, and axle ratio is one of them, which allows you to adjust the speedo accuracy. It was interesting when I changed the diff ratio in one of them and the speedo was telling you you were going much faster than the actual speed, until I changed the ECU setting.
when you drive your car the tyres have a little flat spot on the bottom.2% less radius perhaps.on my ute with a heavy load, its bigger and flatter. gps difference is greater. fxd
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..JulianRoss said..FormulaNova said..JulianRoss said..FormulaNova said..
Really? I know on commodores I have owned in the past, each increment seemed to be 1.6kms, obviously based on something from the USA, but other cars I have noticed that they had increments of 2kms.
1.6 Km is one mile...
So USA based cars might have done a lazy conversion?
Yes, sorry, I didn't spell it out, but my assumption at the time was that it was a unit that was calibrated in miles. It makes sense as a lot of stuff is just used as is from the US and then only the things that are changed are the bits the user sees.
Ha ha
yep as a determined key board warrior I just need to be right every so often..... even when stating the obvious
Wouldn't it be easier if we just argued? I could come up with some lame argument that it must have been 1.57kms and you could argue it was obviously a mile
Monty python argument......
