• frank@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    2 days ago

    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

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      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.

      • frank@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        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

        • schnapsman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Since they apparently have the same volume, could one of you be a hero and steal one of each and weigh them?

          • frank@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            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.