GR86 127 MPG - why?

Silver Fox

Silver Fox

Totally Hooked
Joined
May 7, 2022
Messages
3,626
Reaction score
8,351
I know there's plenty to choose from, but this might be the dullest thread I've ever started.

I've noticed that, when coasting, the instant MPG reading shows a maximum figure of 127.0 MPG.

Anyone know why this particular number? Does it convert to something 'neater' when using L per 100 KM (which I think is the European standard)?

Or do different cars have a different maximum reading?

Does anyone else even care?
 
Thank you gentlemen, I have genuinely learnt something this evening!
 
Every day is a school day. I had a Pug 406 of around 1998 vintage IIRC, that had a xxx.y readout and on long downhills with foot off the throttle it would show 999.9 mpg.
 
v8s said:
Every day is a school day. I had a Pug 406 of around 1998 vintage IIRC, that had a xxx.y readout and on long downhills with foot off the throttle it would show 999.9 mpg.
Click to expand...
Yeah I'd have expected something like that for our cars.

However, after input from our intelligent esteemed comrades above I gave myself a crash course in signed/unsigned integers and binary last night!
 
Oh gawd, I've just been transported back to the days when I was an Instructor, trying to teach HNC Computing Principles and Hex/Binary programming to a class of spanner wielding grease monkeys: Day One, try breaking the ice with a joke .. "There are only 10 kinds of people in this class - those who know Binary Notation and those that don't" [Baddum-Tish!] 🥁
... <silence> 😶

I'll get my (lab) coat 🥼
 
There was a thing in Evo magazine letters about why the volume goes up to 63 and a possible reason was binary too, if I remember correctly. Is that the same ?
 
Dav1d said:
There was a thing in Evo magazine letters about why the volume goes up to 63 and a possible reason was binary too, if I remember correctly. Is that the same ?
Click to expand...
Typically anything that has a range of 1 less than a power of 2 (e.g. 15, 31, 63, 127, 255 etc) will likely be a binary limitation relating to how many data bits have been allocated to represent that range.
 
So my initial reluctance and slight sense of shame in posting about what I thought was a tedious matter, has resulted in by far the most technical, intelligent, cerebrally-rewarding thread on the whole damn forum.

Prove me wrong, comrades!
 
Silver Fox said:
So my initial reluctance and slight sense of shame in posting about what I thought was a tedious matter, has resulted in by far the most technical, intelligent, cerebrally-rewarding thread on the whole damn forum.

Prove me wrong, comrades!
Click to expand...
Well, as an embedded systems developer, I spend a lot of time working with exactly this type of tedium :ROFLMAO:
 
midlife_sportscar said:
Typically anything that has a range of 1 less than a power of 2 (e.g. 15, 31, 63, 127, 255 etc) will likely be a binary limitation relating to how many data bits have been allocated to represent that range.
Click to expand...
Thanks, realise how little I know about computers. Not a topic for the forum, but I’m still fascinated by how instructions in a written code transfer across into 1s and 0s and how that makes things happen. Maybe a topic to spend some weekend time learning about from a lay perspective.
 
Phew...saved me some embarrassment on second service Thursday when I was going to bring up Im never hitting 127 mpg....best I can get 33.2 !!:unsure::ROFLMAO:
 
midlife_sportscar said:
Well, as an embedded systems developer, I spend a lot of time working with exactly this type of tedium :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Incidentally, for any fellow binary computing enthusiasts, that's why my reg is:

BY73XOR.webp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top