

| Subject: | Re: The Vanagon as a standard unit of volume |
| From: | Gary Bawden |
| Date: | Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:31:43 -0700 |
Mr. Squirrel's none-too-subtle hint about being armed is very disturbing, indeed! I would have volunteered to be a member of the measurement committee but now feel that emotions are running at too high a pitch for properly accurate dimensions to be recorded safely. Scott, I strongly suggest you return to home base with the ping-pong balls, I fear anyone getting close to Mellow Yellow may be pelted with walnuts! Gary >Mr Bawden's suggestion to redefine what a volumetric Vanagon is makes whole thing unnecessarily >complicated. This body wishes to know whether Mr Bawden thinks that we also need to compensate for >armed vs armless driver > > >We feel it be in the best interest of everyone that all agree on one standard unit of volume. But this body >recognizes the sovereignty of nations and reckons that Canadians will probably end up with a slightly >different definition, that the United States will steadfastly stick with Imperial units, and that the whole >rest of the g*##amn world will go all metric on us. > On 6/18/10, Scott Daniel - Turbovans <scottdaniel@turbovans.com> wrote: > exterior volume, or interior volume ? > > for interior volume of an odd shape, without hurting it, you just fill it > with ping pong balls or whatever, then remove those and put them in a > properly shaped container that you can use to calculate the volume. > > the pool method is good though. >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »