> Sure, but AMD don't actually call it the XP 2.4GHz. That would be false 
> advertising - as would claiming that an engine has a displacement of X 
> when it's actually Y.

Yeh, I doubt any car makers falsely advertise the displacement.  But calling 
your car a "1.6 TDI" or whatever and it actually having a displacement of 
2000cc is probably ok (even though 90% of people would assume the 
displacement was 1.6 litres).

> Or just HP if you want to know how powerful it is,

I doubt many people are actually interested in the maximum power their 
engine can develop at one particular engine speed.  What's more useful is 
how quickly the car can accelerate, eg 40-70mph or 70-100mph times.  This 
depends on how much power the engine can develop across a wider range of 
RPMs, and also the mass of the car.

> MPG if you want to know how efficient it is... I never did understand the 
> fascination with displacement. (Other than that I guess you can 
> unambiguously measure it.)

Didn't the UK car tax depend on the displacement of your engine?  Also lots 
of racing formulas have limits on the engine displacement (eg 2400cc for F1 
currently).  The HP/litre figure is also a good guide as to how well 
engineered and advanced the engine is.  And of course higher displacement 
usually means a heavier engine, which is something you usually try to avoid.

Post a reply to this message