damn lost ounces but not millilitres
damn lost ounces but not millilitres
If anyone can explain how it can be 3.3 ounces in the new can and 3.6 in the old while grams and millilitres remain the same i would love to know.
The damn can is also ever so slightly smaller you can see it very well but you can feel it and measure it
By the power of a quick search, I'm told that 3.6 OZ is actually 102 grams, while 3.3 OZ is 93.6. 96 grams is 3.38 OZ, so one has to assume they're starting from grams and rounding down (even though they'd be justified to report 3.4 instead, honestly). It's not fluid ounces because that'd be somewhere in the region of 5, again according to search.
So most likely, it's a typo of some sort, or proof that non-metric systems should be banned by all humanity. This is also how European basketball players grow several centimeters when they start playing in the NBA.
Interestingly, pictures of the product online alternately show 104 and 96 grams. Volume wouldn't have to change, because you can just pressurize the can less to include less product. Oh, and yet another search tells me the reported net weight should not include the weight of the propellant.
Also, what are you doing buying Beckham's spray deodorant? Multiple times? I mean...
Yeah the whole situation makes no sense.
As far as buying multiples im alllergic to something in some deodorants and i get rashes under my arms. This one hasn't so I have been using it for over 10 years. I have many many cans in the cupboardbecausewr buy them when they come half price.
My wife likes the smell I like the smell too.
And as far as I know it's not evil right?
Some deodorants irritate me as well.
I eventually found out that it was a "72 hour" deodorant that I was reapplying every 24 hours (after my shower where, I assure you, I was washing my pits) and it was building up. It was so itchy and I'd scratch until I was raw.
Now I only wear it every other day and use a "natural" deodorant in between.
Might be different for you, obvs
Just to add; it's clearly measured by weight because 150 ml is 5 fluid ounces. And my comment, buy unscented deodorant and an actual bottle of cologne, it smells nicer.
proof that non-metric systems should be banned by all humanity
DON'T TAKE AVOIRDUPOIS FROM ME
The "e" before the weight means estimated.
If I had to guess, they might be giving an upper and lower number to cover a range and their backs.
Ah I didn't know that about the "e"
You might be onto something
mL is volume. oz is weight or mass. It is entirely possible for only one to change.
It is TRICKIER for oz to change, but the mass g not to change. This can only mean that the weight changed, but the mass did not. Presumably, this is from an exoplanet with an approximately Earth-like gravity.
Depending on what it is it could be just more compressed as liters is volume but oz is weight. That said they’re both 96 grams so the only thing that “makes sense” is if one was weighed under different gravity
Yeah I can't make heads or tails of it.
I just kind of assume they updated the one they're most familiar with and didn't adjust the other too.
The can is definitely skinnier though
One was clothes on, the other was clothes off. Obviously clothes off weight is the only accurate measurement.
... Or the specific density of the material inside the can is different.
The old formulation was more dense, so it weighed more at the same volume.
Or the volume (in mL) is the volume of the can, and not the uncompressed volume of the marital inside the can, and they just lowered the pressure of the substance inside the can as shrinkflation.
96 g is neither 3.3 nor 3.6 oz, lmao
It's not? My calculator says 3.3863 oz. If they were forced to correct the incorrect 3.6 they weren't going to go with 3.4 and risk it getting corrected again.
Maybe it just had an incorrect value and they were forced to correct it?
Yeah and fixed it with the can update perhaps.
I wish I had a full original can to do some research of my own.
you'd have more weight if you had more liquid in the can. The can probably contains an emulsifying agent that was changed, altering how much liquid you'd need in the same volume to guarantee the aerosol effect worked.
But Oz and g's are both weight measurements
yes and no, fluid ounces are volume.
"Is 1 fl oz the same as 1 oz? Both fluid ounces and ounces represent a unit of measurement, but they are quite different. Fluid ounces, as the name might imply, are specifically meant to measure volume (often of liquid ingredients like water), while ounces measure weight, usually of solid ingredients like all-purpose flour."
aerosol cans typically display fluid ounces. You can google it.
