Why America's MPG Is A Dumb Unit For Fuel Economy
Miles Per Gallon (mpg) is a dumb unit we use in the United States.
Recommended Books & Car Products - amzn.to/2BrekJm
Subscribe for new videos every Wednesday! - goo.gl/VZstk7
EE Shirts! - bit.ly/2BHsiuo

In the United States, we measure fuel economy with miles per gallon (mpg), rather than gallons per 100 miles, or liters per 100 kilometers. Using distance per volume of fuel consumed causes a rather weird scenario for comparison purposes however, which is perhaps why the rest of the world does the reverse: volume of fuel consumed per distance driven. Enjoy the video to see how the math causes complications with MPG that don't exist when using G/100mi or L/100km.

Engineering Explained is a participant in the Amazon Influencer Program.

Don't forget to check out my other pages below!
Facebook: facebook.com/engineeringex...
Official Website: www.howdoesacarwork.com
Twitter: twitter.com/jasonfenske13
Instagram: instagram.com/engineeringe...
Car Throttle: www.carthrottle.com/user/engi...
Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/engineeri...
EE Extra: fibill.info/online/srY...

  • Engineering Explained
    Engineering Explained

    If you enjoy watching me throw gallon jugs, you'll love this video: fibill.info/nick/videot/s3WpqZKrZGl0iak

    • Ethan Jacques
      Ethan Jacques

      @ engineering explained this video makes you seem like a raving crazy person any real engineer would know that it's very easy to push numbers around on a piece of paper is very difficult in reality though to make the mpg mechanically work it's someone who knows a thing or two about this kind of stuff it's kind of obvious not to seem like at or anything like that but this video makes you seem pretty bad makes you look very bad

    • Ethan Jacques
      Ethan Jacques

      this video makes you seem like a raving crazy person any real engineer would know that it's very easy to push numbers around on a piece of paper is very difficult in reality though to make the mpg mechanically work it's someone who knows a thing or two about this kind of stuff it's kind of obvious not to seem like at or anything like that but this video makes you seem pretty bad makes you look very bad

    • UncleTrashero

      i dont see how this is a real world scenario that matters? an actual consumer is buying just the one car at a time, based on the one sort of standard use case scenario. If they know its a long distance they are traveling often (ie they need a car for a commute), they know they need a high MPG otherwise they will be spending a lot of money. If they are hardly ever driving the car, but they want to have fun when they do, they want more power, therefore they dont care how much more gas they spend in the process. There is a essentially no person who looks at a selection of V8 sports cars and thinks "well these two both have the same power, but this one gets better MPG so ill buy this one". No. They look at the two cars and pick that one that LOOKS the "coolest" in their opinion. Or maybe they choose the interior that is more comfortable. But the last thing they care about is MPG lol. Even the people who are buying long distance/commute cars are making the same decision: "Which one looks cooler, compared to how much gas im going to waste driving my cooler looking car." (or maybe Brand image is more important than actual looks, but thats effectively the same metric: aesthetics) The decision making process doesnt change if the "Unit" changes, because the understanding of "whats better vs whats worse" doesnt change. The unit is therefore arbitrary.

    • Jcewazhere

      This reminds me of that old statistics story where they kept adding armor to the parts of planes that got shot but still flew home, instead of putting armor where it would help: the parts that were shot on the planes that didn't make it home. It's like 2am so if that didn't make sense mea culpa. Google "Abraham Wald and the Missing Bullet Holes" for the coherent version. "The armor, said Wald, doesn’t go where the bullet holes are. It goes where the bullet holes aren’t: on the engines."

    • zefallafez

      How many white boards per marker do you get, or is it white boards per 100 markers?

  • Alexander Harris
    Alexander Harris

    So in a nutshell comparing different car MPGs in terms of absolute fuel savings is misleading as it’s a nonlinear comparison, whereas the l/100km measurement is, right?

  • CʀᴀғᴛAᴇʀᴏ

    Math doesn't lie, but it can be used to obfuscate the truth. By using non-intuitive units and derivations the US makes it's public "feel" informed and it's engineers genius for understanding the difference. As a Canadian engineer I can seamlessly work between US customary (Imperial) and Metric (SI). Although the US auto-industry is officially Metric, I chuckle every time I see a hole spec'd at 12.7mm (1/2") or 19.05mm (3/4").

  • Terrance Blount
    Terrance Blount

    Every time I watch one of your videos… I go on a hardcore geek trip. 🤓 Keep up the great work and love the explanations. (And the ole whiteboards)

  • Buzz Pedrotti
    Buzz Pedrotti

    French scientific purists have been criticizing US measuration practices for 250 years. Meanwhile the US citizen has become twice as productive as a French citizen.

  • Owen Bondar
    Owen Bondar

    It should be gallons per mile. Or at least that's what my 454 pick should be in makes me feel good when I get 3 gallons to the mile😂😂

  • plonkster

    In South Africa using km/liter is also common, and of course that has the same problems. But I always think of it this way: One is a unit of consumption (liter per 100km) while the other is a unit of efficiency (km per liter). I find that l/100km is a poor unit for the dash display in the car. It shows decimal values between 7 and 8 on most days, which are mostly mostly useless to my brain, which cares about driving efficiently :-)

  • plzhelpj

    You didn’t explain how the math would be affected if the 50 mpg cars sold 10,000 units, but the 5 mpg only sold 100; or vice versa.

  • Wayne Hobbs
    Wayne Hobbs

    97% of the world uses litres per 100km. Get Biden to catch up with the rest of us.

  • Daniel Nordstrand
    Daniel Nordstrand

    Then there's the other issue if 1 country in the world holding onto the initial system: the whole world needs to make double the quantity of tools! (Metric sockets + imperial sockets etc)... Really bad for the environment :/

  • Rob Mitchell
    Rob Mitchell

    I'm sorry but doing the wrong sum doesn't excuse getting the basics wrong. I live metric hate imperial and particularly hate America's mashed up version of imperial. Anyway live your shows by the way. Why not stick to basics and not complicate it with using a mix of straight unit and a complication. Why not L per m

  • Ethan Jacques
    Ethan Jacques

    @ engineering explained this video makes you seem like a raving crazy person any real engineer would know that it's very easy to push numbers around on a piece of paper is very difficult in reality though to make the mpg mechanically work it's someone who knows a thing or two about this kind of stuff it's kind of obvious not to seem like at or anything like that but this video makes you seem pretty bad makes you look very bad

  • Skely

    Can I just go off of gallons per hour like planes?

  • Jay4Jet

    When calculating how much it's going to cost to commute to and from work, MPG is king. If I drive 25mi per day and get 25mpg, if you know the fuel tank size you can determine how much and how often you'll be filling up per week.

  • Al J
    Al J

    Metric just makes more sense since its more accurate. You have rulers for "Metres" but we dont have a ruler for "foot". Americans think 'foot' makes more sense but everones foot is different so how you gon measure that? And "gallon"? what a joke.... have you heard of car manufactures use "gallons" for their engine displacement? 0.5 gallon turbo charged 4 cyl engine?? lmao. 12 gallons of trunk space? And if you car needs exact 5.5Ls of engine oil, for yall americans are you gonna measure your oil jug and make sure its 1.453 gallon? Jokes.

  • Skip In Perth
    Skip In Perth

    I am guessing the big car manufacturers suggested "mpg" comparison measurement :-)

  • Rush Weaver
    Rush Weaver

    I don't know what I just saw...

  • telocity

    I'd like to see a video about how electric cars get such high fuel mileage when they are compared to same size ICE vehicle. Because 2 vehicle of similar mass, resistance would take similar amount of energy to go a specific distance.

  • yard limit
    yard limit

    you better say thankyou for watching,,,,,,,,,,,i just wasted 11 minutes out of my life..........talk about double talk,,,,,,,,,,,,this is doulble talk BEYOND double talk.........

  • Andruhevich

    What are you on about? 5 to 6 MPG means it takes 16.6 gallons vs 2 gallons in a 52MPG car. 8 times the economy brother! abandon 6mpg car! no point improving it. Get a 50 mpg car.

  • Y A
    Y A

    The reason mile or ft isn’t a good unit because you have to deal with uneven numbers all the time with kilometres it’s more even 1 kilometre is 1000 meters everything is 1000 1 10

  • Petar Tonkov
    Petar Tonkov

    Ok, as a guy from Europe I just have to ask why miles per gallon and not gallons per mile or 100 miles. In Europe it's liters per 100 km. After all we won't to know how much fuel we are spending not how much miles we are going.

  • Darrell Sandmoen
    Darrell Sandmoen

    I switched my thinking to litres per hundred kilometres years ago. So much easier to calculate range and cost. In Canada, we measure distance and volume in metric units like most of the rest of the world. No need to convert units, just convert your thinking.

  • wyatt hatch
    wyatt hatch

    Counter point: I know how far a mile is, but I have no concept of how far 100 miles is

    • antonio teixeira
      antonio teixeira

      More or less 160km...😂

  • Metal Gamer
    Metal Gamer

    I love laughing at Americans, but come on! You're just trolling by this point! Not only do you use different units than the rest of the world, but you even flip things around to make things even worse?

  • Inexorability

    Your shirt causes a weird optical illusion. When I first looked at it, I saw two magnets opposite each other, now I see the backwards and forwards "E's" but my head still switches it back and forth between the two, and I can only see one at a time. If I look at the whole, it's magnets. If I look at a side individually, it's an "E"

  • Nezalu

    Trashing units in USA... try living in UK.

  • Ed B
    Ed B

    and THIS is why I've been working on building a 400 hp V8 that gets good gas mileage. Sure, you can make a Smart Car that gets 50 mpg (vs. the usually 35ish), but doesn't it make more sense (and fun) to make a Mustang that gets 50 mpg (vs. the usually 25ish)? (sorry, 2 gal/ 100 mi). I know, everybody wants an electric car (except not everybody does).

  • John

    Yeah, but I don' have 10 cars that I want to know the average fuel economy of! I have one car! Here's the issue: my fuel tank has a capacity of 17.3 gallons (65 litres). I want to know how far I can go on that. If my car gets 30 mpg on the highway, then I can drive 30x17.3= 519 give or take. What if my fuel economy is shown as 7.84 km/100 litres which is the same as 30 mpg? Well, then my range is going to be 65/7.84*100= 829 kms = 519 miles. In the first case I multiply two numbers to get the result. In the second case I divide two numbers, then multiply by a third to get the result. For most people, multiplying is easier than dividing so it's easier to calculate range in your head knowing how many gallons you have in your tank and your typical mpg fuel economy stats. The proponents of litres/100kms argue that what a person wants to know is how much fuel it will take to drive a certain distance. "Suppose," they say, "you want to drive 350 kms. How much fuel do you need? Well, you divide the distance by 100 kms (=3.5) and then multiply that by the fuel economy in litres/100 kms (eg 7.84) so it will take 27.4 litres to drive that distance." So now I have to compare 27.4 litres to what's in my tank based on the fuel gauge needle. Let's suppose the needle is at half full and for the sake of argument, let's assume the gauge is linear and accurate. Then that means I have 65/2= 32.5 litres in the tank. So that should be enough for the trip. Great! What's my safety margin on that? That is, how much further can I go before I run out of fuel? Oh, hmmm... Let's see. Well, you should have 32.5 - 27.4 = 5.1 litres left at the end of the trip. Your car uses 7.84 litres / 100 kms so that's 5.1 / 7.84 * 100 = 65 kms of extra range. Whew! That was an ordeal! Let's try this the old fashioned way. I want to go 218 miles (350 kms). I really don't care how much fuel it's going to take. It is what it is based on the decisions I prioritized when I bought the car (eg performance, comfort, fuel economy). All I care about is do I have enough fuel in the tank to get there. The gas gauge shows half full. That means I've got 17.3/2 ~ 8.6 gallons in the tank. My fuel economy on the highway is 30 mpg. So I can go about 8 1/2 times 30 = 255 miles. So, yeah, I've got enough fuel in the tank to go the distance. What's my safety margin? Easy, 255 - 218 = 37 miles (actually a bit more because I rounded the amount of fuel in the tank down from 8.6 to 8.5 to make the multiplication easier in my head!) If you're trying to figure out fleet average fuel consumption or what percentage of fuel you will save based on improving your fuel economy from 30 to 32 mpg versus improving it from 18 to 20 mpg, then yeah, litres per 100 kms as a measure makes perfect sense. On the other hand, if all you care about is how far you can go on a tankful of gas, then the old mpg is a far simpler measure.

  • Kenneth Solis
    Kenneth Solis

    Stopped the video as soon as I hear "I'm an engineer "

  • bikebudha01

    It's far more important to know just how far i can go on one gallon.....

  • John Thimakis
    John Thimakis

    Wow! Absolutely fascinating. The perfect example of why maths matters. Ps. CAFE is simply Gal/100 miles converted into MPG You can do this using the formula: 1 / ((Gal/100 Mil) / 100)

  • Bane_Diesel

    One mistake I made when I purchased my ford focus rs was to not look at fuel tank size. I made the mistake of assuming that cars would have a reasonable size tank. I spent one week trying to get the absolute best mpg after purchase only to then notice that I had one puny little 12 gallon tank. :(

  • GroceryGetter

    Miles/Gallon Liters/Kilometer Distance/Volume Volume/Distance An engineer shouldn't complain as clearly the conversion requires a simple inversion of units Complaining about why people use different units in different parts of the world is like complaining about how not everybody speaks the same language.

  • Terry Byrd
    Terry Byrd

    For someone (me) who rarely reasons beyond the basics (readin, ritin, an rithmatics) .. it makes perfect sense to increase the efficiency of the least efficient vehicle ... somehow(?)!

  • midlan6

    Americans uses MPG because they need to easily know if their range is enough to reach the next gas station. Europeans needs to easily count how much will be cost of the next trip.

  • Chuck Wright
    Chuck Wright

    Old man stands on porch and shakes fist at society... Old engineer stands in front of whiteboard for ten minutes using math to complain about society.

  • Rowland Buck
    Rowland Buck

    Well, people should know that a 1 mpg increases from 20mpg compared to 50 mpg is a bigger fuel savings. 5% compared to 2%. Basic math that Prius drivers don’t understand, driving under the speed limit everywhere they go.

  • Tom Slick
    Tom Slick

    I feel like Scooby Doo realizing something is wrong.

  • Oleksii Shevelov
    Oleksii Shevelov

    There is one problem mpg is different for US and UK. God bless Napoleon Bonaparte who has burned Europe and brought metric system.

  • Uppat Dawn
    Uppat Dawn

    Silly engineering-head speak and intellectual confusion… All youre doing is inverting the same ratio. You’re not improving on fizical conditions, nor are you actually improving on measuring them…

  • Shaikh Aasif
    Shaikh Aasif

    Best option sell the 1 car

  • cgarzs

    SHOCKING NEWS! 'Murica uses terrible units. EXTRA EXTRA 🤣

  • Gustavo G
    Gustavo G

    How many football stadiums per gun is that?

  • Dallas Stang
    Dallas Stang

    Real life solution: Get rid of the pig

  • The Whaley Life
    The Whaley Life

    You've created a scenario that very few experience then exaggerated it. MPG works better for the question that most of ask"how far can I go on a tank of gas?" We drive high efficient cars when we need to cover long distances and low efficient vehicles for pleasure or to complete heavy task (generalizing of course). Gallons/100 is more important for companies like FedEx that is trying to decide where to invest in their fleet not for the average household

    • Tom Slick
      Tom Slick

      Do you realize that the better mileage a care gets, the smaller the fuel tank is? There are exceptions, but this generally applies. It's the same idea that planes carry only slightly more fuel than they need for each flight. Weight matters for vehicles on the road as well as planes in the air, and fuel has weight.

  • candlercando

    People in the US will more than likely need to factor in the range a certain amount of gallons are in the tank versus some magic engineering increase or decrease their mpg.

  • Kur Norock
    Kur Norock

    eh. This isn't an argument against the MPG unit of measurement. This is an argument against averaging several vehicles together. If you only have the one vehicle then you don't have this issue.

  • Isak s
    Isak s

    well, we are a bit weird here in sweden. we generally talk in liters per mil. one mil is 10 km. my car gets 0.52l/mil or 5.2l/100km or 45mpg. I think that is pretty decent for a 10 year old car with a 136hp 1.6l naturally aspirated inline 4.

  • Facundo Gonzalez
    Facundo Gonzalez

    The world also uses km per liter which is the equivalent of MPG.

    • Facundo Gonzalez
      Facundo Gonzalez

      And I hate it lol I like liters per 100km.

  • dzelpwr

    I agree and I've been saying this myself for a long time! Gallons per 100 miles would be better. Better still would finally catching up with the rest of the modern world and using metric (and they use L/100km, so they even have that part right, too)... But I digress. It's so much easier to get a mental idea of how much fuel you're going to use, which also makes it far easier to do the mental math on how that impacts your wallet. It's far more linear representation of fuel consumption. The difference between 10 and 15 MPG is far bigger than the difference between 35 and 40 MPG as far as fuel savings when you convert to the gallons per 100 mile, even though you're increasing both by 5 MPG...

  • BeezerB

    Diminishing returns.

  • Roberto Fabikann
    Roberto Fabikann

    america and its units... its like a crying stubborn child ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • bryan glass
    bryan glass

    This "engineer" reminds me of the fellow I used to work with: one day the boss man had to explain to him that as noble as it is to want to show what you learned during those few weeks it took for your mother to teach you how to masturbate, she didn't mean for you to give public demonstrations!

  • Cody Collinsworth
    Cody Collinsworth

    I think we can all agree this is only relevant for companies with large fleets. If you only drive one vehicle it's unnecessary. A car getting 35mpg is more fuel efficient than a truck getting 18mpg. I also think we should be more focused on emissions than fuel consumption right now. The planet is suffocating itself with carbon dioxide and no one cares. "China makes more emissions than the US therefore we shouldn't worry about it." Listen buddy. If we cut our emissions by 10% we cut them by 10%. Let China worry about China. We should be doing what we can to help solve the problem.

  • Glenn

    I use km per liter most of the time, because a lower number usually gives me a better feeling.

  • Poppyclypse Noir
    Poppyclypse Noir

    The world's cargo ship fleets produce more pollution than all the cars in the world. Thank you globalization. A Prius is filthier than a Hummer. Thank you nickel-metal foam scientists.

  • Rick James
    Rick James

    I saw all the crap on the board and I said... Nah

  • Stephen Troyer
    Stephen Troyer

    The only time I've heard "gallons per mile" was in an explanation of how much fuel a pulling tractor uses in a run. I forgot the figure, but it was mind blowing in the unlimited category of pulling tractors.

  • AJ G
    AJ G

    Its dump still using the imperial system in the 21 century.


    What if you use the mediane for the "average" MPG?

  • Dusty Carrier
    Dusty Carrier

    As much as I get that MPG makes little engineering sense, it is similar to Fahrenheit in that it is meant to be practical, not sensible. MPG is great because it describes the average efficiency of a vehicle directly, rather than inductively, and this is generally easier for people to understand in America. People usually think, "A gallon is X dollars, and so X dollars can get me Y miles." While it is logarithmic, it is not intended necessarily to describe direct efficiency of the engine either, but rather economic efficiency of the engine.

  • Curtis Grisdale
    Curtis Grisdale

    Canadian here, this nonsense just hurt my brain. XD

  • Carl Knapp
    Carl Knapp

    I like to use this scenario. Four motorcycles with one rider on each travel 40 miles. If each motorcycle gets 40mpg then during that trip they would use 4 gallons amongst the group. If the four riders jumped into one car to travel the same 40 miles that gets 20mpg then they use 2 gallons. By math, it makes more sense to take a car but who cares about math and fuel usage when having fun on a motorcycle. It should also be noted that the four motorcycles will put out over (2x4) eight times the NOx levels and (3x4) 12 times the CO levels in the USA versus a new car on that same drive.

  • John Miller
    John Miller

    For people with cars in both the US and Europe: l/100Km = 235.215 / US_MPG

  • Nathan Egnew
    Nathan Egnew

    This is all well and good from a mathematically point of view. But if we are just concerned about transporting goods at the cheapest cost to us (i.e. how many gallons will be used in moving the fleet) doubling the 9 cars to 100 mpg is the best option: I take 9 loads the 100 miles then send 1 car back to pick up the 10th load and return. That is 9×1+2 or 11 gallons. Car 10 gets sold for scrap metal. Or towed behind on of the other cars for extra storage space. It's an interesting intellectual experiment but there are practical work arounds that make the experiment redundant.

  • jaden dennys
    jaden dennys

    why cant everywhere just use the same measurements. it would make everyday life sooo much simpler

  • Eric G
    Eric G

    Isn’t this disingenuous? The idea is to save money when you make the choice between one car. Obviously you would save more money if you had 10 cars that had 50 mpg… The decision most of us make is replacing one car - I choose between one that I will buy 2 gallons per 100 miles or 50 mpg and one that takes 20 gallons per 100 miles or 5mpg - the units don’t matter until I look at either of that one car and make this calculation- 2 gallons or 20 gallons * $4 for the same distance is either $8 or $80. The idea is that you should buy per car and not per fleet…which is why that CAFE thing exists for fleets.

  • Gavin Kneale
    Gavin Kneale

    Yes Miles per Gallon looks towards the end of the Cosmos for the bar of Absolute Efficiency. Liters per 100km looks towards Zero for that same mark. I came up with an Efficiency formula which tests comparative outputs with scores where closest to Zero is most efficient. I guess there is nothing new under the Sun but I will show it off anyway. - (Conditional) Absolute Efficiency An expression of efficiency as a comparason of likewise combined resistence functions of various systems and with respect to their efficient tendency towards zero. a1/(1/b1) vs a2/(1/b2) vs a(n)/(1/b(n)) where a1 is common input running cost factor a1 where a2 is common input running cost factor a2 where a(n) is common input running cost factor a(n) where b1 is common drag or resistance cost factor b1 where b2 is common drag or resistance cost factor b2 where b(n) is common drag or resistance cost factor b(n) ~ a is typical upfront cost expensed to establish operation. ~ B are retarding factors caused by operation. Restated a1/(1/(b1/(1/(n1))) VS a2/(1/(b2/(1/(n2))) VS a[n]/(1/(b[n]/(1/n[𝘯]))) Where as above but including Where 𝘯 is common 𝘯 drag factors 𝘯[n] Simplified a1/(1/(1/(n1)) VS a2/(1/(1/(n2)) VS a[𝘯]/(1/(1/𝘯[n])) ......... Basic Financial product Example Savings Account a1/(1/b1) a1 = (Account Fee over period) + ( Savings deposit amount) (1/b1) = (1/(Savings deposit amount/(Savings deposit Amount + Interest earned over period) VS Comparison of like for like alternarive options B , C, D etc. Vehicle ownership Example a1/(1/(b1/(1/(n1))) a1 = (all operating costs per period) + (All Capital Cost per period) (1/(b1/(1/(n1))) = (1/( (Capital Cost Per Period)/( Expected Depreciation per Period) /( 1/(Litres of Fuel burned per Period) ))) VS like for like comparason for other vehicle options. Period in this case may as well be litres per 100km but does not have to be as long as Like for Like comparasons are consistent across comparisons. closest score to Zero is the most efficient option for the period in question. In the above example the Units are most likely something like Combined Dollar Operating Costs per Combinef Inverse Operational Drag Inefficiency. (Or something like that ! ) The above two examples are for comparing ( Conditional ) Absolute Efficiency. Conditional upon - Input Units tested - Accuracy of inputs If one trends to more Physics or Engineering based inputs then the results become more Absolute and less conditional. Conditional then upon - Accuracy only. ( I think) Consistency is the main thing that matters across comparisons. Further Just know if your results are more Conditional Absolute Efficiency or more Absolute Efficiency. The formula can be as simple or as complex as the application demands. In the Vehicle example above Litres per 100 Km is an excellent proxy for all energy losses. The fuel consumption is caused by All combined Energy conversion losses and thus we don't need to be concerned about any breakdown for this example. One is essentially just dealing with cost and drag factors and with respect to their combined tendency to approach Zero. ----------- My full verbose recap follows Relative Efficiency vs Absolute Efficiency vs Relative Absolute Efficiency ......... - Relative Efficiency An expression of efficiency as a function of one system relative to another and expressed as a percentage. a/b×100 ......... - Absolute Efficiency An expression of efficiency as a comparason of likewise combined resistence functions of various systems and with respect to their efficient tendency towards zero. a1/(1/b1) vs a2/(1/b2) vs a(n)/(1/b(n)) where a1 is common input cost factor a1 where a2 is common input cost factor a2 where a(n) is common input cost factor a(n) where b1 is common drag cost factor b1 where b2 is common drag cost factor b2 where b(n) is common drag cost factor b(n) ~ a and b are factors of retardation. ~ a and b Cost Energy Restated a1/(1/(b1/(1/(n1))) vs a2/(1/(b2/(1/(n2))) vs a[n]/(1/(b[n]/(1/n[𝘯]))) Where as above but including Where 𝘯 is common 𝘯 drag factor 𝘯[n] Simplified a1/(1/(1/(n1)) vs a2/(1/(1/(n2)) vs a[𝘯]/(1/(1/𝘯[n])) ......... - Relative Absolute Efficiency a1/(1/(1/(n1)) / a2/(1/(1/(n2)) × 100 Where as all as above. Both above applications could be prefaced as (Conditional) - input depending. ......... Electrical Example (In network A and B) Total Cost Of Appliance Operation A /(1/(Line Loss A /1/(Appliance Loss A )) / Total Cost Of Appliance Operation B /(1/(Line Loss B/1/(Appliance LossB )) ×100 OR Electrical Example (Appliance [Per User Case] ) Total Cost Of Appliance Operation Per User Case A /(1/(Line Loss A)1/(Appliance Loss A)) / Total Cost Of Appliance Operation per user case B /(1/(Line Loss B /1/(Appliance Loss B)) ×100 e.g 100/(1/60/(1/45)) / 180/(1/65/(1/48)) ×100 =45.627% vs.... ---- Something missing but you get the picture. Apologies for not being brief. I hope it inspires. : )


    Allowing rolling stops and more yield signs with higher speed limits would help save fuel but the government cares more about tickets. Drivers sleeping at the light wastes time and fuel.

  • Yourjoshnme

    🤯🤯 great video as always! The math is always fascinating.

  • RockWell Aim
    RockWell Aim

    Allz I wanna know is how to get my 1962 Cadillac and 1952 Buick Roadmaster back on the highways affordably. Dun' care how many gallons I use only cost matters.

  • Robert Vicol
    Robert Vicol

    Takeaway : you're much better off improving the efficency of 1 gas guzzler than 9 50mpg cars . Best selling car in the US for the past 44 years ? Ford F series. Which in 2020 had an average of 20/MPG or 5gall/mile😁 over 17 F-150 variants.

  • renragged

    Scenario 2 and sell the 5mpg vehicle.

  • Rdd Sknk89
    Rdd Sknk89

    I’m sorry, but you didn’t say anything in this video to convince me that gallons/100 miles is better than MPG. For a person with single car, there’s no reason to calculate it any other way then MPG. If you know the distance you want to travel, and you know your fuel economy, divide distance by fuel economy, and then that’s how much fuel you need. No need to faff around with multiple calculations figuring it out the other way. And on the point of going from 5 to 6 MPG being bigger than going from 50 to 51… well yeah, obviously. It’s the same absolute increase, but a much different relative increase. Even if people don’t know how to put it into technical terms, I think most understand that intuitively. For a person with one or two cars, bigger MPG=better, end of story. And calculating how much fuel you need for a trip is much easier. And it’s not like a genie is going to pop out of a bottle and ask if you want to increase the MPG of your Prius or your gas-guzzling Hummer. And honestly, if that did happen somehow, I think most people would still increase the one with worse MPG. Absolutely no reason to deal with gallons per 100 miles. Lastly, in my opinion, MPG is just more elegant. That’s just aesthetics, but still.

  • Arnie Geddon
    Arnie Geddon

    Extremely long winded example of the law of diminishing returns.

  • PandaMan

    you're using a theoretical/magical doubling of fuel economy scenario to justify why gallons/mile is better than miles/gallon when the two concepts don't care about the other.

  • Hamidreza Saberyoun
    Hamidreza Saberyoun

    FINALLY somebody said it 🤣

  • Kasper Guldmann
    Kasper Guldmann

    Can you do a video on MPGe? Also, can you show what a gallon of e looks like?

  • max factor
    max factor

    MPG is not normalized.

  • patriot 945
    patriot 945

    This will become relevant when fuel stations are 100Km apart, so we can pretend we are all engineers, and throwing gallon jugs looks fun. Would you throw 5 1 liter jugs to simulate an imperial gallon. Have a fun day.

  • James Daniel
    James Daniel

    Miles per gallon doesn't measure efficiency except in one direction. An engine can be efficient in producing more power per volume of fuel used or it can be measured in the amount of fuel used to travel a given distance. The latter is affected by the terrain, the weight of the car, the weight of passengers and cargo, etc. Output is only affected by temperature and air peressure as an uncontrollable issue and air pressure can be controlled with a turbo or a supercharger.

  • Hemant Jadhav
    Hemant Jadhav

    Its lot easier if we use cents/mile!

  • Asif Kidwai
    Asif Kidwai

    Very interesting math in this video. File away in the Nerd/Geek box, but still useful to everyone. Disclaimer: if complicated math gives you a headache, take your advil before watching this video.

  • Maya Jane
    Maya Jane

    now do it with 9 cars that only get 15 mpg and one car gets the 5 mpg and see what you come up with

  • Rim Fire
    Rim Fire

    What's even dumber? THE WHOLE IDEA THAT YOUR SCENARIO IS BASED ON DOUBLING SOME VEHICLES MILEAGE. Even 20% is a rather dubious scenario.

  • shrekviper01

    Come on. If you can double the mpg on 9 cars, I'm sure you could find the funding to double the 10th car too.

  • Hellion 1
    Hellion 1

    Here we live by Litres\100km.

  • Talyf Coelho
    Talyf Coelho

    Just do like brazillians: we use Km/L lol

  • J Sh
    J Sh

    You made a mistake with your math there in the beginning. See scenario 1 vs 2 in your whatever diagram

  • j m
    j m

    So basically, don't have any vehicles in your fleet that gets 5 mpg.

  • Henge

    For me its more important with the quality of the content then the saneness of the units :)

  • Nathan Spain
    Nathan Spain

    I only have one car though so.....

  • Lurking Turkey
    Lurking Turkey

    L per 100km works

  • Brett Blose
    Brett Blose

    The problem is that it is highly unlikely that all vehicles will get the same amount of usage and are interchangeable. It doesn't factor in that the 5 mpg vehicle may get lower mileage because it is larger and can haul what the others can't. Or alternatively if they can be used interchangeably it is highly unlikely that some of the usage of the 5 mpg vehicle couldn't be shifted to the now 100 mpg vehicles. But yes MPG isn't that intuitive but it is an accurate way to measure fuel consumption.

  • Mark Jones
    Mark Jones

    Literally every standard of measurement that we have here in the U.S. is flipping horrible compared to the brilliant metric system that the rest of the world uses. We need to adopt that system.

  • Sephiroth5200

    If you have a vehicle that can display both values, like mine, you can use both. My truck averages 18.4 mpg or 13.4L/100km. I digress though. I live in Michigan. We measure distance with time and fuel economy with money. For example: Grand Rapids is 90 minutes away and costs me $20 in fuel on the old highway. It is 70 minutes and $30 to take the interstate.

  • Cam Bryan
    Cam Bryan

    Because REAL Americans measure in Smiles per gallon anyway. Self explanatory.

  • tinker'n e-round
    tinker'n e-round

    I've been doing this for years. I'm a large vehicle transporter who pays for my own fuel. Slowing 10 mph can bring me from 5 mpg to 7 mpg moving two boomed together tractors where when I drive my 3.6 l Buick car I only go from 32 mpg to 38 mpg dropping the 10 mph. If a person put a value on their time the fuel savings slowing 10 mph is negligible in a modern car, but substantial in a big truck. I once moved a new trash truck from Iowa to Florida. It took me 3 extra hours to get there by slowing to 55 mph. I saved $100 in fuel on the trip. $33.33/hour for the extra hours...

  • Trustin Judo
    Trustin Judo

    I just like mpg because its way easier and faster to say than L/100km. I really wish my truck was in mpg