Re: The joy of FORTRAN

On 3/2/25 3:19 AM, rbowman wrote:

On Sun, 2 Mar 2025 00:08:04 -0500, c186282 wrote:
 

    When American were used to 350 cubic inch engines in their cars,
    using 'CCs' generated bigger numbers and those tended to impress even
    though a lot of those engines were of much smaller displacement.
    Fooled enough of the people enough of the time.

 That worked backwards when the displacement was given in liters. 428 ci
sounds a lot better than 7 L.
 They seemed to have died down but for a while the market was flooded with
cheap Chinese knockoffs of Vespas. One proudly advertised itself as having
150 cc (of oil in the crankcase). The engine was 49 cc on a good day.
 My first bike was a '55 FLH I bought at a police auction. When I called my
friendly insurance man he asked what the displacement was and I said 74.
"CCs?" he asked. I should have lied.  The 1200 cc Sportster really is
1200; 73.35 doesn't roll of the tongue well.

   "Sales-speak" and objective reality are two different things  :-)
   Esp if selling to males, "bigger"/"stronger" is what you
   want to convey to the rube ... er ... customer.