5 times faster - Engineering Language/Grammar Skills (2024)

Nope.Percentages get hinky, but I don't think you'll find many people at all who think "five times faster" means "six times the original velocity".

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

It annoys you for the same reason it annoys me:

You never know who's making the statement and what they really mean.It could be some marketing schmuck who wouldn't be able to understand the difference in the math if you helped them count with their digits or it could be an engineering type who is saying exactly what they mean.

If the numbers really matter, use them.If you simply need to make a generalization, a statement like "5X faster" might be sufficient.As with all writing, you've got to know your audience.

I always take statistics with a grain of salt anyhow.

For example, I recently heard statistics that the most common colours of cars are yellow and white.

White is the most common colour anyhow, and yellow is most often seen on sports cars.

There was no mention as to if the data was per capita or total.

Not seeing the confusion if used correctly.

25% faster means 25% on top of the original 100%.

5 X faster means you multiply the original value by 5.

5X faster is a 400% increase.

500% faster is not the same as 5X as fast.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

Twice as fast means twice the original speed.

Five times as fast, then, means five times the original speed.

Mike McCann
McCann Engineering

I tend to stay away from that kind of terminology by making my meaning clear, repeating myself if I have to:

"The program is faster by a factor of 2.It takes half the original time to run."

- Steve

To me, 5 times as fast is the same as 5 times faster.

Multiply the original value by 5.

However, 500% as fast is not the same as 500% faster.

500% as fast = multiply 100% by 5 = 500%

500% faster = add 500% to the original 100% = 600%

I think this is what HgTX was addressing.

Is there the same confusion if you say half as fast or 50% as fast or 50% slower?

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

I think that's what I'm saying.That 500% faster is not the same as 5 times faster (or 5 times as fast).I don't think you'd find a single person on the street who would think that 5 times faster means 6 times as fast, but you would get a certain percentage who would start doing some mental arithmetic if you asked them what 500% faster means.

I think this is why:

500% faster can be seen as either an addition of 500% to the original 100% or a multiplier; hence the confusion (and why percentages should be avoided in such cases).

On the other hand, when you say 5 *times* faster, you're multiplying.No question about it.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

So, is a 100% improvement twice as fast?

Mike McCann
McCann Engineering

thread1010-166742: percentages

OK, now I'm worried.

I'm usually one of the denser posters here on Eng Tips.

If I think I get it/don't see the confusion then this means I must actually be really confused or deluded and just don't realize it.

Reminds me of the confusion between factor of safety and reserve factor when working on US/UK Aerospace/Defense.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

but 500% = 500/100 = 5 so why do the different terms mean different things.

I just think this is bad english that has been used for so long now that we dont see the problem with it. Similar to "I didnt do nothing.."

"as fast" shouldn't be used in multiples of fast.

"This is as fast as that" - OK

"This is 5 times as fast" - Makes no sense.You wouldn't say "this is 5 times as big"

"This is 5 times faster" - OK

OK, but how about 'twice as fast', is there any confusion there?

If original speed was 50 mph then 'twice as fast' is surely 100 mph.What other interpretation am I missing?

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

Agreed,

Twice as fast is understandable but you wouldn't describe something that is the same speed as something else "as once as fast". So maybe grammatically it's not exactly correct.
Thrice as fast is OK too .

Dunno what they use for four times.

I would say the opposite

5 times as fast is the correct english,
5 times faster is incorrect (for reasons stated above)
5mph faster would be okay.

faster refers to the difference between the two, as fast refers to the ratio.

I would apply this rule universally (percentages, 1,2,3,...infinity) None of this it is okay for... it is not okay for...

Another thing to fix when I reach world dictatorship.

There is more difference between "500% faster" and "5 times faster" than just the difference between 500% and 5.The word "times" implies multiplication to many.As in, "two times two is four."

"faster refers to the difference between the two, as fast refers to the ratio."

What??The word "faster" just means "faster".500 mph is faster than 5 mph.6 mph is also faster than 5 mph.There is nothing inherent about the word "faster" that means we have to be thinking in terms of additive rather than multiplicative differences; it just means there *is* a difference.

There is a usage difference here.There are two constructions under discussion:"X times more" and "X times as".Neither is grammatically incorrect.Both are idiomatic.Probably neither should be used in an extremely technical context.

http://www.themathpage.com/arith/ratio-and-proportion_1.htm#more

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

one times faster, 1+1

two times faster, 1+2

three times faster, 1+3

1 times as fast as the original, 1*1
2 times as fast as the original, 1*2
3 times as fast as the original, 1*3

Forever Young

... by UP TO 73% is the usual language.In other words, anywhere between 0% and 73%, but never more than 73%.

- Steve

HgTX,

But is the times multiplication of the original or multiplication of the difference.

Somptingguy,

Yes they gave one person a huge discount in order to claim that 73%.

Snowfire,

That is 100% what I think.

uh, huh?

There's not grammarical difference between saying:
"5 times faster" and "much faster".In both cases, there is a quantity, though in the first case there is an exact quantity and in the second case there is an inexact quantity.It is simply a forumla stated in english verbage.

The only thing "as" adds is preposition (context of the relation between the two objects).There's no literal different between "5 times as fast" and "5 times faster".They both mean object2speed = 5 * object1speed.The nonliteral difference is that the second statement implied the object is moving faster than the other object; and the first statement is explicit.

500% faster means 6 times faster.%'s are derived numbers, so its components have to be taken into account. 500% as fast, I don't think this makes sense, but let me think about.Anyone else?

1 times faster an incorrect statement.You cannot be 1 times faster.You can be 1 times as fast.It doesn't work because you aren't moving faster if you are moving at 1 times the speed.1 = 1not 1 > 1

2 times faster is just that, twice as fast or two times as fast.There's no argument here, I hope, about this.

csd72, I think you are just confused by incorrect use of these terms.They are forumlae stated in english terms.I'll state another example.Another miss used term is 360deg turn (when 180deg turn is what is meant).

1 times as fast means 1*1 = 1
1 times faster means 1*1 = but implies a > b, which is illegical
2 times as fast means 2*1 = 2
2 times faster means 2*1= 2 and implies that a > b (which is already a given based on the formula itself)
3 times as fast means 3*1 = 3
3 times faster means 3*1 = 3 and implies that a > b

Because percents are more complex, I'll leave that to someone else or come back to this later.

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

I expected maybe one or two replies on this but it has been a jolly good debate.

I think we are divided on the original issue, a few agree with me and a few disagreee. In the end it is probably just a matter of opinion.

But one thing that still gets me from the opposing arguement is your willingness to apply one rule to the percentage and a different rule to the number even though numerically they are the same thing. I can see no logic in that, but that is just my personal opinion.

Again.It's not just the number.It's the word "times".It's not "500% faster" vs. "5 faster", it's "500% faster" vs. "5 times faster".There are five letters and a space difference between those two, in addition to the numerical question.

Also, as someone pointed out, percentages are inherently relational.5 is 5.500% is 5, but of necessity seen in relationship to something else.They're not *exactly* the same unless you're plugging them into a formula, rather than using them in a sentence, where all kinds of assumptions and expectations kick in.

The overall moral of the story is if you really mean to convey something technical, just give the original speed and the new speed and let your intelligent audience work it out.For advertising, don't sweat the small distinctions of 5x vs. 6x.You can't rely on grammar (or, rather, your individual grammatical prejudices, shared with some but not others) to take care of this for you.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

CSD, we're not applying different rules as such.

Inherently when you start talking percentages you imply different rules.

With a percent you're never talking absolute.You set up some figure/value as 100% and then show other figures variation from it in proportion to that figure.

Percentages do cause confusion, I just don't see that 5X or 1/2 off ect cause the same confusion.

Like I said though, it's probably my failure to see some bigger picture issue.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

Kenat

RE:
"CSD, we're not applying different rules as such.

Inherently when you start talking percentages you imply different rules."

There is a contradiction in there somewhere!

"With a percent you're never talking absolute."
what????
Inflation is called up as 4% e.t.c. that is 4% more than it was last year (it is not called up as 104% as your logic would suggest).

No debating team captain badge for you :).

"Like I said though, it's probably my failure to see some bigger picture issue. "

Thanks CSD, I think I've worked out the bigger issue.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

"Inflation is called up as 4% e.t.c. that is 4% more than it was last year (it is not called up as 104% as your logic would suggest)."

Two corrections with your statement csd72:

1) You just said has already been spoken by those who you disagree with.

2) It's your logic that is suggesting the opposite of your own statement, not KENAT's.

This really isn't even a matter of opinion at all.

A percentage is the ratio of the whole that is compared to the whole.The whole being 100% (or in old times "100 per cent" meaning in verbage "how many of a 100 hundred components").

I recommend checking out the wiki article.It is actually pretty well explained there:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent

Also, check out the multiplication article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplication

Enjoy.

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

I've seen the phrase "5 fold increase in" or a "3 fold decrease in" something else.I assume they mean 5x, 3x.

thanks fcsuper, I now know what percent and multiplication is. It all makes so much more sense now.....

No, I just disagree with the use of one rule for percentages and a different rule for numbers. It just seems illogical.

500% is not the same thing as 5.500% of ONE equals 5.500% of something else other than 5 will not be 5.500% of a certain quantity does equal 5 times that quantity, but it doesn't mean that they can be substituted freely in sentences.I was 5 years old when I went to kindergarten.I was NOT 500% years old, and neither were you.

Unless you're plugging them into an Excel spreadsheet, they are different.Live with it.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

5% biggerX+X*5%=1.05X
10% biggerX+X*10%=1.1X
20% biggerX+X*20%=1.2X
50% biggerX+X*50%=1.5X
100% bigger X+X*100%=2X

2 times biggerX+X*2=3X

2 times as bigX*2= 2X

2 times bigger <> 2 times as big

2 times as big as the other oneX*2=2X
3 times as big as the other oneX*3=3X

biggerthan ----(er)'+'or'-'

I can run 5Km in 20 minutes, you can run 5Km in 15 minutes, you are 5 minutes faster than I am.20 - 15 =5.

Forever Young

"Every math illiterate coach is asking for 110%,makes 100% seem nigg*rdly."

Careful - illiterate people don't understand the word 'nigg*rdly'.It can get you into a heap of trouble with some folks.

"Every math illiterate coach is asking for 110%,makes 100% seem nigg*rdly."

It actually makes sense if you have ever been beyond what youthought was your limit. 110% of your percieved limit is actually quite achievable, maybe they are wiser about these things than you give them credit for.

Snowfire and csd72, I seriously recommend you read the wiki articles (both of them) that I posted above.The percentage article talk about this exact topic.This isn't rocket science, but it is forumla based.

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

Hi, fcsuper, thanks for your reply.
I think it is a very good post.

And I think we are talking about different things.

People can go their way, I will go my way.

If someone tell me that is 0.5 times bigger, I believe it is 1.5*X.

If someone tell me it is 2 times bigger, I will ask him do you mean mutiply by 2, or do you really mean X + 2 times.

When people say two times bigger I have to be careful.

That is my experience from my life.

Forever Young

I agree that it is annoying, but I find '5 times slower' even more annoying, when somebody means for example that the speed of a cyclist is 20% of that of a car.

The cyclist is 5 times slower than the car.

Ugh.

Perfectly correct posts above are criticized by people offering incorrect opinions as facts. I would contribute normally, but I am not on this bulletin board to join in a futile argument!

I agree with csd72.

As MintJulep said early on

Quote:

"500% faster" <> "500% as fast"

The people on the other side seem to be suggesting that different rules apply for computing 25% faster and 500% faster.

Maybe you know what you mean when you say 500% faster, but that doesn't make it unambiguous.

=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.

I don't want to be flamed.

My apologies for attempting to represent what anyone said.

The bottom line, imo, there is a lot of ambiguity if you say 5 times faster or 500% faster.Only five times as fast is unambiguous to my ears.

=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.

Just yesterday I read something that was along the lines of "75% fewer" when the context implied "75% as many".

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

Jimkirk - agree with the temperature thing - very annoying.

Our (UK) weather forecasters sometimes report that the temperature has 'doubled' from 10C to 20C. I haven't heard them trying to cope with the same incremental increase from minus 5C to plus 5C. Has the temperature gone up by a factor of minus 1?

But it works just fine for Kelvins!

I heard "4 times cheaper" on the TV last night.So you get paid 3 times the original cost of the item if you decide to have it.

- Steve

I can run 5km in 20 minutes, you can run 5km in 15 minutes, you are 5 minutes faster than I am.20 - 15 =5.

He is 1 minute per km quicker and 5 km per hour faster.

5 minutes is a measure of time and the word 'fast' refers to speed.

If you shout your kids to come in and eat, the one that gets there quickest might not have been the fastest - for example he may have been the closest to you and maybe moved quite slowly.

Sorry if that is a bit deep for those of you still struggling with percentages and multiplication.

I'm now 5 times as stupid as I was before I read this thread...

I heard the following in an interview on National Public Radio this morning, talking about the load of court cases in the U.S.(from memory)

"..with the greatly increased number of home foreclosures the case load is one hundred per cent of what it once was..."

Hmmm, exactly the same, eh?

Pretty funny.

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

Just this morning I heard an advertisem*nt saying that I could change my reading speed.The change was quoted as:

"1000% faster"

and

"10 times the speed you read now"

in the same ad.I'm with fcsuper on this one;I don't think those agree.

If you "heard" it on the internet, it's guilty until proven innocent. - DCS

Just saw an interesting application of this over in the welding forum.Code refers to "an increase in heat input over that qualified".Poster had qualified 16 kJ/in, wanted to run 25 kJ/in, and figured he was okay, because the "increase" was 9 kJ/in, and "that qualified" was 16 kJ/in.In other words, he thought the code allowed him to double the qualification heat input (though I don't think he was thinking of it quite in that way), when the intent was for him not to exceed it.

I supposed using the word "beyond" rather than "over" might have helped, but maybe not.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

Apsix,

Most of us know already.I think some may be used to hearing the terms in a particular way and never thought about it til now, but still prefer their particular way.However, it is colliquial and doesn't make much sense when applied to directly to the numbers its supposed to represent.Just because something can be said in English terms doesn't mean it is a logical statement."One times faster" is an illogical statement.I think trying to find logic in it is fruitless and causes confusion (as can be seen by this thread).

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

Quote (apsix):

I can't see your logic.
500% faster should mean adding 500% of the original speed, resulting in 6 x faster.

LOL
And 6 times faster is also 7 times faster is it?

I think some lessons in counting to ten are required here.

OK crystal.

You're travelling at 10 mph.

You decide to go 50% faster.

What is your new speed?

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

crystal,

Maybe its your english and not our mathematics?

OK, now I've lost all track of who's right, who's wrong and who's implying who is an idiot.

Or something like that, perhaps there should be a whome in there somewhere.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

crystal,
Maybe its your english and not our mathematics?

No. Five times faster cannot mean six times faster can it?

True, but 5 + 1 has been known to equal 6 on occasions.

As fcsuper said, there are bound to be regional/national differences in the method the english is translated into a mathematics.

KENAT,

Im the idiot for starting this crazy post.

crystalclear,

The correct english would be
5 times faster means 6 times as fast.

Just as you would say "X earns twice as much as Y."

We have all explained our points of view, just look at the posts above.

And I'm a fool for not letting go.

The correct english would be
5 times faster means 6 times as fast.

The correct maths would be
5 times faster means 5 times as fast.

(And yes, we say 'maths' where I come from)

It's not "correct" english.It's a statement made in english that isn't logical.It is based on multiplication, not percentage.Percentage is different, and the rule being used to justify the statement using percentage is only based on use particular use of percentages.There are many ways to use percentages.Picking one to find justification for an illogical statement doesn't make for a sound argument.

"Times" = "multiply by".One is used for the other interchangeably in meaning for the other.There's no magical 1 + in this, other than using english to make illogical statements.

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

The problem is the use of the word 'faster', which implies a comparison, along with a percentage, which is also a comparison, so people become confused.

When the percentage is less than 100%, nobody has any problems:30% fastER means 130% of the original speed (ie, original speed = 100% plus the 30% increase).However, when you start to say 200% fastER, people don't understand that this must mean 3 x the speed (ie, 100% original plus the 200% increase).If you want to mean DOUBLE the speed, you need to say 200% AS FAST, not 'faster'.

When the change is more than 100%, people need to use different terminology.ie, 30% faster would be an umambiguous term, but for larger numbers, it would be more clear to say 3 times as fast, or 3.5 times as fast.

Despite my very definate language above this is one of the situations where there is no black and white answer.

I think it is important to realise the potential for misunderstanding if you use terms such as 5 times faster. While you might only see one way of interpreting that phrase, this forum has proved that there are definately well educated people out there that are bound to interpret it differently.

Thanks everyone for the lively debate.

Even worse than the 5 times faster example, is 5 times slower. How about 5 times less? Is such a thing possible?

Here's an example to look at:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/28/opinion/edfreeman.php

someguy,

I am glad someone else revisited this one as I didnt want to be the one.

I was thinking about the above argument the other day (yes I was really bored at the time waiting for a train).

We have been discussing the language on this but maybe the proof is in mathematics insead.

Thinking of 5 times tables:

5 times 1 =1
5 times 2 = 10
.....

But
5 times faster = ????

Thinking of it this way it doesnt make sense as you have to have 5 times something but the word 'faster' indicates something that is not quantifiable.

Substitute the words 'as fast' and you have a definate quantity that you can multiply.

Thus

'5 times as fast'

Is really the correct way to say it.

5 times 1 =1 ?????????

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

Kenat,

For the "least qualified checker (I'll) ever meet", you seem to catch a fair amount. I've noticed your attention to detail in other threads too. Do you keep print-outs of threads with corrections in your portfolio? ;)

- MechEng2005

someguy,

Nice link.It explains the issue well.

- Steve

Yes MechEng2005, I have a complete redlined print off of all threads I've participated in.

I find it useful in fine tuning my pedantry as a checker.

If only I applied the same standard to my own posts.

I estimate that this thread is approximately 78 times longer than it needs to be.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

This is 5 times more perfect than it is plentiful.

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

Drifting through this thread, it appears that only percentages over 100 are confusing.

50% faster - unambiguous (1.5 times the original)
100% faster - unambiguous (twice as fast as the original)
110% faster - can be interpreted as 1.1 times or 2.1 times.

I think the latter is correct, but obviously views between intelligent folks in this thread differ.

So why don't we agree not to use percentages over 100 and reject or query any reference that isn't crystal clear?

the flip side: bugs me to see '3 times lighter than the old one'.

Here we struggled so hard to remove heavy weight, when I should have focused on adding 'lighter' weight.

Just more illustration of our math and sicence totally illiterate culture. And the more dumbing down we do.....

k

So is that 1/3 or 1/4 of the original mass?

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

"3 time lighter"

Think of a Trie Cassyn with phosphorus coated feet.

- Steve

Yes,

All this comes down to what I said above - 3 times what? lighter.

What is wrong with saying one third as heavy, or cant advertising execs understand fractions?

Here's a typical example of horrendous writing.What do you think it means?

"Balance Piston to Balance piston bushing clearance: .0046"-.0065"
When clearances exceed those listed above by 150% of the maximum listed, changing of the parts should be considered, especially if the unit is in critical service"

At what point do you think you should consider changing the parts?

"At what point do you think you should consider changing the parts?"

Straight away, replace with parts from a supplier whose documentation makes sense.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

Thats a good case of redundancy, remove "those listed above by" and it actually makes a lot more sense.

Removing the 'exceed...by' actually changes the meaning of the sentence, although I believe it would be what they actually meant.

'exceed...by' 150% would mean that the change out should be when the clearances are 250% of the original.

The sentence should read 'when clearances reach 150% (or 250%) of these maximums'; that would make it clear what was meant.

TenPenny,

I never said to remove the word exceed, just the words after it. It would then read
"...When clearances exceed 150% of the maximum listed,..."

You're correct, I shouldn't have included the 'exceed', but still,exceeding 150% of the maximum is not the same as exceeding it by 150%.

Who knows what the original author meant, and this is a perfect example of something that would have been given a 0 mark when I was in University.

TenPenny,

I agree with your last post.

apsix,

I think this was probably a generic specification with fillin the gaps

Wow!!!Lots of post on this one.

The math is exact!!I'm not sure why anyone would debate what a percent means or what "times" means or what faster or bigger means.

The confusion is in the "verbal" or "written" communication using the English language.The context in which a statment is made can change the meaning of the statement or the "assumed" meaning of the statement.The original posters example clearly shows that the confusion is merely due to the sloppy use of language to describe the magnitude of certain things.

If you ever find a math book using language similar to the original example... throw it away.It's garbage.

Dan

Yes Dan, I agree

This post has gone on for 5 times as long as it should have!

csd72, in the past I wrote to Design News (or some such) magazine over a similarly worded statement such that Thing A was "3 times smaller" than Thing B. If it was ONE time smaller, would it be gone?

Never heard back...

Regards,

Mike