So that’s why they changed the shape. I saw no valid reason so I just assumed they were trying to evade taxes in some way. I’ll admit I have no idea how much anything I buy at a convenience store costs.
If anything the taller cylinder will use more aluminum for the same volume, so they’re kinda shooting themselves in the foot here with aluminum and steel tariffs, lol
Seems pretty clear the only reason for this was to change the price without as many people noticing.
Regular cans are somewhat inefficient shapes as well, shorter and fatter would be more economical, but less ergonomical and for once that won out, for a while anyway. Now we get designed by marketing instead.
Yeah, there’s an awesome video on aluminum drink cans from TheEngineerGuy on YouTube. The ideal shape for holding pressure with minimal material is a sphere, but there’s 2 problems with that: They roll, and can’t be packed as efficiently as cylinders.
I’m not sure of the shape change reason, but I prefer the thinner cans. I have a candy store with soft drinks and I can put more of the thinner cans on the shelf. Usually one more can per shelf.
If the cans were even shorter (closer to cube/ more efficient for amount of aluminum used) you might be able to put 2 on top of eachother
Love it!
Make it happen, captain.
chant with me
dont
buy
american
The liberal media wants you to think that the two volumes of liquid are equal using their woke science, but if you use your common sense, you can clearly see that the narrow tube is filled higher and therefore contains more liquid. There is nothing wrong with the economy, real Americans just need to use narrower glasses. Checkmate, leftists. /s
You know, this should only trick young kids as they genuinely believe taller = more. The fact that it probably tricks a ton of adults just suggests their critical thinking never made it past adolescence and we should be very concerned by that.
This doesn’t really have anything to do with critical thinking, it’s just that our brains work on estimations and approximations, although experience can balance it out.
Try this: draw a martini glass (inverted cone), and draw a line where you think it would be half full.
It will be wrong. Numberphile - Cones are messed up (YT)
People who bought cola before won’t stop anyway. That has little to do with the shape
That’s more an argument in semantics. Developmental psych actually has this as a brain development stage, with the later stages being about critical thinking even if the earlier phase doesn’t seem so. Experiments were done where children of various ages were tested on benchmarks such as volume and kids under a certain age failed almost universally (I forget the age, something like 5 or 6) in the same way that infants lack object permanence. Later, at 9 and around 13 (?) the same framework argues that the brain gets basic and advanced problem solving and critical thinking, although even that theory admits plenty of people skip that last milestone.
Your point is more a common logical (sensory?) fallacy that plenty of adults fall into, but isn’t necessarily the same thing. At least, I think it is, I’m a bit busy right now to check and it’s bad enough I’m typing this out instead of taking care of my own toddler, lol.
You know, this should only trick young kids as they genuinely believe taller = more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-pound_burger?wprov=sfla1
Adults in Murica are just as dumb and unneducated
Essentially all of America’s problems are because its population is so uneducated. We want simple answers to complicated questions because that’s the best we can hope to understand. 52% of us can barely read at a 6th grade level FFS. The ignorance then allows us to entertain some pretty dark thoughts leading us to Trump.
Hmmmm while I agree a large uneducated population is a terrible problem, I would not say this is the cause. I would characterize it as a “condition” necessary to get this low.
I find just saying all problems are because of lack of education feels like an indirect way of saying “If I take advantage of you, it’s only because you let me” which I believe leaves the evil-doers off the hook
Kind of like saying “the problem with school shootings is because kids are so soft and squishy, they are easily destroyed by bullets” (obviously I am exaggerating here to make my point clearer)
Of course we are, our education system is designed to churn out undereducated, incapable of critical thought, silent, obedient cogs for the corporate machine.
Edit: made a typo
I want to point out that, especially after No Child Left Behind, we’ve actively worked to teach-to-the-test in public schools. That was a bipartisan compromise to make education “accountable” that ultimately worsened education. Obama’s DoE helped, slightly, in 2015 adjustments but it’s still no where near where it should be and made only worse by a push to get more charters and affordable private schools that don’t understand pedagogy.
That is to say, uneducated isn’t quite right as It’s not a lack of education, but more of a misguided pedagogy that prioritizes rote memorization over deductive reasoning and critical thinking. It’s not a lack of trying, but an avoidence of evidence based approaches.
And it has been humming
How much critical thinking is going on in a supermarket? Anyway, the tall ones also warm faster 😡
Oh good point, another downside of the taller shape. More surface area = warms faster and uses more aluminum.
Critical thinking (or at least reasoning) is everywhere, even when people drive or do chores, an ounce of thoughtfulness at the very least makes a difference.
And yes, warm soda. Lol
It surprises me none at all that a significant market share of an American brand are stupid enough to fall for it.
Makes me remember a study where conservatives fall for internet scams at like a 3x higher rate than everyone else lol
The fact they kept the lid the same size probably helps the deception, especially once there’s no old cans to compare it to. This could actually work out to be a good thing if people buy fewer sugary sodas while thinking they’re drinking about the same
“shitflation”
Good enough reason to boycott coke products, anyway.
Good enough to contact one’s consumer organizations or government watchdogs.
The funding of Death Squads in Colombia is a better reason IMO but this works too, haha
Didn’t knew about that one
What’s up with that?Would have thought that a legal trade of coca leaves would work out reasonable…well, I’m naive it seems
Coca Cola is an old company with a long and dark history. If they appear reasonable, it’s only because they’ve used the massive weight of their resources to create an international marketing campaign over decades to make themselves appear benign and refreshing.
The reasons keep on stacking up.
Just like coke cans
*ColOmbia
100% correct, thank you.
Fun fact, a taller, narrower can uses more aluminum!
It’s definitely more surface area per volume, but a 200 vs 202 lid and a smaller hermetic seal cancels some of those losses. Sidewall is cheap aluminum wise, but you’re likely right in that it’s a little more aluminum. Definitely costs more to make since they do fill a little slower.
Also fuck coke, what a bunch of assholes
The larger diameter of the original can plus the angled transition at either end probably means same surface area of aluminium. Small diameter differences make larger circumferential changes.
They do, but overall the can end (lid) is a LOT more aluminum than you expect and the whole rest of it isn’t as much as you expect.
So a little less lid is worth a fair bit more sidewall in terms of weight of aluminum
Since they apparently have the same volume, could one of you be a hero and steal one of each and weigh them?
Aren’t these the same lid?
I guess I’m a bit rusty, so I am not sure at 355ml and the skinny profile if you can get a 202 end can, or have to use a 200
Hard to tell if it’s sleek or slim
Edit: Actually no, that’s a 200 not a 202. Look at the profile around the tab.
I thought it was the other way around. The thickest part of the can is the top, followed by the bottom. The sides are much thinner. I thought the reasoning behind switching to tall and narrow cans with the same internal volume was to save on aluminium.
The top seems to be the same size, the old one just bulges more while the new one almost goes straight down.
Tops are pretty much standars size on all cans I’m pretty sure. So that part should be constant.
That looks like a 202 vs a 200 can end, so a “sleek” not a “slim” (red bull can is slim)
The sleek can is 355 ml and uses a 200 end.
As for which uses more aluminum… Good question. It’s probably close
Someone should weigh both and see!
The only real way, speculation by photo is not that great. They also could have made the metal thinner.
Well, I assumed constant thickness, so if that’s true, you might be right.
you could use your coke scale to confirm
The tops are the same on both
Damn, 123% rise.
Who cares. Stop drinking soda that shit is awful for you.
If you’re dumb enough to consume this shit all the time then you’re exactly the one who is being fooled at the same time.
This attitude is a huge problem, and is exactly what the billionaire class is wanting.
By pitting you against a group of people you clearly look down on, it stifles your ability to care about a real issue, which is that the ruling class is taking advantage of your peers. You don’t think of them as your peers but they are, since you are both the working class. Even if you are a multi-millionaire, you are much, much closer to being someone making minimum wage than you are to a mutli-billionaire. Hell, even if you were a billionaire you are closer to being someone working minimum wage than you are to a multi-billionaire.
Plus, if they get away with this now, they will do it for something you actually do use eventually, and no one will care about backing you since you were an asshole when it wasn’t effecting you. This is exactly what the billionaire class wants, all us peasants squabbling at the bottom, grandstanding and hating on each other for no reason, while they get to sit at the top, unscathed.
Hmmm careful with the slippery slope of victim blaming
You should care cause its not just soda, its everything. companies just your exact reasoning to justify it.
I haven’t bought any American brands for the past few weeks. Surprise surprise, my intake of soda and candy and unhealthy stuff has fallen like a stone.
You’re only a victim if you get victimized. Stop buying from companies that do this shit.
If you really have to drink it, drink the zero versions of most sodas. Dr Pepper in particular has some really decent flavors without the gross aftertaste. Pepsi zero is also really good. Just stop drinking regular soda. We have the technology to make diet taste good now so use it.
Its cancer to drink sweeteners or isnt it
Living will kill. Pick your battles.
I think the consensus on health effects of artificial sweeteners is unclear so long as you only consume a reasonable amount. There are plenty of other synthetics in highly processed foods that are much more concerning.
That said, water is obviously healthier.
Yes. Do run an experiment on your health. Find out in 15 years if it causes cancer.
Like I said, it’s not the healthy choice, but I’m also not going to demonize a person for having the occasional sweet drink.
A much better hill to die on is the systemic use of known carcinogens in products that we come in contact with everyday as well as the dumping of even worse materials into the environment that make their way into our bodies via the water we drink and the air we breathe. You don’t get to choose whether you are exposed to these things.
MAH! MAH, C’MERE!!!
THEY REPLACED ARE RAT POISON WITH MORE EXPEMSIVE RAT POISON!!
Our
I’m sorry, did you just… oh lol never mind. I’m going to harvest this whoosh for wind power.
