• frank@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 day 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
        ·
        1 day 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
          ·
          1 day 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

            • frank@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day 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.

                • frank@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Look at the indent around the opening. On the shorter can it goes from wide to narrow at the back of the tab. It’s more of a straight line on the taller can