1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

sonar1313
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:29 am UTC

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby sonar1313 » Fri Jan 12, 2018 5:32 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:There's definitely size inflation, but AIUI a lot of the weight increase in cars, particularly since the VW Beatle/Mini Cooper/2CV days is down to things like Side Impact Protection, which was introduced in the 80s/90s. It's basically metal armour, and has a weight to match. Safety features take all the fun out of motoring...


This is called platform creep in the industry. You definitely don't need to go back as far as the '80s to see it (in fact, the '80s are a bit misleading, because cars lost a whole shit-ton of weight due to gas shortages and fuel economy standards. That took a lot of fun out of driving, because all the engines had to be replaced with hamster wheels to make the technology of the time meet the new standards.)

The main cause of platform creep is automakers wanting their newest models to be ever more capable - more storage, more towing, etc. etc. I mean, you can't release a model with less capability. And vehicles have definitely followed the same pattern as the comic shows. What is now called a "midsize" pickup (Toyota Tacoma, new Chevy Colorado, upcoming Ford Ranger) is every bit as big, long, and hefty as a full-size pickup (Tundra, Silverado, F-150) from 12-15 years ago. Sedans do the same thing. Probably the only thing keeping SUVs/crossovers from the trend is that automakers offer so many of them these days that there's no need to upsize them - if the customer wants something bigger, they just buy the bigger model.

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 683
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby Steve the Pocket » Sat Jan 13, 2018 1:57 am UTC

freezeblade wrote:
Steve the Pocket wrote:I'll make an exception if you want to explicitly call something a "knife and fork sandwich", because at least you're being honest even if it's kind of cheating.


or "Open Face Sandwich?"

Indeed. And at least most of those can still be eaten by hand as long as you don't tilt them.
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby somitomi » Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:25 pm UTC

sonar1313 wrote:The main cause of platform creep is automakers wanting their newest models to be ever more capable - more storage, more towing, etc. etc. I mean, you can't release a model with less capability. And vehicles have definitely followed the same pattern as the comic shows. What is now called a "midsize" pickup (Toyota Tacoma, new Chevy Colorado, upcoming Ford Ranger) is every bit as big, long, and hefty as a full-size pickup (Tundra, Silverado, F-150) from 12-15 years ago. Sedans do the same thing. Probably the only thing keeping SUVs/crossovers from the trend is that automakers offer so many of them these days that there's no need to upsize them - if the customer wants something bigger, they just buy the bigger model.

I think given enough time, the SUV/Crossover segment will manage to gradually inflate too. At least I seem to recall car reviews always saying the new Audi Q7/BMW X5/<insert Mercedes SUV here because I don't rememeber it, they all look the same anyway> is a couple centimeters bigger in each dimension that its predecessor. What I wonder is what will happen to cars at the top of the size chart now, that they cannot possibly become bigger without exceeding the size limits of the average parking lot and some roads as well.
—◯-◯

xtifr
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:38 pm UTC

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby xtifr » Sun Jan 14, 2018 10:15 pm UTC

For some reason, I'm reminded of the Shepard scale, an auditory illusion where a sequence of chords appears to rise (or fall) indefinitely. It uses a similar mechanism.
"[T]he author has followed the usual practice of contemporary books on graph theory, namely to use words that are similar but not identical to the terms used in other books on graph theory."
-- Donald Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol I, 3rd ed.

alcore
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 6:34 pm UTC
Location: New Orleans
Contact:

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby alcore » Mon Jan 15, 2018 4:26 pm UTC

I believe this graph misses the other common cycle that occurs... gradual shrinkage due to profit maximization.

Honestly... I suspect that the underlying property is not a constant property. In the '80s and '90s I watched the once proud and impressive "Big Mac" gradually shrink until it was not really worthy to be a flagship sandwich. At one point during this period, due to the need to back-fill gaps that were appearing in the larger sizes McDonald's size chart was "Large, Ex-Large, and Super". The small and medium sizes had shrunk until they imploded and disappeared, with each larger size, shrinking downwardly to fill the gap.

But I absolutely agree that food sizing is a non-constant phenomenon. Probably non-Euclidean.

SuicideJunkie
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:40 pm UTC

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby SuicideJunkie » Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:01 pm UTC

This is one of the advantages of food where size names are measured amounts, like sub sandwiches or beer in some cases.
The price will notch up with inflation, but they're at least being held honest as to the size.

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby somitomi » Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:40 pm UTC

SuicideJunkie wrote:This is one of the advantages of food where size names are measured amounts, like sub sandwiches or beer in some cases.
The price will notch up with inflation, but they're at least being held honest as to the size.

That might have been the case before some madman came up with 0,4 liter beer bottles. All bets are off on how long until this principle is applied to aluminium cans...
—◯-◯

Mikeski
Posts: 1000
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby Mikeski » Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:57 pm UTC

somitomi wrote:All bets are off on how long until this principle is applied to aluminium cans...

Well, USAan diet coca-cola is going to change to new cans; they're still 12oz, but taller and skinnier. Which breaks a couple of my assumptions about aluminum cans:

1) Since the can is more expensive than the contents, they'll always minimize aluminum usage. The further you get from a sphere, the more material you need to contain the same amount of stuff, so the new coke cans will use more aluminum than the old ones. This is apparently to make diet coke seem "cool" to red-bull-guzzling Millenials, or something. I guess marketing beats materials costs here?

2) No one will ever change the standard 12oz/355ml aluminum can, in either volume or dimensions, since that will obsolete approximately 6.3 trillion vending machines.

User avatar
somitomi
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:21 pm UTC
Location: can be found in Hungary
Contact:

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby somitomi » Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:10 am UTC

Mikeski wrote:2) No one will ever change the standard 12oz/355ml aluminum can, in either volume or dimensions, since that will obsolete approximately 6.3 trillion vending machines.

Wait, do they sell beer in 355ml cans over there? Here beer cans are the taller 500ml variant and I've never seen a vending machine selling beer.
—◯-◯

Mikeski
Posts: 1000
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby Mikeski » Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:16 am UTC

somitomi wrote:
Mikeski wrote:2) No one will ever change the standard 12oz/355ml aluminum can, in either volume or dimensions, since that will obsolete approximately 6.3 trillion vending machines.

Wait, do they sell beer in 355ml cans over there? Here beer cans are the taller 500ml variant and I've never seen a vending machine selling beer.

That's also our default beer can, yes. Beer vending machines are basically non-existent due to liquor laws and other legal liabilities (sales to the under-aged, sales to the obviously inebriated, etc.)

User avatar
Reka
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:21 pm UTC

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby Reka » Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:22 am UTC

somitomi wrote:Wait, do they sell beer in 355ml cans over there? Here beer cans are the taller 500ml variant and I've never seen a vending machine selling beer.

Yes, beer comes in the same size of can as soda. No, beer is not sold in vending machines, at least not in my memory. (When I was very little, they still had cigarette vending machines all over the place. When I was a little older, the cigarette vending machines still existed, they just didn't work.)

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2901
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby orthogon » Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:58 pm UTC

SuicideJunkie wrote:This is one of the advantages of food where size names are measured amounts, like sub sandwiches or beer in some cases.
The price will notch up with inflation, but they're at least being held honest as to the size.

I wouldn't be so sure: centimetres aren't as big as they used to be. My dad and I noticed this when fitting my kitchen; we're both Chartered Engineers so are reliable witnesses. Presumably millilitres are correspondingly smaller (and more so, because of the cubicity).
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Wee Red Bird
Posts: 181
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:50 am UTC
Location: In a tree

Re: 1940: "The Food Size Cycle"

Postby Wee Red Bird » Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:30 pm UTC

Mikeski wrote:
somitomi wrote:
Mikeski wrote:2) No one will ever change the standard 12oz/355ml aluminum can, in either volume or dimensions, since that will obsolete approximately 6.3 trillion vending machines.

Wait, do they sell beer in 355ml cans over there? Here beer cans are the taller 500ml variant and I've never seen a vending machine selling beer.

That's also our default beer can, yes. Beer vending machines are basically non-existent due to liquor laws and other legal liabilities (sales to the under-aged, sales to the obviously inebriated, etc.)

I've been on the odd Spanish holiday and found vending machines selling 330ml (or there about) cans of beer for less than a bottle of water. Guess what I drank when thirsty.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests