Yep, I noticed there was a fluffy kind, a lumpy kind, and one a bit like a cat’s tail.Problem there is that all grass is not the same. Umpteen different varieties for different purposes.
Because cold is cold. It isn't refreshing, or bracing.
Same with rucksacks, equally daft.
But but but they are the same volume? Do you mean that by being “brick shaped” it’s a more practical assessment of the useful space?
Isn't a litre just 1000 cubic centimeters?
Why not usable volume as in width x depth by height? Plus door opening dimensions? I need a car that will accommodate a wheelchair easily and it is unbelievably difficult to find out what the usable boot space actually is. Instead we are given numerous details of 'infotainment' systems, touchscreens and other gimmickry - the like of which I believe should be banned as use is bound to distract drivers attention from the road.
Should we campaign for the Kendal Mint Cake standard?
Except using water is exactly how they find the volume of rucksacs - in goes the dustbin liner followed by the required litre jugs full of water. The ongoing debate is about what constitutes 'full'. On mid size rucksacs the designation is quite conservative as people buy small and are then pleased when everything fits. But expedition sacs are topped up until it weeps out of the lace holes as they're bought on maximum volume.
Sixteen boxes, retail size, in a 15 litre rucksack.
The metric system in its entirety
