On Thursday 26 October 2006 18:50, Nigel Henry wrote: > Ok. That works the same way for the UK imperial gallon which equates with > 160 fl oz's. The quart is 40 fl oz, the pint is 20 fl oz, and there is > little difference between the US fl oz, and the UK imperial one. > See below > This site gave some insite on the origins of the US gallon, and the UK > imperial gallon, which is the basis for this totally OT thread, which > incidentally you started Gene, with that dal garned Canon A10 camera > problem, and how it ever turned into a discussion on weights and measures I > don't know, but perhaps I'm suffering from the affects of alu-alzheimer > from drinking beer from alu cans. > A little trivia lightens the day, after reading the endless complaints from people who ignore good advice then wonder what went wrong :-) > http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/upload/appenb.pdf > What a fascinating document! I've only scanned it so far, but I'll certainly read it more thoroughly. > Page 6 is interesting, and shows the origin of the US, and the UK imperial > gallon. > > According to this, the American colonists adopted the English wine gallon > (231 cubic inches). Back in England the English used this gallon, and also > the ale gallon (282 cubic inches) , but in 1824 dropped both of them, and > set the the ne British Imperial gallon as the volume of 10 pounds of water > at 62.4° F which equates with 277.42 cubic inches. > The very small difference in fl.oz. that I saw there would indicate something like 19.22 US fl. oz. to the pint, greatly at odds with the experience of others here. I'll read on. > Anyway whichever way you look at it, and I know I'm in France, but if > you're in the UK you get more beer in your pint, than you do in the US. > Anne
Attachment:
pgpco1jkfRr0u.pgp
Description: PGP signature
